2018
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23458
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dental size variability in Central African Pygmy hunter‐gatherers and Bantu‐speaking farmers

Abstract: Odontometric patterns and the degree of sexual dimorphism in dental size differ among Central African groups, indicating adaptation to their different forager and farmer lifestyles. In particular, the admixture of Bantu-speakers in Baka populations is smaller than that in other western Pygmy groups. The greater dental phenetic diversity in Baka compared to that of the smaller-toothed farmers suggests that ecogenetic and microevolutionary factors are influencing a particular divergence scenario.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
39
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
2
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Tooth size in Pygmies does not differ from that in other populations, and for some dimensions, teeth in Pygmies are in fact larger than in non-Pygmies (Romero et al 2018). This indicates an intraspecies relationship; since similar tooth dimensions correspond to very dissimilar body sizes, an absence of correlation between these two sets of variables would be expected for our species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Tooth size in Pygmies does not differ from that in other populations, and for some dimensions, teeth in Pygmies are in fact larger than in non-Pygmies (Romero et al 2018). This indicates an intraspecies relationship; since similar tooth dimensions correspond to very dissimilar body sizes, an absence of correlation between these two sets of variables would be expected for our species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…Maximum mesiodistal (MD) and buccolingual (BL) crown dimensions (in mm) were obtained from casts for both I 1 -M 2 and I1-M2. Teeth from left side were measured using a needle-point Helios-Preisser (Germany) digital caliper (0.01-mm precision) (Romero et al 2018).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have shown significant inter‐population variations in both metric and non‐metric measurements, and in the degree of sexual dimorphism in such measurements (Ateş et al, ; Brook et al, ; Garn et al, ; Guatelli‐Steinberg, Sciulli, & Betsinger, ; Hanihara, ; Hanihara & Ishida, ; Harris, Hicks, & Barcroft, ; Peckmann et al, ; Pereira, Bernardo, Pestana, Santos, & Mendonça, ; Pilloud, Hefner, Hanihara, & Hayashi, ; Romero, Ramirez‐Rozzi, & Pérez‐Pérez, ; Yong et al, ; Zorba et al, ). Saunders et al () suggested that the degree of sexual dimorphism in relative measures of dental tissue proportions may remain constant across tooth types and populations, despite variation in overall tooth crown size between males and females, but there is currently little data on this question.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dental measurements were then converted into shape variables by dividing each measurement by the geometric mean for all the measurements in each individual (Jungers, Falsetti, & Wall, ). This standardization procedure removes gross size from the data in order to assess differences in the proportionate contribution of individual variables to overall tooth size (Harris & Lease, ; Hemphill, , ; Irish, Hemphill, de Ruiter, & Berger, ; Irish & Kenyhercz, ; Paul et al, ; Romero, Ramirez‐Rozzi, & Pérez‐Pérez, ; Scherer, ). Furthermore, this procedure adjusts for size differences between individuals that may result from sexual dimorphism.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%