Implications of Enamel Prism Patterns for the Origin of the New World Monkeys

Gantt, David G.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-3764-5_10

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such use implies a predominantly vertical movement of the incisors and this is supported by the finding that scratch marks on cercopithecine incisors tend to be oriented labiolingually (Walker, 19761, i.e., perpendicular to the incisal edges. It is of interest in this connection that on the lingual surfaces of the lower incisors of the marmosets Cebuella and Callithrix, which are used to pierce tree bark during sap-feeding, enamel is either absent or extremely thin (Rosenberger, 1978;Gantt, 1978).…”

Section: Enamel Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution of enamel on the incisors of old world monkeys

Shellis

Hiiemäe

1986

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Longitudinal ground sections of 29 Old World monkey central lower incisors were studied histologically and metrically. Labiolingual incisor width tended to scale isometrically with body weight but with important deviations in relative incisor size, which appeared to be correlated with diet in accord with work by Hylander. Lower incisors of the predominantly folivorous colobine monkeys had a substantial layer of enamel on both lingual and labial aspects and consequently had blunt incisal edges. These teeth in both cercopithecins and papionins, which are omnivorous or frugivorous, had little or no enamel on the lingual aspect, resulting in sharp incisal edges. It is suggested that colobine incisors are used mainly in gripping and tearing leaves, whereas cercopithecine incisors are better adapted to cutting and scraping. Crown height showed a positive allometric relationship with overall incisor height, so that the tall incisors of papionins, especially Papio and Mandrillus, were more hypsodont than the shorter incisors of colobines and cercopithecins. This appears to be related to differences in the rates of incisor wear between the groups.

show abstract

Section: Enamel Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution of enamel on the incisors of old world monkeys

Shellis

Hiiemäe

1986

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bei Ätzverfahren mit Phosphorsäure müsste da gegen erst eine Facette geschliffen und po liert werden [Boyde et al, 1978;Boyde und Martin, 1982;Gantt, , 1980Gantt, , 1983Gantt und Cring, 1979;Xirotiris und Henke, 1981] [Gantt, 1983;Vrba und Grine, 1978]. Obwohl man annehmen kann, dass Gantt [1980;p. 206, fig.…”

Section: Materials Und Methodeunclassified

Zahnschmelzprismen von Mesopithecus pentelicus Wagner, 1839, im Vergleich mit rezenten Cercopitheciden (Primates: Cercopithecidae)

Dostal¹,

Zapfe²

1986

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dental enamel prisms of Cercopithecidae were examined by scanning electron microscopy. The main task of this study was to show the prism morphology representatives of different genera as well as their comparison with the fossil Mesopithecus pentelicus Wagner, 1839. The method used to show the enamel prisms was to etch the tooth surface with hydrochloric acid. In this way the outlines of the prisms were better contrasted for the descriptive morphology of the prisms than in etching with phosphoric acid. Two types were determined, in accord with the systematic division into subfamilies. In the subfamily Cercopithecinae elongated slender prisms were dominating, some with pointed, others with truncated tops. Most characteristic of this type were Macaca and Cercopithecus. An exception was Papio hamadryas which had broader, rounded prisms. In this way it differed largely from P. anubis whose prisms were short and mostly triangular. A very interesting fact was that very different patterns were found in P. anubis and P. hamadryas, although these two species are regarded as only one species by many authors. The second subfamily, the Colobinae, was characterized by broader prisms with a rounded shape, nearly as long as wide. Exceptions of the ‘Colobine type’ were at first Colobus with prisms little longer than wide and secondly Nasalis, with mostly parallel sides and truncated tops of the prisms. The prism outlines of Mesopithecus showed the greatest similarity to those of Presbytis which represents the characteristic ‘Colobine type’. This fact confirmed the actual systematic position of the fossil Mesopithecus within the subfamily Colobinae. In addition to previously known primitive features of Mesopithecus within the subfamily of Colobinae, we present here a further concrete, common feature with asiatic Colobines.

show abstract

“…Acceptance of the notion of anthropoid monophyly is partly attributable to mounting evidence from various sources-placentation and fetal membranes (Luckett, 1975(Luckett, ,1980, microcomplement fixation (Sarich and Cronin, 1976), immunodiffusion studies and protein amino acid sequences (Baba et al, 1980;Goodman, 1975Goodman, , 1976, enamel microstructure (Gantt, 1980), sulcal patterns on the brain (Falk, 1980), postcranial anatomy (Ford, 1980), cephalic arterial patterns (Bugge, 1980), sperm morphology (Martin and Gould, 1980), and the anatomy of the visual system (Cartmill, 1980)-that all pointed toward anthropoid monophyly. Although primate systematists were beginning to abandon pervasive parallelism in favor of cladistics and parsimony, they used cladistic terminology to describe their preferred hypotheses of anthropoid relationships long before they used parsimony analyses to discover them (e.g ., Cartmill and Kay, 1978;Luckett, 1975;MacPhee and Cartmill, 1986).…”

Section: Phylogenetic Hypotheses: From Vagueness To Precisionmentioning

confidence: 97%