Palatal growth in baboons (Papio cynocephalus anubis)

Abstract

ABSTRACT. In this study the structure and development of the palate as observed in a cross-sectional collection of olive baboons (Papio cynocephalus anubis) skulls are described and analyzed using craniometric techniques. Considered are structural functional relationships among different parts of the palate, and between the palate and other parts of the craniofacial skeleton. Several inferences are drawn and speculated upon. These inferences are as follows: odontogenesis affects premaxillary growth the most during late fetal and early postnatal development; maxillary length is significantly affected by development and eruption of the maxillary dentition, whereas maxillary breadth is less affected by dental development. Growth of the palatine bones and nasopharyngeal airway is correlated with dentomasticatory changes; the developmental and functional significance of these correlations is unclear. Further inferences are that growth rates for each palatal component differ for each sex even though lengths of the components relative to total palatal dimensions show no sexual dimorphism. Also, it is determined that maxillary length remains constant, premaxillary length reduces and palatine length increases relative to total palatal length with growth.

Direct Transformation from Quiescence to Bone Formation in the Adult Periosteum Following a Single Brief Period of Bone Loading

“…Second, woven bone does occur as part of the normal process of bone formation. Although most evident in fast‐growing animals, particularly those producing laminar or plexiform bone, significant areas of woven bone have been reported as constituents of normal structural bone in both humans and monkeys (21) . Third, in this experiment and in previous chronic experiments involving the same preparation, (5,8) woven bone formation has always been induced by strain levels within the physiologic range.…”

Strain in the Galago facial skull

“…Such data were then used to test the facial torsion model (Greaves, 1985(Greaves, , 1991(Greaves, , 1995. Our analyses are thus of direct relevance to any argument positing that circumorbital features are structural adaptations to resist masticatory stresses (e.g., Endo, 1966;Oyen et al, 1979;Rak, 1983;Rangel et al, 1985;Russell, 1985;Hilloowala and Trent, 1988a,b;Tattersall, 1995;Lahr and Wright, 1996;Wolpoff, 1996;Bookstein et al, 1999). Lastly, as living strepsirhines 2 Greaves and Mucci (1997) claim that the facial torsion model should apply only to artiodactyls and that tests of this model using primates are erroneous.…”

Functional Geometric Morphometric Analysis of Masticatory System Ontogeny in Papionin Primates

“…As the sex of juvenile specimens is generally unknown, no effort was made to control for the sex composition of the juvenile sample; most adult samples were roughly balanced. The use here of mixed‐sex samples is supported both by past findings that facial shape dimorphism in papionins is minimal prior to adolescence and by the absence of consistent sex‐based differences in the timing of postcanine dental eruption in cercopithecines generally (Cheverud, ; Oyen, ; Phillips‐Conroy and Jolly, ; O'Higgins and Collard, ; Bolter and Zihlman, ).…”