Wear’s the problem? Examining the effect of dental wear on studies of crown morphology

Burnett, Scott; Irish, Joel D.; Fong, Michael R.

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511984464.021

Cited by 24 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The observations of Lahr and Haydenblit on degree of trait expression may have been impacted by dental attrition. Wear most likely caused the underscoring of crown traits that led them to propose the presence of Sundadonty (Burnett et al 1998). Tooth wear might also have misled Powell and his associates in their observations on small Paleo-Indian samples.…”

Section: A Brief History Of the Pre-clovis Revival As It Bears On Denmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dentition of American Indians: Evolutionary Results and Demographic Implications Following Colonization from Siberia

Turner

Scott

2013

Handbook of Paleoanthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: A Brief History Of the Pre-clovis Revival As It Bears On Denmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dentition of American Indians: Evolutionary Results and Demographic Implications Following Colonization from Siberia

Turner

Scott

2013

Handbook of Paleoanthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subsequent research has identified similar wear-related frequency biases in commonly studied morphological dental traits such as shoveling of the maxillary central incisor, upper canine distal accessory ridge, and lower molar cusp number . In addition, wear-related biases may be different between morphological traits or between observers (Burnett, 1998;Burnett et al, 1998). Because of variation in the location and angle of tooth facets, it is difficult to generalize about the level of wear that impacts occlusal traits such as MxPAR.…”

Section: Scoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brief communication: Population variation in human maxillary premolar accessory ridges (MxPAR)

Burnett¹,

Hawkey²,

Turner³

2009

American J Phys Anthropol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this brief communication is to report the results of an analysis of maxillary premolar accessory ridges (MxPAR), a common but understudied accessory ridge that may occur both mesial and distal to the central ridge of the buccal cusp of upper premolars. We developed a new five-grade scoring plaque to better categorize MxPAR variation. Subsequently, we conducted a population analysis of MxPAR frequency in 749 dental casts of South African Indian, American Chinese, Alaskan Eskimo, Tohono O'odham (Papago), Akimel O'odham (Pima), Solomon Islander, South African Bantu, and both American and South African Whites. Northeast Asian and Asian-derived populations exhibited the highest MxPAR frequencies while Indo-European samples (South African Indians, American and South African Whites) exhibited relatively low frequencies. The Solomon Islanders and South African Bantu samples exhibited intermediate frequencies. Our analysis indicates that statistically significant differences in MxPAR frequency exist between major geographic populations. As a result, the MxPAR plaque has now been added to the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System, an important contribution as maxillary premolar traits are underrepresented in analyses of dental morphology.

show abstract

“…First, many remain observable despite slight attrition. Of course to avoid potentially biased data (Burnett, ), proper scoring restraint must be exercised (Nichol and Turner, ; Turner et al, ; Burnett et al, ; Stojanowski and Johnson, ); this is especially important with near‐occlusal traits that are more affected at early wear stages (Burnett, ). Second, rank‐scale reference plaques comprising the ASUDAS promote intra‐ and interobserver recording repeatability; however, additional measures, like dichotomization (below), are used to address concordance issues (Nichol and Turner, ; Turner et al, ), especially between observers (Stojanowski and Johnson, ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who were they really? model‐free and model‐bound dental nonmetric analyses to affirm documented population affiliations of seven South African “Bantu” samples

Irish

2015

American J Phys Anthropol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: For bioarchaeological biodistance analyses it is common to "assume" that skeletal samples are representative of the populations to which they are attributed. Here, alternatively, samples with "known" attribution in the Raymond A. Dart Collection are assessed regarding their suitability for use in such analyses. Prior curation issues may call their ascribed identities into question. Materials and Methods: These 20th century samples ostensibly derive from South African Ndebele, Sotho, Swazi, Tswana, Venda, Xosa, and Zulu populations. First, the mean measure of divergence (MMD) is used to obtain among-sample dental phenetic distances for comparison with documented population relationships. Second, the Mantel test evaluates fit of the isolationby-distance model between MMD and geographic distances, i.e., among the historic homelands.Third, R-matrices and minimum and estimated F st from MMD distances give an indication of genetic micro-differentiation. Results:Output from these model-free and model-bound analyses suggest that five and perhaps six samples are representative of their attributed populations -presenting differences along population lines and evidence of more ancient ancestry. Discussion:Other than the Swazi and perhaps Nedebele, the among-sample variation: 1) mirrors documented population history, 2) reveals a moderately positive correlation between phenetic and geographic distances, and 3) although evidencing much homogeneity, provides measures of genetic distance in support of the phenetic distances. Therefore, with the two noted exceptionsperhaps from collection issues, swamping of past genetic structure, or both, most samples appear suitable for bioarchaeological analyses. On this basis, results are offered to supplement published findings concerning the biological relationships of these peoples. Page 2 of 61John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Most of these skeletons came from cadavers of early to mid-20 th century South Africans. American Journal of Physical AnthropologyInformation on these individuals that is now available to researchers may vary from that recorded at the times of death; for example, the names are not provided. Otherwise data categories in these records include: ID and accession numbers, cause of death, notes of interest, sex, age, death date, population group (often to the level of "tribe" for Africans), skeletal inventory, and additional notes. As Dayal et al. (2009) relate, the percentage of individuals in the collection can be broken down into the country's standard census categories (Stats SA, 2014; Jacobson, 1982): "Indian" (0.3%), "Coloured," i.e., ancestry from two or more of the other categories (4%), "White" (15%), and "African" (76%).The focus here is on the last category, specifically those assigned to one of seven "Bantu" 1 2 3 4 5...

show abstract

Wear’s the problem? Examining the effect of dental wear on studies of crown morphology

Cited by 24 publications

References 45 publications

The Dentition of American Indians: Evolutionary Results and Demographic Implications Following Colonization from Siberia

The Dentition of American Indians: Evolutionary Results and Demographic Implications Following Colonization from Siberia

Brief communication: Population variation in human maxillary premolar accessory ridges (MxPAR)

Who were they really? model‐free and model‐bound dental nonmetric analyses to affirm documented population affiliations of seven South African “Bantu” samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About