Geometric morphometric analysis of allometric variation in the mandibular morphology of the hominids of Atapuerca, Sima de los Huesos site

Anatomical Record - Part A Discoveries in Molecular, Cellular, and Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 278, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 551-560

  Rosas, Antonio ^a   Bastir, Markus ^a  

^a MUSEO NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS NATURALES   (Spain)

Author keywords

Chin; Complex morphology; Human evolution; Retromolar space; Size and shape

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BONE; CHIN; CRANIOFACIAL MORPHOLOGY; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GEOMETRY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; MANDIBLE; MORPHOLOGY; MORPHOMETRICS; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

HOMINIDAE; PAN (APE); PROCRUSTES;

EID: 2642571007     PISSN: 0003276X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ar.a.20049     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Ackermann RR, Krovitz GE. 2002. Common patterns of facial ontogeny in the hominid lineage. Anat Rec 269:142-147.
2. Aiello L, Dean C. 1990. An introduction to human evolutionary anatomy. London: Academic Press/Harcourt Brace & Company. 596 p.
3. Alberch P. 1990. Natural selection and developmental constraints: external versus internal determinants of order in nature. In: De-Rousseau CJ, editor. Primate life history and evolution. New York: Wiley-Liss. p 15-35.
4. Arsuaga JL, Gracia A, Lorenzo C. 1997. The Sima de los Huesos crania (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain). A comparative study. J Hum Evol 33:219-281.
5. Atchley WR, Hall BK. 1991. A model for development and evolution of complex morphological structures. Biol Rev 66:101-157.
6. Bastir M, Rosas A, Kuroe K. 2004. Petrosal orientation and mandibular ramus breadth: evidence of a developmental integrated petroso-mandibular unit. Am J Phys Anthropol 123:340-350.
7. Bastir M, Rosas A, Sheets DH. The morphological integration of the hominoid skull: a partial least squares and PC analysis with morphogenetic implications for European Mid-Pleistocene mandibles. In: Slice D, editor. Developments in primatology: progress and prospects. Kluwer Academic/Plenum (in press).
8. Bermúdez de Castro JM, Sarmiento S, Cunha E, Rosas A, Bastir M. 2001. Dental size variation in the Atapuerca-SH middle pleistocene hominids. J Hum Evol 41:195-209.
9. Bermúdez de Castro JM, Martinon-Torres M, Sarmiento S, Lozano M, Arsuaga J-L, Carbonell E. 2004. Rates of anterior tooth wear in middle pleistocene hominins from Sima de los Huesos (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:11992-11996.
10. Bischoff JL, Fitzpatrick JA, León L, Arsuaga J-L, Falgueres JJB, Bullen T. 1997. Geology and preliminary dating of the hominid-bearing sedimentary fill of the Sima de los Huesos Chamber, Cueva Mayor of the Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain. J Hum Evol 33:129-155.
11. Bischoff JL, Shamp DD, Aramburu A, Arsuaga JL, Carbonell E, Bermúdez de Castro JM. 2002. J Archaeol Sci 30:275-280.
12. Björk A. 1969. Prediction of mandibular growth. Am J Orthod 55:585-599.
13. Björk A. 1991. Facial growth rotation-reflections on definitions and cause. Proc Fin Dent Soc 87:51-58.
14. Bookstein FL. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 455 p.
15. Bookstein FL. 1996. Combining the tools of geometric morphometrics. In: Marcus LF, editor. Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum Press. p 131-151.
16. Chernoff B, Magwene PM. 1999. Afterword. In: Olson EC, Miller PL, editors. Morphological integration. Chicago: University of Chicago. p 319-353.
17. Cheverud JM. 1982. Relationships among ontogenetic, static an evolutionary allometry. Am J Phys Anthropol 59:139-149.
18. Dryden IL, Mardia KV. 1998. Statistical shape analysis. Chichester: Wiley.
19. Emerson SB, Bramble DM. 1993. Scaling, allometry and skull design. In: Hanken J, Hall BK, editors. The skull. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p 384-421.
20. Enlow DH. 1968. The human face: an account of the postnatal growth and development of the craniofacial skeleton. New York: Harper & Row. 423 p.
21. Enlow DH, Hans MG. 1996. Essentials of facial growth. Philadelphia/ London/New York: W.B. Saunders Company. 303 p.
22. Franciscus RG, Trinkaus E. 1995. Determinants of retromolar space presence in Pleistocene Homo mandibles. J Hum Evol 28:577-595.
23. Godfrey L, Sutherland M. 1996. Paradox of peramorphic paedomorphosis: heterochrony and human evolution. Am J Phys Anthropol 99:17-42.
24. Kendall DG. 1977. The diffusion of shape. Adv Appl Probabil 9:428-430.
25. Klingenberg CP. 1998. Heterochrony and allometry: the analysis of evolutionary change in ontogeny. Biol Rev 73:79-123.
26. Klingenberg CP, Leamy LJ. 2001. Quantitative genetics of geometric shape in the mouse mandible. Evolution 55:2342-2352.
27. Klingenberg CP. 2002. Morphometrics and the role of the phenotype in studies of the evolution of developmental systems. Gene 287:3-10.
28. Klingenberg CP, Mebus K, Auffray J-C. 2003. Developmental integration in a complex morphological structure: how distinct are the modules in the mouse mandible? Evol Dev 5:522-531.
29. Lieberman DE, McBratney BM, Krovitz G. 2002. The evolution and development of cranial form in Homo sapiens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:1134-1139.
30. Martinez-Maza C, Rosas A. 2002. Bone remodeling in the Atapuerca-SH mandibles. Implications for growth patterns in Middle Pleistocene hominids. Am J Phys Anthropol 115:107-108.
31. Maynard Smith J, Burian R, Kauffman S, Alberch P, Campbell J, Goodwin B, Lande R, Raup D, Wolpert L. 1985. Developmental constraints and evolution. Q Rev Biol 60:265-287.
32. Moss M, Young RW. 1960. A functional approach to craniology. Am J Phys Anthropol 45:281-292.
33. Penin X, Berge C, Baylac M. 2002. Ontogenetic study of the skull in modern humans and the common chimpanzees: neotenic hypothesis reconsidered with a tridimensional Procrustes analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 118:50-62.
34. Ponce de León M, Zollikofer C. 2001. Neandertal cranial ontogeny and its implications for late hominid diversity. Nature 412:534-538.
35. Rohlf FJ, Slice D. 1990. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst Zool 39:40-59.
36. Rohlf FJ. 1996. Morphometric spaces, shape components and the effects of linear transformations. In: Marcus LF, editor. Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum Press. p 117-128.
37. Rohlf FJ, Loy A, Corti M. 1996. Morphometric analysis of Old World talpidae (Mammalia, Insectivora) using partial warp scores. Syst Biol 45:344-362.
38. Rohlf F. 1998a. tpsREGR. version 1.27. Stony Brook NY: State University of New York.
39. Rohlf F. 1998b. SMALL. version 1.19. Stony Brook NY: State University of New York.
40. Rohlf F. 1998c. tpsRELW. version 1.30. Stony Brook NY: State University of New York.
41. Rosas A. 1992. Ontogenia y filogenia de la mandíbula en la evolución de los homínidos. Aplicación de un modelo de morfogénesis a las mandíbulas fósiles de Atapuerca. In. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.
42. Rosas A. 1995. Seventeen new mandibular specimens from the Atapuerca/Ibeas Middle Pleistocene hominids sample (1985-1992). J Hum Evol 28:533-559.
43. Rosas A. 1997. A gradient of size and shape for the Atapuerca sample and Middle Pleistocene hominid variability. J Hum Evol 33:319-331.
44. Rosas A. 1998. Modelos de crecimiento en mandíbulas fósiles de homínidos. Atapuerca, un nuevo paradigma. In: Aguirre E, editor. Atapuerca y la Evolución Humana. Madrid: Fundación Ramón Areces. p 239-275.
45. Rosas A. 2000. Ontogenic approach to variation in Middle Pleistocene hominids. Evidence from the Atapuerca-SH mandibles. Hum Evol 15:83-98.
46. Rosas A. 2001. Occurrence of Neandertal features in mandibles from the Atapuerca-SH Site. Am J Phys Anthropol 114:74-91.
47. Rosas A, Bastir M. 2002. Thin-plate spline analysis of allometry and sexual dimorphism in the human craniofacial complex. Am J Phys Anthropol 117:236-245.
48. Rosas A, Bastir M, Martínez Maza C, Bermúdez de Castro JM. 2002a. Sexual dimorphism in the Atapuerca-SH hominids. The evidence from the mandibles. J Hum Evol 42:451-474.
49. Rosas A, Bastir M, Martinez-Maza C. 2002b. Morphological integration and predictive value of the mandible in the craniofacial system of hominids: a test with the Atapuerca SH mandibular sample. Coll Antropol 26:171-172.
50. Sheets DH. 2001. IMP, integrated morphometric package. http:// www.canisius.edu/~sheets//morphsoft.html; Sheets, David H.
51. Slice D. 2001. Landmark coordinates aligned by Procrustes analysis do not lie in Kendall's shape space. Syst Biol 50:141-149.
52. Smith KK. 1993. The form of the feeding apparatus in terrestrial vertebrates. In: Hanken J, Hall BK, editors. The skull. Chicago/ London: Chicago University Press. p 150-196.
53. Zelditch ML, Lundrigan BL, David Sheets H, Garland T. 2003. Do precocial mammals develop at a faster rate? A comparison of rates of skull development in Sigmodon fulviventer and Mus musculus domesticus. J Evol Biol 16:708-720.