Interpreting the Dental Peculiarities of the ‘Robust’ Australopithecines

  • Bernard Wood

Abstract

It is now widely recognised that during the early Pleistocene there were at least two distinct hominid lineages (Tobias, 1973; Leakey and Walker, 1976; White, Johanson and Kimbel, 1981; Wood, 1981). Whatever the nomenclatural devices used, there is also widespread agreement that one lineage contains, or leads to, the group we know informally as the ‘robust’ australopithecines. Most workers also accept that the specialisations which demarcate that lineage are most developed within the hypodigm of Australopithecus (Paranthropus) boisei. The first attempt to define the functional adaptations underlying the evolution of ‘robust’ australopithecines (what Tattersall and Eldredge (1977) call the evolutionary ’scenario’) was made three decades or more ago (Robinson, 1954) and since then nearly all such attempts have identified characteristic features of the teeth, jaws and cranium and stressed their likely association with particular dietary and feeding regimes (Robinson, 1963; Jolly, 1970; Du Brul, 1977; Walker, 1981). Before one can proceed to postulate hypothetical scenarios, however, it is most important to examine whether the basis for identifying the morphological sets, or phena, is a sound one. Even though the case for the distinctiveness of the ‘robust’ australopithecines is widely accepted, there is much less agreement about the taxonomic and functional implications of the features cited. In particular, there is discussion about whether the apparently distinctive morphological features are not simply the scale effects of a larger body size, rather than evidence of more profound functional modifications. In this paper I will discuss the general problem of how such assessments are made, and examine two examples which relate to dental morphology. The first is the relationship between canine and molar size and between canine/molar size and body size, and the second is the link, if any, between overall size and the relative cusp size of mandibular molar teeth.

Keywords

Tooth Size Molar Area Positive Allometry Fossil Hominid Cusp Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cheverud, J.M. (1982) Relationship among ontogenetic, static and evolutionary allometry. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 59: 139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. DuBrul, E.L. (1977) Early hominid feeding mechanisms. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 47: 305–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gingerich, P.D., Smith, B.H. and Rosenberg, K. (1982) Allometric scaling in the dentition of primates and prediction of body weight from tooth size in fossils. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 58: 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gould, S.J. (1966) Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. BioZ. Rev. 41: 587–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gould, S.J. (1975) Allometry in primates, with emphasis on scaling and_the evolution of the brain. In “Approaches to Primate Paleobiology” ( F.S. Szalay, ed.), pp. 244–292. Karger, Basel.Google Scholar
  6. Harvey, P.H., Kavanagh, M. and Clutton-Brock, T.H. (1978) Sexual dimorphism in primate teeth. J. Zool. (Lond.) 186: 475–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Huxley, J.S. and Teissier, G. (1936) Zur terminologie des relativen Grössenwachstums. Biol. ZbZ. 56: 381–383.Google Scholar
  8. Jolly, C.J. (1970) The seed eaters: a new model of hominid differentiation based on a baboon analogy. Man 5: 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kay, R.F. (1975) The functional adaptations of primate molar teeth. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 43: 195–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Leakey, R.E.F. and Walker, A.C. (1976) Australopithecus, Homo erectus and the single species hypothesis. Nature 261: 572–574.Google Scholar
  11. McHenry, H.M. and Corruccini, R.S. (1980) Late tertiary hominoids and human origins. Nature 285: 397–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pilbeam, D. and Gould, S.J. (1974) Size and scaling in human evolution. Science 186: 892–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Robinson, J.T. (1954) The genera and species of the Australo- pithecinae. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 12: 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Robinson, J.T. (1963) Adaptive radiation in the australopithecines and the origin of man. In “African Ecology and HumanGoogle Scholar
  15. Evolution“ (F.C. Howell and F. Bourliere, eds.), pp. 385–416. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
  16. Smith, R.J. (1981a) On the definition of variables in studies of primate dental allometry. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 55: 323–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith, R.J. (1981b) Interspecific scaling of maxillary canine size and shape in female primates: relationships to social structure and diet. J. Hum. Evol. 10: 165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tattersall, I. and Eldredge, N. (1977) Fact, theory and fantasy in human paleontology. Am. Scient. 65: 204–211.Google Scholar
  19. Tobias, P.V. (1973) Implications of the new age estimates of the early South African hominids. Nature 246: 79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Walker, A. (1981) Diet and teeth. Dietary hypotheses and human evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 292: 57–64.Google Scholar
  21. White, T.D., Johanson, D.C. and Kimbel, W.H. (1981) Australopithecus africanus: its phyletic position reconsidered. S. Afr. J. Sci. 77: 445–470.Google Scholar
  22. Wolpoff, M.H. (1976) Primate models for australopithecine sexual dimorphism. Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 45: 497–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wolpoff, M.H. (1978) Some aspects of canine size in the australopithecine.. J. Hum. Evol. 7: 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wolpoff, M.H. (1982) Relative canine size. J. Hum. Evol. 10: 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wood, B.A. (1978) Models for assessing relative canine size in fossil hominids. J. Hum. Evol. 8: 493–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wood, B.A. (1979) An analysis of tooth and body size relationships in five primate taxa. Folia primatol. 31: 187–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wood, B.A. (1981) Human origins–fossil evidence and current problems of analysis and interpretation. In “Progress in Anatomy”, Vol. 1 ( R.J. Harrison and R.L. Holmes, eds.), pp. 229–245. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  28. Wood, B.A., Abbott, S.A. and Graham, S.H. (1983) Analysis of the dental morphology of Plio-Pleistocene hominids. II. Mandibular molars–study of cusp areas, fissure pattern and cross sectional shape of the crown. J. Anat. 137: 289–316.Google Scholar
  29. Wood, B.A. and Stack, C.G. (1980) Does allometry explain the differences between “gracile” and “robust” australopithecines? Am. J. phys. Anthrop. 52: 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard Wood
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anatomy and Biology as Applied to MedicineThe Middlesex Hospital Medical SchoolLondonUK

Personalised recommendations