Caracterización morfólogica del M2 de primates Hominoidea a partir de análisis de Fourier/ Morphological characterization of the Hominoidea primates second molars from Fourier analysis

  • Beatriz Gamarra
  • Alejandro Romero
  • Alejandro Pérez-Pérez
  • Jordi Galbany

Resumen

RESUMEN Los análisis de Fourier permiten caracterizar el contorno del diente a partir de un número determinado de puntos y extraer una serie de parámetros para un posterior análisis multivariante. No obstante, la gran complejidad que presentan algunas conformaciones obliga a comprobar cuántos puntos son necesarios para una correcta representación de ésta. El objetivo de este trabajo es aplicar y validar los análisis de Fourier (Polar y Elíptico) en el estudio de la forma dental a partir de diferentes puntos de contorno y explorar la variabilidad morfométrica en diferentes géneros. Se obtuvieron fotografías digitales de la superficie oclusal en segundos molares inferiores (M2s) de 4 especies de Primates (Hylobates moloch, Gorilla beringei graueri, Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus y Pan troglodytes schweirfurthii) y se definió su contorno con 30, 40, 60, 80, 100 y 120 puntos y su representación formal a 10 armónicos. El análisis de la variabilidad morfométrica se analizó mediante la aplicación de Análisis Discriminantes y un NP-MANOVA a partir de matrices de distancias para determinar la variabilidad y porcentajes de clasificación correcta a nivel metodológico y taxonómico. Los resultados indicaron que los análisis de forma con series de Fourier permiten analizar la variabilidad morfométrica de M2s en géneros de Hominoidea, con independencia del número de puntos de contorno (30 a 120). Los porcentajes de clasificación son más variables e inferiores con el uso de la serie Polar (?60-90) que con la Elíptica (75-100%). Un número entre 60-100 puntos de contorno mediante el método elíptico garantiza una descripción correcta de la forma del diente.

ABSTRACT Fourier analysis can allow to characterize the shape of teeth, by employing a number of landmarks defining its profile, and extract a number of parameters for subsequent multivariate analysis. However, the great complexity of some cases requires testing how many landmarks are needed for a correct representation. The aim of this paper is to apply and validate the Fourier analysis (Polar and Elliptic) in the dental conformation study by using different contour landmarks, and explore the morphometric variability in different genera. Digital photographs were obtained in occlusal view of second lower molars (M2s) of 4 species of primates (Hylobates moloch, Gorilla beringei graueri, Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus and Pan troglodytes schweirfurthii). Teeth was defined with 30, 40, 60, 80, 100 and 120 landmarks, and 10 harmonics were obtained in each case. The variability was analyzed by applying Discriminant Analysis and NP-MANOVA from distance matrices to determine the percent of correct classification at methodological and taxonomical levels. The results shown that Fourieranalysis detect intergenus variability of shape in M2s of Hominoidea genera, regardless of the number of landmarks defining the contour. The classification rates presented higher variability in Polar (?60-90) analysis than in Elliptic ones (75-100%). Using between 60-100 landmarks in an elliptic analysis ensures a good discrimination of tooth shapes in Hominoidea.

 

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Métricas

Cargando métricas ...

Citas

Ashton EH, Zuckerman S. 1950. Some quantitative dental characteristics of the chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangoutan. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Series B 234:471-484.

Bailey SE, Lynch JM. 2005. Diagnostic differences in mandibular P4 shape between Neandertals and anatomically modern humans. Am J Phys Anthropol 126:268-277.

Bernal V. 2007. Size and shape analysis of human molars: comparing traditional and geometric morphometric techniques. Homo 58(4):279-296.

Courtiol A, Ferdy JB, Godelle B, Raymond M, Claude J. 2010. Height and body mass infl uence on human body outlines: a quantitative approach using an elliptic Fourier analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 142:22-29.

Ehrlich R, Baxter Pharr Jr. R, Healy-Williams N. 1983. Comments on the validity of Fourier descriptors in systematics: A reply to Bookstein et al. Systematic Zool 32:202-206.

Estebaranz F, Martínez LM, Galbany J, Pérez-Pérez A. 2009. Evolution of hominin P4 geometric morphology at the Plio-pleistocene transition. Pal & Evol 3:53-55.

Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Tartaglia GM, Colombo A, Serrao G. 1999. Size and shape of the human fi rst permanent molar: a Fourier analysis of the occlusal and equatorial outlines. Am J Phys Antropol 108:281-294.

Ferson SF, Rohlf FJ, Koehn RK. 1985. Measuring shape variation of two dimensional outlines. Systematic Zool 34:59-68.

Frieß M, Baylac M. 2003. Exploring artifi cial cranial deformation using elliptic Fourier analysis of Procrustes aligned outlines. Am J Phys Antropol 122:11-22.

Galbany J, Pérez-Pérez A. 2006. Tamaño dental, desgaste oclusal y microestriación dentaria en primates Hominoidea. Revista Española de Antropología Física 26:9-15.

Galbany J, Dotras L, Alberts SC, Pérez-Pérez A. 2010. Tooth size variation related to age in Amboseli baboons. Folia Primatol 81:348-359.

Galbany J, Estebaranz F, Martínez LM, Romero A, De Juan J, Turbón D, Pérez-Pérez A. 2006. Comparative analysis of dental enamel polyvinylsiloxane impression and polyurethane casting methods for SEM research. Microsc Res Tec 69:246-252.

Galbany J, Martínez LM, Pérez-Pérez A. 2004. Tooth replication techniques, SEM imaging and microwear analysis in Primates: methodological obstacles. Anthropologie XLII/1:5-12.

Gamarra B, Galbany J, Pérez-Pérez A. 2009. Shape variability in occlusal surfaces of the second lower molar in extant and fossil primates. Paleontol i Evol 3:65-66.

Gingerich PD, Schoeninger MJ. 1979. Patterns of tooth size variability in the dentition of Primates. Am J Phys Antropol 51:457-466.

Gómez-Robles A, Martinón-Torres M, Bermúdez de Castro JM, Margvelashvili A, Arsuaga JL, Pérez-Pérez A, Estebaranz F, Martínez LM. 2007. A geometric morphometric analysis of hominin upper fi rst molar shape. J Hum Evol 55:627-638.

Gómez-Robles A, Martinón-Torres M, Bermúdez de Castro JM, Prado L, Sarmiento S, Arsuaga JL. 2008.

Geometric morphometric analysis of the crown morphology of the lower fi rst premolar on hominins, with special attention to Pleistocene Homo. J Hum Evol 55:627-638.

Grine FE, Smith HF, Heesy CP, Smith EJ. 2009. Phenetic affi nities of Plio-Pleistocene Homo fossils from South Africa: molar cusp proportions. En: Grine FE, Fleagle JG, Leakey RE, editores. The fi rst humans: origin and early evolution of the genus Homo. Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology. Springer. p 49-62.

Haines AJ, Crampton JS. 2000. Improvements to the method of Fourier shape analysis as applied in morphometric studies. Palaeontology 43:765-783.

Hammer Ø, Harper DAT. 2006. Paleontological data analysis. Oxford: Blackwell Pub.

Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Paleontologia Electronica 4(1):9.

Hartman SE. 1989. Stereophotogrammetric analysis of occlusal morphology of extant Hominoid molars: Phenetics and function. Am J Phys Antropol 80:145-166.

Johanson DC. 1979. A consideration of the “Dryopithecus pattern”. Ossa 6:125-137.

Kuhl FP, Giardina CR. 1982. Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour. Comp Graph Imag Proc 18:236-258.

Lestrel PE. 1997. Introduction and overview of Fourier descriptors. En: Lestrel PE, editor. Fourier descriptors and their applications in biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p 22-44.

MacLeod N. 1999. Generalizing and extending the eigenshape method of shape space visualization and analysis. Paleobiology 25:107-138.

Martinón-Torres M, Bastir M, Bermúdez de Castro JM, Gómez A, Sarmiento S, Muela A, Arsuaga JL. 2006. Hominin lower second premolar morphology: evolutionary inferences through geometric morphometric analysis. J Hum Evol 50:523-533.

Navarro N, Zatarain X, Montuire S. 2004. Effects of morphometric descriptor changes on statistical classification and morphospaces. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 83:243-260.

Pilbrow V. 2006. Population systematics of chimpanzees using molar morphometrics. J Hum Evol 51:646-662.

Pilbrow V. 2007. Patterns of molar variation in great apes and their implications for hominin taxonomy. En: Bailey SE, Hublin J-J, editores. Dental perspectives on human evolution. Dordrecht: Springer. p 9-32.

Renaud S. 1999. Size and shape variability in relation to species differences and climatic gradients in the African rodent Oenomys. J Biogeog 26:857-865.

Renaud S, Michaux J, Jaeger J-J, Auffray J-C. 1996. Fourier analysis applied to Stephanomys (Rodentia, Muridae) molars: nonprogressive evolutionary pattern in a gradual lineage. Paleobiology 22:255-265.

Rohlf FJ. 2006. TpsDig2, Version 2.10. New York: Department of Ecology and Evolution. State University of New York at Stony Brook. Disponible en http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/

Rohlf FJ, Archie JW. 1984. A comparison of Fourier methods for the description of wing shape in mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Systematic Zoology 33:302-317.

Scott JE, Lockwood CA. 2004. Patterns of tooth crown size and shape variation in great apes and humans and species recognition in the hominid fossil record. Am J Phys Anthropol 125:303-319.

Sheets HD, Covino KM, Panasiewicz JM, Morris SR. 2006. Comparison of geometric morphometric outline methods in the discrimination of age-related differences in feather shape. Frontiers in Zoology 3:1-15.

Swindler DR. 2002. Primate dentition. An introduction to the teeth on non-Human Primates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swindler DR, Emel LM, Anemone RL. 1998. Dental variability of the Liberian Chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes verus. Hum Evol 13:235-249.

Uchida A. 1998a. Variation in tooth morphology of Gorilla gorilla. J Hum Evol 34:55-70.

Uchida A. 1998b. Variation in tooth morphology of Pongo pygmaeus. J Hum Evol 34:71-79.

Williams JA. 1981. Source Fourier analysis: A new method for describing primate tooth shapes. Current Anthropology 22:423-424.

White J. 2009. Geometric morphometric investigation of molar shape diversity in modern lemurs and lorises. Ant Rec 292:701-719.

Wood BA, Li Y, Willoughby C. 1991. Intraspecifi c variation and sexual dimorphism in cranial and dental variables among higher primates and their bearing on the hominid fossil record. J Anat 174:185-205.
Cómo citar
Gamarra, B., Romero, A., Pérez-Pérez, A., & Galbany, J. (1). Caracterización morfólogica del M2 de primates Hominoidea a partir de análisis de Fourier/ Morphological characterization of the Hominoidea primates second molars from Fourier analysis. Revista Argentina De Antropología Biológica, 13(1), 29-41. Recuperado a partir de https://revistas.unlp.edu.ar/raab/article/view/388
Sección
Trabajos Originales