Search

Life-history inference is an important aim of paleoprimatology, but life histories cannot be discerned directly from the fossil record. Among extant primates, the timing of many life-history attributes is correlated with the age at emergence of the first permanent molar (M1), which can therefore serve as a means to directly compare the life histories of fossil and extant species. To date, M1 emergence ages exist for only a small fraction of extant primate species and consist primarily of data from captive individuals, which may show accelerated dental eruption compared with free-living individuals. Data on M1 emergence ages in wild great apes exist for only a single chimpanzee individual, with data for gorillas and orangutans being anecdotal. This paucity of information limits our ability to make life-history inferences using the M1 emergence ages of extinct ape and hominin species. Here we report reliable ages at M1 emergence for the orangutan, Pongo pygmaeus (4.6 y), and the gorilla, Gorilla gorilla (3.8 y), obtained from the dental histology of wild-shot individuals in museum collections. These ages and the one reported age at M1 emergence in a free-living chimpanzee of approximately 4.0 y are highly concordant with the comparative life histories of these great apes. They are also consistent with the average age at M1 emergence in relation to the timing of life-history events in modern humans, thus confirming the utility of M1 emergence ages for life-history inference and providing a basis for making reliable life-history inferences for extinct apes and hominins. dental histology | great apes | tooth eruption | tooth growth doi/10.1073/pnas.0906206107

Sexual size dimorphism in the postcanine dentition of the late Miocene hominoid Lufengpithecus lufengensis exceeds that in Pongo pygmaeus, demonstrating that the maximum degree of molar size dimorphism in apes is not represented among the extant Hominoidea. It has not been established, however, that the molars of Pongo are more dimorphic than those of any other living primate. In this study, we used resampling-based methods to compare molar dimorphism in Gorilla, Pongo, and Lufengpithecus to that in the papionin Mandrillus leucophaeus to test two hypotheses: (1) Pongo possesses the most size-dimorphic molars among living primates and (2) molar size dimorphism in Lufengpithecus is greater than that in the most dimorphic living primates. Our results show that M. leucophaeus exceeds great apes in its overall level of dimorphism and that L. lufengensis is more dimorphic than the extant species. Using these samples, we also evaluated molar dimorphism and taxonomic composition in two other Miocene ape samples--Ouranopithecus macedoniensis from Greece, specimens of which can be sexed based on associated canines and P3s, and the Sivapithecus sample from Haritalyangar, India. Ouranopithecus is more dimorphic than the extant taxa but is similar to Lufengpithecus, demonstrating that the level of molar dimorphism required for the Greek fossil sample under the single-species taxonomy is not unprecedented when the comparative framework is expanded to include extinct primates. In contrast, the Haritalyangar Sivapithecus sample, if it represents a single species, exhibits substantially greater molar dimorphism than does Lufengpithecus. Given these results, the taxonomic status of this sample remains equivocal. KEY WORDS bootstrap; dental variation; Lufengpithecus; Ouranopithecus; Sivapithecus

There have been numerous attempts to sex fossil specimens using the canine dentition. Whether focused on canine size or canine shape, most of these efforts share two deficiencies: lack of quantification of male-female differences in the adopted criteria and a failure to adequately explore among extant species the discriminatory power of these criteria. Here, canine shape indices relating to relative canine height, upper canine root/crown proportionality, and relative length of the lower canine mesial ridge were calculated for males and females of all species and subspecies of extant great apes and two species of gibbons. The accuracy of these indices for identifying the sex of the extant ape specimens was investigated through discriminant analysis and the use of bivariate plots of the two upper and two lower canine indices. The indices were found to be highly accurate in identifying the sex of great ape individuals, not only in single-species and subspecies samples but in mixed-species samples as well; assignment error rates were mostly between 0 and 4%. Accuracy was lowest in Pan (error rates as high as 15%) and highest in Pongo (one error). In most cases, error rates were lower in the upper canines. The effectiveness of these shape indices for sexing might be related to the degree of absolute canine size dimorphism; the indices did not effectively segregate males and females among minimally canine-dimorphic gibbons. The mixed-species results reveal that same-sex index values are remarkably concordant across great ape species, as are the patterns of spatial segregation of males and females in the bivariate plots. Results suggest that, while the indices can be used with some confidence to sex individual fossil specimens, their greatest utility will be for identifying the sex of groups of canines united by size and morphology. KEY WORDS Pan, Gorilla, Pongo, Hylobates, Apes, Canine teeth, Sexing, Sexual dimorphism

Canines of fossil hominoids and primitive catarrhines from several early, middle, and late Miocene sites were analyzed according to the shape indices described in Kelley (1995) and compared to those of males and females of extant great apes. In bivariate plots of the fossil canines utilizing the indices, 90% of the upper canines and 85% of the lower canines fell within or just outside the exclusively male or exclusively female territories delimited by the extant great apes. The remainder fell in the male-female overlap zones. Sex assignments based on these distributions were nearly 100% concordant with classifications according to canine height, suggesting a high degree of accuracy. There were various taxon-specific shifts in bivariate space among fossil genera, reflecting subtle differences in canine shape between taxa within the overall pattern of similarity to extant great apes as a whole. In many cases these shifts are matched by particular extant-ape species and subspecies, while other fossil taxa have no exact analogue for canine shape among the extant great apes. However, the pattern of spatial segregation of canines identified as either male or female at each of the sites largely mirrors that of males and females within the extant-ape sample, indicating that Miocene catarrhines shared with extant great apes a common pattern of shape differences between male and female canines, regardless of taxon-specific morphologies. These observations demonstrate that the canines of fossil catarrhines can be sexed with a high degree of confidence based solely on intrinsic features of shape. This will permit more reliable characterizations of morphological sexual dimorphism among fossil species. It is also argued that canine shape is a more reliable indicator of sex in fossil taxa than are canine/molar size ratios. KEY WORDS Canines, Hominoid, Miocene, Sexual dimorphism, Taxonomy

A partial hominoid skeleton just older than 15 million years from sediments in the Tugen Hills of north central Kenya mandates a revision of the hominoid genus Kenyapithecus, a possible early member of the great ape--human clade. The Tugen Hills specimen represents a new genus, which also incorporates all material previously referable to Kenyapithecus africanus. The new taxon is derived with respect to earlier Miocene hominoids but is primitive with respect to the younger species Kenyapithecus wicked and therefore is a late member of the stem hominoid radiation in the East African Miocene., An important issue in hominoid systematics concerns the origin of the great ape and human clade. Estimated divergence times among the lineages of extant great apes and humans based on [...]

Author(s): Jay Kelley [1] It is nearly 150 years since the existence of Neanderthals was first recognized, but debate about their relationship to modern humans remains as contentious as ever. [...]