Publications

We investigated patterns of jaw-muscle coordination during rhythmic mastication in three species of ungulates displaying the marked transverse jaw movements typical of many large mammalian herbivores. In order to quantify consistent motor patterns during chewing, electromyograms were recorded from the superficial masseter, deep masseter, posterior temporalis and medial pterygoid muscles of goats, alpacas and horses. Timing differences between muscle pairs were evaluated in the context of an evolutionary model of jaw-muscle function. In this model, the closing and food reduction phases of mastication are primarily controlled by two distinct muscle groups, triplet I (balancing-side superficial masseter and medial pterygoid and working-side posterior temporalis) and triplet II (working-side superficial masseter and medial pterygoid and balancing-side posterior temporalis), and the asynchronous activity of the working- and balancing-side deep masseters. The three species differ in the extent to which the jaw muscles are coordinated as triplet I and triplet II. Alpacas, and to a lesser extent, goats, exhibit the triplet pattern whereas horses do not. In contrast, all three species show marked asynchrony of the working-side and balancing-side deep masseters, with jaw closing initiated by the working-side muscle and the balancing-side muscle firing much later during closing. However, goats differ from alpacas and horses in the timing of the balancing-side deep masseter relative to the triplet II muscles. This study highlights interspecific differences in the coordination of jaw muscles to influence transverse jaw movements and the production of bite force in herbivorous ungulates.

The major purpose of this study is to analyze anterior and posterior temporalis muscle force recruitment and firing patterns in various anthropoid and strepsirrhine primates. There are two specific goals for this project. First, we test the hypothesis that in addition to transversely directed muscle force, the evolution of symphyseal fusion in primates may also be linked to vertically directed balancing-side muscle force during chewing (Hylander et al. [2000] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 112:469-492). Second, we test the hypothesis of whether strepsirrhines retain the hypothesized primitive mammalian condition for the firing of the anterior temporalis, whereas anthropoids have the derived condition (Weijs [1994] Biomechanics of Feeding in Vertebrates; Berlin: Springer-Verlag, p. 282-320). Electromyographic (EMG) activities of the left and right anterior and posterior temporalis muscles were recorded and analyzed in baboons, macaques, owl monkeys, thick-tailed galagos, and ring-tailed lemurs. In addition, as we used the working-side superficial masseter as a reference muscle, we also recorded and analyzed EMG activity of the left and right superficial masseter in these primates. The data for the anterior temporalis provided no support for the hypothesis that symphyseal fusion in primates is linked to vertically directed jaw muscle forces during mastication. Thus, symphyseal fusion in primates is most likely mainly linked to the timing and recruitment of transversely directed forces from the balancing-side deep masseter (Hylander et al. [2000] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 112:469-492). In addition, our data demonstrate that the firing patterns for the working- and balancing-side anterior temporalis muscles are near identical in both strepsirrhines and anthropoids. Their working- and balancing-side anterior temporalis muscles fire asynchronously and reach peak activity during the power stroke. Similarly, their working- and balancing-side posterior temporalis muscles also fire asynchronously and reach peak activity during the power stroke. Compared to these strepsirrhines, however, the balancing-side posterior temporalis of anthropoids appears to have a relatively delayed firing pattern. Moreover, based on their smaller W/B ratios, anthropoids demonstrate a relative increase in muscle-force recruitment of the balancing-side posterior temporalis. This in turn suggests that anthropoids may emphasize the duration and magnitude of the power stroke during mastication. This hypothesis, however, requires additional testing. Furthermore, during the latter portion of the power stroke, the late activity of the balancing-side posterior temporalis of anthropoids apparently assists the balancing-side deep masseter in driving the working-side molars through the terminal portion of occlusion.

In vivo studies of jaw-muscle behavior have been integral factors in the development of our current understanding of the primate masticatory apparatus. However, even though it has been shown that food textures and mechanical properties influence jaw-muscle activity during mastication, very little effort has been made to quantify the relationship between the elicited masticatory responses of the subject and the mechanical properties of the foods that are eaten. Recent work on human mastication highlights the importance of two mechanical properties-toughness and elastic modulus (i.e., stiffness)-for food breakdown during mastication. Here we provide data on the toughness and elastic modulus of the majority of foods used in experimental studies of the nonhuman primate masticatory apparatus. Food toughness ranges from approximately 56.97 Jm(-2) (apple pulp) to 4355.45 Jm(-2) (prune pit). The elastic modulus of the experimental foods ranges from 0.07 MPa for gummy bears to 346 MPa for popcorn kernels. These data can help researchers studying primate mastication select among several potential foods with broadly similar mechanical properties. Moreover, they provide a framework for understanding how jaw-muscle activity varies with food mechanical properties in these studies.

Many primates habitually feed on tree exudates such as gums and saps. Among these exudate feeders, Cebuella pygmaea, Callithrix spp., Phaner furcifer, and most likely Euoticus elegantulus elicit exudate flow by biting into trees with their anterior dentition. We define this behavior as gouging. Beyond the recent publication by Dumont ([1997] Am J Phys Anthropol 102:187-202), there have been few attempts to address whether any aspect of skull form in gouging primates relates to this specialized feeding behavior. However, many researchers have proposed that tree gouging results in larger bite force, larger internal skull loads, and larger jaw gapes in comparison to other chewing and biting behaviors. If true, then we might expect primate gougers to exhibit skull modifications that provide increased abilities to produce bite forces at the incisors, withstand loads in the skull, and/or generate large gapes for gouging. We develop 13 morphological predictions based on the expectation that gouging involves relatively large jaw forces and/or jaw gapes. We compare skull shapes for P. furcifer to five cheirogaleid taxa, E. elegantulus to six galagid species, and C. jacchus to two tamarin species, so as to assess whether gouging primates exhibit these predicted morphological shapes. Our results show little morphological evidence for increased force-production or load-resistance abilities in the skulls of these gouging primates. Conversely, these gougers tend to have skull shapes that are advantageous for creating large gapes. For example, all three gouging species have significantly lower condylar heights relative to the toothrow at a given mandibular length in comparison with closely related, nongouging taxa. Lowering the height of the condyle relative to the mandibular toothrow should reduce the stretching of the masseters and medial pterygoids during jaw opening, as well as position the mandibular incisors more anteriorly at wide jaw gapes. In other words, the lower incisors will follow a more vertical trajectory during both jaw opening and closing. We predict, based on these findings, that tree-gouging primates do not generate unusually large forces, but that they do use relatively large gapes during gouging. Of course, in vivo data on jaw forces and jaw gapes are required to reliably assess skull functions during gouging.