Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T03:09:22.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional and phylogenetic interpretation of enamel microstructure in rhinoceroses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

John M. Rensberger  and
Wighart v. Koenigswald
John M. Rensberger
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences and Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
Wighart v. Koenigswald
Affiliation:
Geologisch-Paläontologische und Mineralogische Abteilung des Hessischen Landesmuseums, Friedensplatz, D-61 Darmstadt, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Worn enamel surfaces of the cheek teeth in fossil and recent rhinoceroses are characterized by fine, parallel ridges aligned perpendicular to the enamel-dentin interface. We show that these ridges result from an unusual enamel ultrastructure in which a primitively horizontal layering of the prisms has become vertical. The new structure apparently appeared between early and middle Eocene, at the time when the superfamilies of perissodactyls were rapidly diverging. Similar modifications of the enamel structure occurred in certain parts of the cheek teeth in tapiroids, chalicotherioids and brontotherioids, but hardly at all in the equids. The modified enamel structure, where it occurs in groups other than rhinocerotoids, is associated with lophs but not cusps. Experimental evidence shows that the modified enamel is more resistant to wear than the unmodified enamel. The consistent association with thin lophs rather than cusps suggests that the modified enamel evolved to prolong the life of the lophs, where occlusal pressures are highest and attrition greatest. The dominance of modified enamel in rhinocerotoids correlates with the higher degree of compression of the cusps and extreme lophodonty in this group. The absence of modified enamel structure in the equids, even in the ectoloph, correlates with the lesser importance of the ectoloph in equids relative to brontotherioids, chalicotherioids and rhinocerotoids.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , Fall 1980 , pp. 477 - 495
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Boyde, A. 1978. Development of the structure of the enamel of the incisor teeth in the three classical subordinal groups of the Rodentia. pp. 43–58. In: Butler, P. M. and Joysey, K. A., eds. Development, Function and Evolution of Teeth. Academic Press; London, New York, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Fortelius, M. (in press). Functional anatomy of the cheek teeth in the Rhinocerotidae. In: Kurtén, B., ed. Dental Development, Evolution, and Function. Columbia Univ. Press; New York.Google Scholar
Kawai, N. 1955. Comparative anatomy of the bands of Schreger. Okijimas Folia Anatomica Japonica. 27:115–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kay, R. F. and Hiiemae, K. M. 1974. Jaw movement and tooth use in Recent and fossil primates. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop. 40:227–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korvenkontio, V. A. 1934. Mikroskopische Untersuchungen an Nagerincisiven. Ann. Zool. Soc. Zool.-Bot. Fennicae Vanamo. 2(1):1–280.Google Scholar
Mills, J. R. E. 1955. Ideal dental occlusion in the Primates. Dent. Pract., Bristol. 6:47–61.Google Scholar
Mills, J. R. E. 1967. A comparison of lateral jaw movements in some mammals from wear facets on the teeth. Arch. Oral Biol. 12:645–661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rensberger, J. M. 1973. An occlusion model for mastication and dental wear in herbivorous mammals. J. Paleontol. 47:515–528.Google Scholar
Rensberger, J. M. 1978. Scanning electron microscopy of wear and occlusal events in some small herbivores. pp. 415–438. In: Butler, P. M. and Joysey, K. A., eds. Development, Function, and Evolution of Teeth. Academic Press; London, New York, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Tomes, J. 1850. On the structure of the dental tissues of the order Rodentia. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London. 140:529–567.Google Scholar
Koenigswald, v. W. 1977. Mimomys cf. reidi aus der villafranchischen Spaltenfüllung Schambach bei Treuchtlingen Mitt. Bayer. Staatsslg. Palaontol. hist. Geol. 17:197–212.Google Scholar
Koenigswald, v. W. 1980. Schmelzstruktur und Morphologie in den Molaren der Arvicolidae (Rodentia). Abh. Senckenberg. Naturforsch. Ges. Frankfurt a. M. 539:1–129.Google Scholar
Wahlert, J. H. 1968. Variability of rodent incisor enamel as viewed in thin section, and the microstructure of the enamel in fossil and Recent groups. Breviora, Mus. Comp. Zool. 309:1–18.Google Scholar
Walker, A., Hoeck, H., and Perez, L. 1978. Microwear of mammalian teeth as an indicator of diet. Science. 201:908–910.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warshawsky, H. 1971. A light and electron microscopic study of the nearly mature enamel of rat incisors. Anat. Rec. 169:559–599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed