| Abstract: | The pattern of overall dental dimensions in over 900 teeth of ramapithecines from Lufeng in China is examined using frequency distribution histograms and fitted normal curves, and compared with data for extant hominoids. A prior study has demonstrated unequivocally that at least two groups of animals must have existed at Lufeng Wu and Oxnard, 1983; Oxnard, 1983a]. The present investigation confirms this finding in more detail. In addition it shows that one fossil group possesses smaller teeth with a lesser degree of sexual dimorphism and approximately equal numbers of adult males and females, and the other possesses larger teeth with a rather larger degree of sexual dimorphism and a female-male ratio that may have approximated from as low as 2:1 to as high as 4:1. Comparisons of patterns of difference along the tooth row demonstrate that both these forms differ from modern apes in their sexual dimorphism, the smaller form being more like humans than the larger, which is more like apes, especially orangutans. Comparisons of the areas of the canine teeth with each of the other functional segments of the tooth row again show that the smaller form is basically similar to modern humans and that the larger resembles extant great apes. Comparisons of other functional dental areas seem to relate to dietary and masticatory functions. Thus the cutting areas are large relative to the chewing areas in omnivorous humans, whereas in the essentially vegetarian great apes this ratio is smaller. The smaller fossil resembles the human condition and may have been somewhat omnivorous; the larger one more resembles the apes and may have been somewhat more vegetarian. However, these comparisons also show that the way in which the larger form resembles the apes is associated with special development of the canines, which is different from that in any modern ape. Comparisons show that the canines in the larger form project far beyond the normal line of tooth crowns. Finally, comparisons show that canine sexual dimorphism in height is marked in the larger form. Neither of these last two features is true of the smaller fossil. These findings have implications for our understanding of the evolution of early pongids and hominids, and for the evolution of primate sexual dimorphisms and dental mechanisms. |
