Pokaż uproszczony rekord

The assessment of the relationship between the traits of temporal muscle and the massiveness of the supraorbital region of the Homo sapiens crania including the influence of the neurocranial shape and size of the occlusal surface of the upper molars – preliminary study

dc.contributor.authorNowaczewska, Wioletta
dc.contributor.authorGórka, Katarzyna
dc.contributor.authorCieślik, Agata
dc.contributor.authorPatyk, Mateusz
dc.contributor.authorZaleska-Dorobisz, Urszula
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-24T11:23:56Z
dc.date.available2023-10-24T11:23:56Z
dc.date.issued2023-09-26
dc.identifier.issn1898-6773
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/48153
dc.description.abstractThe knowledge about the pattern of the relationship between the morphological variability of the supraorbital region of human skulls and the features of the temporal muscle is far from complete. The main aim of this study was to determine the relationships between the traits of human temporal muscle (i.e., its relative height and length) and the relative massiveness of the supraorbital region of the frontal bone with taking into account the potential influence of the neurocranial shape and the relative area of the occlusal surface of the upper molars.Skulls of African and Australian males (n = 44) exhibiting high variability in the massiveness of the supraorbital region, the presence of two types of the upper molars (first and second, n = 88) and a good state of the preservation of the braincase with the clearly visible inferior temporal line were examined.The qualitative scales were used to assess the degrees of the massiveness of the supraorbital regions. Metric traits of temporal muscle and that used to calculate the index of the neurocranial shape, size of the braincase and the facial skeleton were collected. Values of the occlusal areas of the molars were obtained using the ImageJ software.Spearman’s rank correlation and partial rank correlation analyses were performed.The results of our study showed the relationships between the traits of the temporal muscle and only the degree of the robusticity of most lateral part of the supraorbital area (trigonum). However, when the influences of the neurocranial shape and the relative occlusal area of molars were excluded, these relationships disappeared. The greatest importance of the neurocranial shape for the formation of the morphology of the trigonum was indicated. The results of the study were discussed from the perspective of the potential role of the temporal muscle as the part of the mastication apparatus for the development of the robusticity of the cranial supraorbital region.en
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesAnthropological Review;3en
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
dc.subjectcranial robusticityen
dc.subjectmasticatory stressen
dc.subjectmasticatory musclesen
dc.subjecthuman skullsen
dc.subjectcranial shapeen
dc.titleThe assessment of the relationship between the traits of temporal muscle and the massiveness of the supraorbital region of the Homo sapiens crania including the influence of the neurocranial shape and size of the occlusal surface of the upper molars – preliminary studyen
dc.typeArticle
dc.page.number67-86
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationNowaczewska, Wioletta - Department of Human Biology, University of Wrocław, Polanden
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationGórka, Katarzyna - Department of Anthropology, L. Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, Polanden
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationCieślik, Agata - Department of Anthropology, L. Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, Polanden
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationPatyk, Mateusz - Department of General and Pediatric Radiology, Medical University of Wrocław, Polanden
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationZaleska-Dorobisz, Urszula - Department of General and Pediatric Radiology, Medical University of Wrocław, Polanden
dc.identifier.eissn2083-4594
dc.referencesAbràmoff MD, Magalhães PJ, Ram SJ. 2004. Image processing with Image J. Biophotonics Int 11:36–42.en
dc.referencesBaab KL, Freidline SE, Wang SL, Hanson T. 2010. Relationship of cranial robusticity to cranial form, geography and climate in Homo sapiens. Am J Phys Anthropol 141: 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21120en
dc.referencesBastir M, Rosas A. 2005. Hierarchical nature of morphological integration and modularity in the human posterior face. Am J Phys Anthropol 128(1):26–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20191en
dc.referencesBeecher RM, Corruccini RS. 1981. Effects of dietary consistency on maxillary arch breadth in macaques. J Dent Res 60(1):68 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345810600011301en
dc.referencesBräuer G. 1988. Osteometrie. In: R. Knussmann, editor. Anthropologie (160–232). Germany, Stuttgart: G. Fischer. 160–232.en
dc.referencesBresin A, Johansson CB, Kiliaridis S. 1994. Effects of occlusal strain on the development of the dentoalveolar process in the growing rat. A morphometric study. Eur J Musculoskel Res 3: 112–22.en
dc.referencesBuikstra JE, Ubelaker DH. 1994. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series, No 44. NC, USA: Fayetteville.en
dc.referencesCarlson DS, Van Gerven DP. 1977. Masticatory function and post-Pleistocene evolution in Nubia. Am J Phys Anthropol 46(3):495–506.en
dc.referencesCunningham DJ. 1908. The evolution of the eyebrow region of the forehead, with special reference to the excessive supraorbital development in the Neanderthal race. Earth Environ Sci Trans R Soc Edinb 46(2):283–311.en
dc.referencesDemes B, Creel N. 1988. Bite force, diet and cranial morphology of fossil hominids. J Hum Evol 17(7):657–70.en
dc.referencesDempsey P, Townsend G. 2001. Genetic and environmental contributions to variation in human tooth size. Heredity 86(6):685–93. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2540.2001.00878.xen
dc.referencesEndo B. 1970. Analysis of stress around the orbit due to masseter and temporalis muscles respectively. J Anthropol Soc Jpn 78(4):251–66.en
dc.referencesFerembach D, Schwindezky I, Stoukal M. 1980. Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. J Hum Evol 9(7):517–49.en
dc.referencesGarvin HM, Ruff CB. 2012. Sexual dimorphism in skeletal browridge and chin morphologies determined using a new quantitative method. Am J Phys Anthropol 147(4):661–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.22036en
dc.referencesGonzalez PN, Perez SI, Bernal V. 2010. Ontogeny of robusticity of craniofacial traits in modern humans: a study of South American Populations. Am J Phys Anthropol 142(3):367–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21231en
dc.referencesGórka K, Romero A, Pérez-Péreza A. 2015. First molar size and wear within and among modern hunter-gatherers and agricultural populations. Homo 66(4):299–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchb.2015.02.007en
dc.referencesGórka K, Romero A, Pérez-Péreza A. 2016. Dental-macrowear and diet of Tigara foragers from Point Hope, Northern Alaska. Anthropol Anz 73(3):257–64. https://doi.org/10.1127/anthranz/2016/0613en
dc.referencesGórny S. 1957. Crania Africana, Uganda. Mater Prace Antropolog 14:1–400.en
dc.referencesHammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electron 4:1–9.en
dc.referencesHarvati K, Weaver TD. 2006. Human cranial anatomy and the differential preservation of population history and climate signatures. Anat Rec 288(12):1225–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.a.20395en
dc.referencesHassan MG, Kaler H, Zhang B, Cox TC, Young N, Jheon AH. 2020. Effects of multi-generational soft diet consumption on mouse craniofacial morphology. Front Physiol 11:783. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.00783en
dc.referencesHillson S. 1996. Dental Anthropology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.en
dc.referencesHylander WL. 1977. The adaptive significance of Eskimo craniofacial morphology. In: A. Dahlberg, TM. Graber, editors. Orofacial growth and development. Mouton Publishers, The Hague, Paris: 129–169.en
dc.referencesHylander W, Picq P, Johnson K. 1991. Masticatory-stress hypotheses and the supraorbital region of primates. Am J Phys Anthropol 86(1):1–36.en
dc.referencesKamegai T, Tatsuki T, Nagano H, Mitsuhashi H, Kumeta J, Tatsuki Y, Kumeta J, Inaba D. 2005. A determination of bite force in northern Japanese children. Eur J Orthod 27(1):53–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjh090en
dc.referencesKatz DC, Grote MN, Weaver TD. 2017. Changes in human skull morphology across the agricultural transition are consistent with softer diets in preindustrial farming groups. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114(34): 9050–55. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1702586114en
dc.referencesLahr MM. 1996. The Evolution of Modern Human Diversity:A Study in Cranial Variation. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.en
dc.referencesLahr MM, Wright RVS. 1996. The question of robusticity and the relationship between cranial size and shape in Homo sapiens. J Hum Evol 31(2):157–91.en
dc.referencesLarsen CS. 1995. Biological changes in human populations with agriculture. Annu Rev Anthropol 24:185–213.en
dc.referencesLieberman DE. 2011. The Evolution of the Human Head. Harvard University Press: Cambridge.en
dc.referencesLieberman DE, Krovitz GE, Yates FW, Devlin M, St Claire M. 2004. Effects of food processing on masticatory strain and craniofacial growth in a retrognathic face. J Hum Evol 46(6):655–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.03.005en
dc.referencesLieberman DE, McBratney BM, Krovitz G. 2002. The evolution and development of cranial form in Homo sapiens. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99(3):1134–39. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.022440799en
dc.referencesMaskos A, Schmidbauer ML, Kunst S, Rehms R, Putz T, Romer S, et al. 2022. Diagnostic utility of temporal muscle thickness as a monitoring tool for muscle wasting in neurocritical care. Nutrients 14(21), 4498. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14214498en
dc.referencesMatsumura H, Tanijiri T, Kouchi M, Hanihara T, Friess M, Moiseyev V, Stringer Ch, Miyahara K. 2022. Global patterns of the cranial form of modern human populations described by analysis of a 3D surface homologous model. Sci Rep 12:13826. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-15883-3en
dc.referencesMaughan RJ, Watson JS, Weir J. 1983. Strength and cross sectional area of human skeletal muscle. J Physiol (London) 338:37–49.en
dc.referencesMerema BBJ, Sieswerda JJ, Spijkervet FKL, Kraeima J, Witjes MJH. 2022. A contemporary approach to non-invasive 3D determination of individual masticatory muscle forces: a proof of concept. J Pers Med 12(8), 1273. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12081273en
dc.referencesMilicerowa H. 1995. Crania Australica. Mater Prace Antropolog 6:1–268.en
dc.referencesMitteroecker P, Gunz P, Neubauer S, Muller G. 2012. How to explore morphological integration in human evolution and development? Evol Biol 39:536–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-012-9178-3en
dc.referencesMoltoni G, D’ Arco F, Ross-Espagnet MC, James G, Hayward R. 2021. Observations on the growth of temporalis muscle: a 3D CT imaging study. J Anat 238:1218–1224. https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.13370en
dc.referencesNoback ML, Harvati K. 2015. The contribution of subsistence to global human cranial variation. J Hum Evol 80:34–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.11.005en
dc.referencesNowaczewska W, Górka K, Cieślik A. 2023. Assessment of the relationship between the total occlusal area of the human permanent upper first and second molars and the robusticity of the facial skeleton in sex-different cranial samples of Homo sapiens: a preliminary study. Biology 12(4):566. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12040566en
dc.referencesNowaczewska W, Kubicka AM, Piontek J, Biecek P. 2022. The meaning of the shape of the frontal bone, facial retraction and prognathism for the degree of gracilisation of the supraorbital region in Homo sapiens. Anthropol Anz 79(3):341–60. https://doi.org/10.1127/anthranz/2022/1497en
dc.referencesNowaczewska W, Kuźmiński Ł, Biecek P. 2015. Morphological relationship between the cranial and supraorbital regions in Homo sapiens. Am J Phys Anthropol 156(1):110–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.22632en
dc.referencesPaschetta C. de Azevedo S, Castillo L, Martínez-Abadías N, Hernández M, Lieberman DE, González-Joséet R. 2010. The influence of masticatory loading on craniofacial morphology: a test case across technological transitions in the Ohio valley. Am J Phys Anthropol 141(2):297–314. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21151en
dc.referencesPearson AM. 1990. Muscle growth and exercise. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 29(3):167–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408399009527522en
dc.referencesPerez SI, Lema V, Diniz-Filho JAF, Bernal V, Gonzalez PN, Gobbo D, Pucciarelli HM. 2011. The role of diet and temperature in shaping cranial diversification of South American human populations: an approach based on spatial regression and divergence rate tests. J Biogeogr 38:148–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02392.xen
dc.referencesPerez SI, Monteiro LR. 2009. Nonrandom factors in modern human morphological diversification: a study of craniofacial variation in southern South American populations. Evol 63(4):978–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00539.xen
dc.referencesRavosa MJ, Ning J, Costley DB, Daniel A, Stock SR, Stack MS. 2010. Masticatory biomechanics and masseter fiber-type plasticity. J Musculoskeletal Neuronal Interact 10(1):46–55.en
dc.referencesRosas A, Bastir M. 2002. Thin-plate spline analysis of allometry and sexual dimorphism in the human craniofacial complex. Am J Phys Anthropol 117(3):236– 45. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.10023en
dc.referencesRoseman CC. 2004. Detecting interregionally diversifying natural selection on modern human cranial form using matched molecular and morphometric data. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101(35):12824–29. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402637101en
dc.referencesRowe RWD, Goldspink G. 1969. Muscle fibre growth in five different muscles in both sexes of mice. I. Normal mice. J Anat 104:519–30.en
dc.referencesRussell M.D. 1985. The supraorbital torus: a most remarkable peculiarity. Curr Anthropol 26(3):337–50.en
dc.referencesSardi ML, Novellino PS, Pucciarelli HM. 2006. Craniofacial morphology in the Argentine Center-West: consequences of the transition to food production. Am J Phys Anthropol 130(3):333–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20379en
dc.referencesSingh N, Harvati K, Hublin J-J, Klingenberg ChP. 2012. Morphological evolution through integration: a quantitative study of cranial integration in Homo, Pan, Gorilla and Pongo. J Hum Evol 62(1):155–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.11.006en
dc.referencesSmith HF, Terhune CE, Lockwood CA. 2007. Genetic, geographic, and environmental correlates of human temporal bone variation. Am J Phys Anthropol 134(3):312–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20671en
dc.referencesTolhurst DE, Carstens MH, Greco RJ, Hurwitz DJ. 1991. The surgical anatomy of the scalp. Plast Reconstr Surg 87:603–12.en
dc.referencesToro-Ibacachea V, Muñozd VZ, O’Higgins P. 2016. The relationship between skull morphology, masticatory muscle force and cranial skeletal deformation during biting. Ann Anat 203:59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2015.03.002en
dc.referencesTownsend G, Bockmann M, Hughes T, Brook A. 2012. Genetic, environmental and epigenetic influences on variation in human tooth number, size and shape. Odontology 100(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-011-0052-zen
dc.referencesVon Cramon-Taubadel N. 2011. The relative efficacy of functional and developmental cranial modules for reconstructing global human population history. Am J Phys Anthropol 146(1):83–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21550en
dc.referencesVon Cramon-Taubadel N. 2014. Evolutionary insights into global patterns of human cranial diversity: population history, climatic and dietary effects. J Anthropol Sci 92:43–77. https://doi.org/10.4436/jass.91010en
dc.referencesViðarsdóttir US, Cobb S. 2004. Inter- and intra-specific variation in the ontogeny of the hominoid facial skeleton: testing assumptions of ontogenetic variability. Ann Anat 186(5–6):423–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0940-9602(04)80076-1en
dc.referencesViðarsdóttir US, O’Higgins P, Stringer C. 2002. A geometric morphometric study of regional differences in the ontogeny of the modern human facial skeleton. J Anat 201(3):211–29. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-7580.2002.00092.xen
dc.referencesWatt DG, Williams CHM. 1951. The effects of the physical consistency of food on the growth and development of the mandible and the maxilla of the rat. Am J Orthod 37:895–928.en
dc.referencesWeijs WA, Hillen B. 1984. Relationships between masticatory muscle cross-section and skull shape. J Dent Res 63:1154–57.en
dc.referencesWhite TD, Folkens PA. 2000. Human Osteology. Academic Press: San Diego.en
dc.contributor.authorEmailNowaczewska, Wioletta - wioletta.nowaczewska@uwr.edu.pl
dc.contributor.authorEmailGórka, Katarzyna - katarzyna.gorka@hirszfeld.pl
dc.contributor.authorEmailCieślik, Agata - agata.cieslik@hirszfeld.pl
dc.contributor.authorEmailPatyk, Mateusz - mateusz.patyk@umw.edu.pl
dc.contributor.authorEmailZaleska-Dorobisz, Urszula - urszula.zaleska-dorobisz@umw.edu.pl
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1898-6773.86.3.05
dc.relation.volume86


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail
Nazwa:
67-86_Nowaczewska_et_al..pdf
Rozmiar:
1.245MB
Format:
PDF
Oglądaj/Otwórz

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Poza zaznaczonymi wyjątkami, licencja tej pozycji opisana jest jako https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0