Technical note: Artificial Resynthesis Technology for the experimental formation of dental microwear textures.

Dental microwear formation on the posterior dentition is largely attributed to an organism's diet. However, some have suggested that dietary and environmental abrasives contribute more to the formation process than food, calling into question the applicability of dental microwear to the reconstruction of diet in the fossil record. Creating microwear under controlled conditions would benefit this debate, but requires accurately replicating the oral environment. This study tests the applicability of Artificial Resynthesis Technology (ART 5) to create microwear textures while mitigating the challenges of past research. ART 5 is a simulator that replicates the chewing cycle, responds to changes in food texture, and simulates the actions of the oral cavity. Surgically extracted, occluding pairs of third molars (n = 2 pairs) were used in two chewing experiments: one with dried beef and another with sand added to the dried beef. High-resolution molds were taken at 0, 50, 100, 2500, and 5000 simulated chewing cycles, which equates to approximately 1 week of chewing. Preliminary results show that ART 5 produces microwear textures. Meat alone may produce enamel prism rod exposure at 5000 cycles, although attrition cannot be ruled out. Meat with sand accelerates the wear formation process, with enamel prism rods quickly obliterated and "pit-and-scratch" microwear forming at approximately 2500 cycles. Future work with ART 5 will incorporate a more thorough experimental protocol with improved controls, pH of the simulated oral environment, and grit measurements; however, these results indicate the potential of ART 5 in untangling the complex variables of dental microwear formation.

Anterior tooth-use behaviors among early modern humans and Neandertals.

Early modern humans (EMH) are often touted as behaviorally advanced to Neandertals, with more sophisticated technologies, expanded resource exploitation, and more complex clothing production. However, recent analyses have indicated that Neandertals were more nuanced in their behavioral adaptations, with the production of the Châtelperronian technocomplex, the processing and cooking of plant foods, and differences in behavioral adaptations according to habitat. This study adds to this debate by addressing the behavioral strategies of EMH (n = 30) within the context of non-dietary anterior tooth-use behaviors to glean possible differences between them and their Neandertal (n = 45) counterparts. High-resolution casts of permanent anterior teeth were used to collect microwear textures of fossil and comparative bioarchaeological samples using a Sensofar white-light confocal profiler with a 100x objective lens. Labial surfaces were scanned, totaling a work envelope of 204 x 276 µm for each individual. The microwear textures were examined for post-mortem damage and uploaded to SSFA software packages for surface characterization. Statistical analyses were performed to examine differences in central tendencies and distributions of anisotropy and textural fill volume variables among the EMH sample itself by habitat, location, and time interval, and between the EMH and Neandertal samples by habitat and location. Descriptive statistics for the EMH sample were compared to seven bioarchaeological samples (n = 156) that utilized different tooth-use behaviors to better elucidate specific activities that may have been performed by EMH. Results show no significant differences between the means within the EMH sample by habitat, location, or time interval. Furthermore, there are no significant differences found here between EMH and Neandertals. Comparisons to the bioarchaeological samples suggest both fossil groups participated in clamping and grasping activities. These results indicate that EMH and Neandertals were similar in their non-dietary anterior tooth-use behaviors and provide additional evidence for overlapping behavioral strategies employed by these two hominins.

Anterior dental microwear textures show habitat-driven variability in Neandertal behavior.

The causes of Neandertal anterior tooth wear patterns, including labial rounding, labial scratches, and differential anterior-posterior wear, have been debated for decades. The most common explanation is the "stuff-and-cut" hypothesis, which describes Neandertals clamping down on a piece of meat and slicing a portion close to their lips. "Stuff-and-cut" has been accepted as a general aspect of Neandertal behavior without fully assessing its variability. This study analyzes anterior dental microwear textures across habitats, locations, and time intervals to discern possible variation in Neandertal anterior tooth-use behavior. Forty-five Neandertals from 24 sites were analyzed, represented by high-resolution replicas of permanent anterior teeth. The labial surface was scanned for antemortem microwear using a white-light confocal profiler. The resultant 3D-point clouds, representing 204 × 276 µm for each specimen, were uploaded into SSFA software packages for texture characterization. Statistical analyses, including MANOVAs, ANOVAs, and pairwise comparisons, were completed on ranked microwear data. Neandertal descriptive statistics were also compared to 10 bioarchaeological samples of known or inferred dietary and behavioral regimes. The Neandertal sample varied significantly by habitat, suggesting this factor was a principal driving force for differences in Neandertal anterior tooth-use behaviors. The Neandertals from open habitats showed significantly lower anisotropy and higher textural fill volume than those inhabiting more closed, forested environments. The texture signature from the open-habitat Neandertals was most similar to that of the Ipiutak and Nunavut, who used their anterior teeth for intense clamping and grasping behaviors related to hide preparation. Those in more closed habitats were most similar to the Arikara, who did not participate in non-dietary behaviors. These Neandertal individuals had a broad range of texture values consistent with non-dietary and dietary behaviors, suggesting they varied more in anterior tooth-use behaviors and exploited a wider variety of plant and animal resources than did those from open habitats.

Neanderthal teeth from Moula-Guercy, Ardèche, France.

Here we describe dental remains from a Neanderthal fossil assemblage from Moula-Guercy, France. Our report demonstrates that the Moula-Guercy hominid remains contribute important morphological, developmental, and behavioral data to understanding Neanderthal evolutionary history. We include gross comparative morphological descriptions and enamel surface microstructure and microwear data. These teeth reveal numerous characteristics that are diagnostic of Neanderthals and provide no evidence for the presence of any other hominid taxa. Enamel growth increment data from the Moula-Guercy specimens yield evidence of a Neanderthal pattern of development, although at the lower end of the range of variation. The presence of a significant number of linear enamel hypoplasias indicates that these individuals were stressed during childhood. Molar microwear data suggest that these Neanderthals did not differ significantly from modern humans in terms of the fracture properties of the food they were consuming. The incisor microwear and macro striations provide evidence that these individuals may have been using their anterior teeth as tools, similar to the practices of several modern human populations such as the Inuit, Ipiutak, and Australian Aboriginals, and reminiscent of evidence from other Neanderthals from Krapina, Croatia, as well as the 600,000 year old hominids from Sima de los Huesos, Spain. Am J Phys Anthropol 151:477-491, 2013.© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Dental microwear texture analysis of hominins recovered by the Olduvai Landscape Paleoanthropology Project, 1995-2007.

Dental microwear analysis has proven to be a valuable tool for the reconstruction of aspects of diet in early hominins. That said, sample sizes for some groups are small, decreasing our confidence that results are representative of a given taxon and making it difficult to assess within-species variation. Here we present microwear texture data for several new specimens of Homo habilis and Paranthropus boisei from Olduvai Gorge, bringing sample sizes for these species in line with those published for most other early hominins. These data are added to those published to date, and microwear textures of the enlarged sample of H. habilis (n = 10) and P. boisei (n = 9) are compared with one another and with those of other early hominins. New results confirm that P. boisei does not have microwear patterns expected of a hard-object specialist. Further, the separate texture complexity analyses of early Homo species suggest that Homo erectus ate a broader range of foods, at least in terms of hardness, than did H. habilis, P. boisei, or the "gracile" australopiths studied. Finally, differences in scale of maximum complexity and perhaps textural fill volume between H. habilis and H. erectus are noted, suggesting further possible differences between these species in diet.

Technical note: Dental microwear textures of "Phase I" and "Phase II" facets.

The power stroke of mastication has been traditionally divided into two parts, one which precedes centric occlusion, and the other which follows it-"Phase I" and "Phase II," respectively. Recent studies of primate mastication have called into question the role of Phase II in food processing, as they have found little muscle activity or accompanying bone strain following centric occlusion. That said, many researchers today look to Phase II facets to relate diet to patterns of dental microwear. This suggests the need to reevaluate microwear patterns on Phase I facets. Here we use texture analysis to compare and contrast microwear on facets representing both phases in three primate species with differing diets (Alouatta palliata, Cebus apella, and Lophocebus albigena). Results reaffirm that microwear patterns on Phase II facets better distinguish taxa with differing diets than do those on Phase I facets. Further, differences in microwear textures between facet types for a given taxon may themselves reflect diet. Some possible explanations for differences in microwear textures between facet types are proposed.