The term 'obstetrical dilemma' was coined by Washburn in 1960 to describe the trade-off between selection for a larger birth canal, permitting successful passage of a big-brained human neonate, and the smaller pelvic dimensions required for bipedal locomotion. His suggested solution to these antagonistic pressures was to give birth prematurely, explaining the unusual degree of neurological and physical immaturity, or secondary altriciality, observed in human infants. This proposed trade-off has traditionally been offered as the predominant evolutionary explanation for why human childbirth is so challenging, and inherently risky, compared to that of other primates. This perceived difficulty is likely due to the tight fit of fetal to maternal pelvic dimensions along with the convoluted shape of the birth canal and a comparatively low degree of ligamentous flexibility. Although the ideas combined under the obstetrical dilemma hypothesis originated almost a century ago, they have received renewed attention and empirical scrutiny in the last decade, with some researchers advocating complete rejection of the hypothesis and its assumptions. However, the hypothesis is complex because it presently captures several, mutually non-exclusive ideas: (i) there is an evolutionary trade-off resulting from opposing selection pressures on the pelvis; (ii) selection favouring a narrow pelvis specifically derives from bipedalism; (iii) human neonates are secondarily altricial because they are born relatively immature to ensure that they fit through the maternal bony pelvis; (iv) as a corollary to the asymmetric selection pressure for a spacious birth canal in females, humans evolved pronounced sexual dimorphism of pelvic shape. Recently, the hypothesis has been challenged on both empirical and theoretical grounds. Here, we appraise the original ideas captured under the 'obstetrical dilemma' and their subsequent evolution. We also evaluate complementary and alternative explanations for a tight fetopelvic fit and obstructed labour, including ecological factors related to nutrition and thermoregulation, constraints imposed by the stability of the pelvic floor or by maternal and fetal metabolism, the energetics of bipedalism, and variability in pelvic shape. This reveals that human childbirth is affected by a complex combination of evolutionary, ecological, and biocultural factors, which variably constrain maternal pelvic form and fetal growth. Our review demonstrates that it is unwarranted to reject the obstetrical dilemma hypothesis entirely because several of its fundamental assumptions have not been successfully discounted despite claims to the contrary. As such, the obstetrical dilemma remains a tenable hypothesis that can be used productively to guide evolutionary research.
Objectives The narrow human birth canal evolved in response to multiple opposing selective forces on the pelvis. These factors cannot be sufficiently disentangled in humans because of the limited range of relevant variation. Here, we outline a comparative strategy to study the evolution of human childbirth and to test existing hypotheses in primates and other mammals. Methods We combined a literature review with comparative analyses of neonatal and female body and brain mass, using three existing datasets. We also present images of bony pelves of a diverse sample of taxa. Results Bats, certain non‐human primates, seals, and most ungulates, including whales, have much larger relative neonatal masses than humans, and they all differ in their anatomical adaptations for childbirth. Bats, as a group, are particularly interesting in this context as they give birth to the relatively largest neonates, and their pelvis is highly dimorphic: Whereas males have a fused symphysis, a ligament bridges a large pubic gap in females. The resulting strong demands on the widened and vulnerable pelvic floor likely are relaxed by roosting head‐down. Conclusions Parturition has constituted a strong selective force in many non‐human placentals. We illustrated how the demands on pelvic morphology resulting from locomotion, pelvic floor stability, childbirth, and perhaps also erectile function in males have been traded off differently in mammals, depending on their locomotion and environment. Exploiting the power of a comparative approach, we present new hypotheses and research directions for resolving the obstetric conundrum in humans.
It is a classic aim of quantitative and evolutionary biology to infer genetic architecture and potential evolutionary responses to selection from the variance–covariance structure of measured traits. But a meaningful genetic or developmental interpretation of raw covariances is difficult, and classic concepts of morphological integration do not directly apply to modern morphometric data. Here, we present a new morphometric strategy based on the comparison of morphological variation across different spatial scales. If anatomical elements vary completely independently, then their variance accumulates at larger scales or for structures composed of multiple elements: morphological variance would be a power function of spatial scale. Deviations from this pattern of “variational self-similarity” (serving as a null model of completely uncoordinated growth) indicate genetic or developmental coregulation of anatomical components. We present biometric strategies and R scripts for identifying patterns of coordination and compensation in the size and shape of composite anatomical structures. In an application to human cranial variation, we found that coordinated variation and positive correlations are prevalent for the size of cranial components, whereas their shape was dominated by compensatory variation, leading to strong canalization of cranial shape at larger scales. We propose that mechanically induced bone formation and remodeling are key mechanisms underlying compensatory variation in cranial shape. Such epigenetic coordination and compensation of growth are indispensable for stable, canalized development and may also foster the evolvability of complex anatomical structures by preserving spatial and functional integrity during genetic responses to selection.[Cranial shape; developmental canalization; evolvability; morphological integration; morphometrics; phenotypic variation; self-similarity.]
We found evidence for environmental adaptation in macaque body and craniodental size, primarily driven by selection for thermoregulation. This pattern cannot be explained by the within-species pattern, indicating an evolved genetic basis for the between-species relationship. The dietary signal in relative tooth size, by contrast, can largely be explained by phylogeny. This cautions against adaptive interpretations of phenotype-environment associations when phylogeny is not explicitly modelled.
Compared with most other primates, humans are characterized by a tight fit between the maternal birth canal and the fetal head, leading to a relatively high risk of neonatal and maternal mortality and morbidities. Obstetric selection is thought to favor a spacious birth canal, whereas the source for opposing selection is frequently assumed to relate to bipedal locomotion. Another, yet underinvestigated, hypothesis is that a more expansive birth canal suspends the soft tissue of the pelvic floor across a larger area, which is disadvantageous for continence and support of the weight of the inner organs and fetus. To test this “pelvic floor hypothesis,” we generated a finite element model of the human female pelvic floor and varied its radial size and thickness while keeping all else constant. This allowed us to study the effect of pelvic geometry on pelvic floor deflection (i.e., the amount of bending from the original position) and tissue stresses and stretches. Deflection grew disproportionately fast with increasing radial size, and stresses and stretches also increased. By contrast, an increase in thickness increased pelvic floor stiffness (i.e., the resistance to deformation), which reduced deflection but was unable to fully compensate for the effect of increasing radial size. Moreover, larger thicknesses increase the intra-abdominal pressure necessary for childbirth. Our results support the pelvic floor hypothesis and evince functional trade-offs affecting not only the size of the birth canal but also the thickness and stiffness of the pelvic floor.
Background The human foetus typically needs to rotate when passing through the tight birth canal because of the complex shape of the pelvis. In most women, the upper part, or inlet, of the birth canal has a round or mediolaterally oval shape, which is considered ideal for parturition, but it is unknown why the lower part of the birth canal has a pronounced anteroposteriorly oval shape. Results Here, we show that the shape of the lower birth canal affects the ability of the pelvic floor to resist the pressure exerted by the abdominal organs and the foetus. Based on a series of finite element analyses, we found that the highest deformation, stress, and strain occur in pelvic floors with a circular or mediolaterally oval shape, whereas an anteroposterior elongation increases pelvic floor stability. Conclusions This suggests that the anteroposterior oval outlet shape is an evolutionary adaptation for pelvic floor support. For the pelvic inlet, by contrast, it has long been assumed that the mediolateral dimension is constrained by the efficiency of upright locomotion. But we argue that the mediolateral elongation has evolved because of the limits on the anteroposterior diameter imposed by upright posture. We show that an anteroposteriorly deeper inlet would require greater pelvic tilt and lumbar lordosis, which compromises spine health and the stability of upright posture. These different requirements of the pelvic inlet and outlet likely have led to the complex shape of the pelvic canal and to the evolution of rotational birth characteristic of humans.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.