Macaques (genus Macaca) are unique among cercopithecids in that they possess a maxillary sinus, and among anthropoids in that they demonstrate a relatively weak relationship between the size of this sinus and the cranium. To test the hypothesis that extrinsic factors may contribute to maxillary sinus size variation, a sample of 46 Japanese macaque (M. fuscata) crania from known localities were subjected to computed tomography (CT) imaging, and sinus volume and nasal cavity area were analyzed relative to latitude and temperature variables. The results suggest that the environmental factors are significant determinants of nasal cavity size in Japanese macaques, but that the relationships between the environment and maxillary sinus volume (MSV) are probably a passive consequence of changes in the size of the nasal cavity. The sinus shrinks as the nasal cavity expands, due to an increased need to condition inspired air in colder climates. This in turn suggests that the sinus itself does not contribute significantly to upper respiratory function.

Everyone who has ever experienced a head cold is familiar with the paranasal sinuses, the bony hollows above and beside the nasal cavity that contribute, sometimes painfully, to upper respiratory tract disorders. These internal cranial structures have a wide distribution among eutherian mammals and archosaurs.1, 2 Sinuses have languished somewhat in the shadow of their better known and more accessible morphological cousins (dentition, postcrania), but new imaging techniques, growth studies, and explicit phylogenetic evaluation3 are beginning to fill in the gaps in our knowledge of the evolution of these enigmatic spaces in primates and promise to yield insights into the evolution of the facial skeleton.

It has been argued that continuous characteristics should be excluded from cladistic analysis for two reasons: because the data are considered inappropriate; and because the methods for the conversion of these data into codes are considered arbitrary. Metric data, however, fulfill the sole criterion for inclusion in phylogenetic analysis, the presence of homologous character states, and thus cannot be excluded as a class of data. The second line of reasoning, that coding methods are arbitrary, applies to gap and segment coding, but quantitative data can be coded in a nonarbitrary manner by means of tests of statistical significance. These procedures, which are both objective and repeatable, determine the probability that two taxa possess an homologous character state; that is, if they have inherited a particular central tendency and distribution of individual variates unchanged from a common ancestor. Thus, the application of statistical tests to quantitative data empirically detects the presence of evolutionary change, the raw material of phylogenetic reconstruction. ᮊ 1998 The Willi Hennig Society ''I advise my philosophy students to develop hypersensitivity for rhetorical questions in philosophy. They paper over whatever cracks there are in the arguments.'' Ž .

Three adaptive hypotheses have been forwarded to explain the distinctive Neanderthal face: (i) an improved ability to accommodate high anterior bite forces, (ii) more effective conditioning of cold and/or dry air and, (iii) adaptation to facilitate greater ventilatory demands. We test these hypotheses using three-dimensional models of Neanderthals, modern humans, and a close outgroup (), applying finite-element analysis (FEA) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD). This is the most comprehensive application of either approach applied to date and the first to include both. FEA reveals few differences between , modern humans, and Neanderthals in their capacities to sustain high anterior tooth loadings. CFD shows that the nasal cavities of Neanderthals and especially modern humans condition air more efficiently than does that of , suggesting that both evolved to better withstand cold and/or dry climates than less derived We further find that Neanderthals could move considerably more air through the nasal pathway than could or modern humans, consistent with the propositions that, relative to our outgroup, Neanderthal facial morphology evolved to reflect improved capacities to better condition cold, dry air, and, to move greater air volumes in response to higher energetic requirements.

No abstract