2005
DOI: 10.2110/palo.2004.p04-17
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A New Method of Dental Microwear Analysis: Application to Extant Primates and Ouranopithecus macedoniensis (Late Miocene of Greece)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
98
0
4

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 136 publications
(103 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
1
98
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…(ii) Microwear analysis The digital capture and the dental microwear analysis are conducted following the procedures shown in Merceron et al (2005). The microwear pattern is composed of nine variables: length of scratches, numbers of fine and wide scratches, numbers of small and large pits, total numbers of microwear of pits, scratches and microwear scars, and percentage of pits (electronic supplementary material, (Conover & Iman 1981).…”
Section: (B) Methods (I) Mesowear Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(ii) Microwear analysis The digital capture and the dental microwear analysis are conducted following the procedures shown in Merceron et al (2005). The microwear pattern is composed of nine variables: length of scratches, numbers of fine and wide scratches, numbers of small and large pits, total numbers of microwear of pits, scratches and microwear scars, and percentage of pits (electronic supplementary material, (Conover & Iman 1981).…”
Section: (B) Methods (I) Mesowear Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We decided to use a light microscope instead of scanning electron microscope (SEM), because of easier access, affordability and reduced time. Light microscopes have been used successfully in other microwear studies [18,19,24,32]. Note that light microscope results cannot be compared with SEM results directly due to different magnification.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A feature was categorized as a pit if the ratio of length and width was less than four, and a scratch if the ratio was more than four. Features were categorized to small (length less than 20 mm), large (length 20 -50 mm) or very large (length more than 50 mm) pits [33] and thin (width less than 15 mm) or wide (width more than 15 mm) scratches [32,34]. JMP w Pro 10 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA) was used to analyse the results statistically and for visualization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The four extant and four extinct hominid genera represented in our analysis are known for exploiting, or are reported to have exploited, respectively, a wide range of food resources in a variety of diverse environments (Fleagle, 2013;Guatelli-Steinberg, 2016;Hartwig, 2002;Merceron et al, 2005;Nelson and Rook, 2016;Scott et al, 2005;Sponheimer and Lee-Thorp, 2015;Ungar, 2007;Ungar and Sponheimer, 2013). Depending on the taxonspecific feeding habits, the time spent feeding may be considered as another variable which, together with food abrasiveness, likely plays a role in the selection of enamel thickness because of dental wear resistance, i.e., adaptation is not only resistance to fracture, but also to prolonged periods of wear to which enamel thickness can be related (Grine and Daegling, 2017;Pampush et al, 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%