Applying dental microwear texture analysis to the living: Challenges and prospects

Abstract

Objectives: The food that people and animals consume leaves microscopic traces on teeth in predictable ways, and analyses of these markings-known as dental microwear analyses-allow us to reverse engineer the characteristics of diet. However, the microwear features of modern human diets are most often interpreted through the lens of ethnographic records. Given the subtle variation within human diets when compared to other species, we need better models of how foods and processing techniques produce marks on teeth. Here, we report on the second study to target the occlusal surface microwear of living human populations, and the first to target populations other than foragers. Methods: We collected 150 dental impressions from five Kenyan communities: El Molo, Turkana (Kerio), Luhya (Webuye), Luhya (Port Victoria), and Luo (Port Victoria), representing a range of subsistence strategies and associated staple diets-fishing, pastoralism, and agriculture. Our results suggest that the occlusal microwear of these groups records differences in diet. However, biofilm obscured most of the molds obtained despite the steps taken to remove it, resulting in only 38 usable surfaces. Results: Due to the biofilm problem and final sample size, the analysis did not have enough power to demonstrate the differences observed statistically. The results and problems encountered are here explained. Conclusions: Considering that in vivo studies of dental microwear texture analysis have the potential to increase our understanding of the association between patterns of dental microwear and complex, mixed human diets, resolution of the current pitfalls of the technique is critical. K E Y W O R D S dental microwear analysis, dental molding, diet, in vivo microwear studies, Kenya 1 | INTRODUCTION Dental microwear analyses study the microscopic patterns of use wear on teeth to infer aspects of food properties and food prepara

What about the buccal surfaces? Dental microwear texture analysis of buccal and occlusal surfaces refines paleodietary reconstructions

“…Of the 69 LLM2 observed, dental microwear textures were well‐preserved on 33 occlusal surfaces and 39 buccal surfaces, and 27 individuals had well‐preserved microwear textures on both surfaces (e.g., Figure 2). The unavoidable winnowing of our sample due to various taphonomic factors is typical, as noted elsewhere (Correia, et al, 2021; Hernando, Willman, et al, 2020; Krueger, 2016; Martin et al, 2018; Teaford, 2007). The detailed list of occlusal and buccal microwear data by individual can be found in the Supplementary Information (Table S1).…”

“…As discussed previously, one of the downsides of 2D and 3D dental microwear analyses, regardless of the type of surface considered, is the large number of samples that must be discarded due to different taphonomic issues, poor molds, and other factors (Correia et al, 2021; Hernando, Willman, et al, 2020; Krueger, 2016; Teaford, 2007). In vivo wear is more pronounced on the occlusal surfaces, making facet 9 more likely to be unusable in analyses.…”

“…As discussed previously, one of the downsides of 2D and 3D dental microwear analyses, regardless of the type of surface considered, is the large number of samples that must be discarded due to different taphonomic issues, poor molds, and other factors (Correia et al, 2021;Krueger, 2016;Teaford, 2007).…”

Eating through time: Understanding dietary practices across late prehistory in the northeastern Iberian Peninsula

“…The inevitable reduction in the sample size is a typical consequence of various taphonomic factors. Teeth with severe evidence of post‐mortem damage were excluded from the analysis (Correia et al, 2020; Hernando, Fernández‐Marchena, et al, 2020; Hernando, Willman, et al, 2022; Krueger, 2016; Teaford, 2007).…”