Tradeoffs between bite force and gape in Eulemur and Varecia

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY
Myra F. Laird, Taylor A. Polvadore, Gabrielle A. Hirschkorn, Julie C. McKinney, Callum F. Ross, Andrea B. Taylor, Claire E. Terhune, Jose Iriarte-Diaz
{"title":"Tradeoffs between bite force and gape in Eulemur and Varecia","authors":"Myra F. Laird,&nbsp;Taylor A. Polvadore,&nbsp;Gabrielle A. Hirschkorn,&nbsp;Julie C. McKinney,&nbsp;Callum F. Ross,&nbsp;Andrea B. Taylor,&nbsp;Claire E. Terhune,&nbsp;Jose Iriarte-Diaz","doi":"10.1002/jmor.21699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 1974, Sue Herring described the relationship between two important performance variables in the feeding system, bite force and gape. These variables are inversely related, such that, without specific muscular adaptations, most animals cannot produce high bite forces at large gapes for a given sized muscle. Despite the importance of these variables for feeding biomechanics and functional ecology, the paucity of in vivo bite force data in primates has led to bite forces largely being estimated through ex vivo methods. Here, we quantify and compare in vivo bite forces and gapes with output from simulated musculoskeletal models in two craniofacially distinct strepsirrhines: <i>Eulemur</i>, which has a shorter jaw and slower chewing cycle durations relative to jaw length and body mass compared to <i>Varecia</i>. Bite forces were collected across a range of linear gapes from 16 adult lemurs (suborder Strepsirrhini) at the Duke Lemur Center in Durham, North Carolina representing three species: <i>Eulemur flavifrons</i> (<i>n</i> = 6; 3F, 3M), <i>Varecia variegata</i> (<i>n</i> = 5; 3F, 2M), and <i>Varecia rubra</i> (<i>n</i> = 5; 5F). Maximum linear and angular gapes were significantly higher for <i>Varecia</i> compared to <i>Eulemur</i> (<i>p</i> = .01) but there were no significant differences in recorded maximum in vivo bite forces (<i>p</i> = .88). Simulated muscle models using architectural data for these taxa suggest this approach is an accurate method of estimating bite force-gape tradeoffs in addition to variables such as fiber length, fiber operating range, and gapes associated with maximum force. Our in vivo and modeling data suggest <i>Varecia</i> has reduced bite force capacities in favor of absolutely wider gapes compared to <i>Eulemur</i> in relation to their longer jaws. Importantly, our comparisons validate the simulated muscle approach for estimating bite force as a function of gape in extant and fossil primates.</p>","PeriodicalId":16528,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Morphology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jmor.21699","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Morphology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmor.21699","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1974, Sue Herring described the relationship between two important performance variables in the feeding system, bite force and gape. These variables are inversely related, such that, without specific muscular adaptations, most animals cannot produce high bite forces at large gapes for a given sized muscle. Despite the importance of these variables for feeding biomechanics and functional ecology, the paucity of in vivo bite force data in primates has led to bite forces largely being estimated through ex vivo methods. Here, we quantify and compare in vivo bite forces and gapes with output from simulated musculoskeletal models in two craniofacially distinct strepsirrhines: Eulemur, which has a shorter jaw and slower chewing cycle durations relative to jaw length and body mass compared to Varecia. Bite forces were collected across a range of linear gapes from 16 adult lemurs (suborder Strepsirrhini) at the Duke Lemur Center in Durham, North Carolina representing three species: Eulemur flavifrons (n = 6; 3F, 3M), Varecia variegata (n = 5; 3F, 2M), and Varecia rubra (n = 5; 5F). Maximum linear and angular gapes were significantly higher for Varecia compared to Eulemur (p = .01) but there were no significant differences in recorded maximum in vivo bite forces (p = .88). Simulated muscle models using architectural data for these taxa suggest this approach is an accurate method of estimating bite force-gape tradeoffs in addition to variables such as fiber length, fiber operating range, and gapes associated with maximum force. Our in vivo and modeling data suggest Varecia has reduced bite force capacities in favor of absolutely wider gapes compared to Eulemur in relation to their longer jaws. Importantly, our comparisons validate the simulated muscle approach for estimating bite force as a function of gape in extant and fossil primates.

Abstract Image

Eulemur 和 Varecia 在咬合力和咬合口之间的权衡。
1974 年,苏-赫林(Sue Herring)描述了摄食系统中两个重要的性能变量--咬合力和间隙之间的关系。这两个变量之间存在反比关系,因此,如果没有特定的肌肉适应性,大多数动物无法在给定肌肉大小的情况下产生较大间隙的高咬合力。尽管这些变量对摄食生物力学和功能生态学非常重要,但灵长类动物体内咬合力数据的缺乏导致咬合力主要通过体外方法估算。在这里,我们对两种颅面截然不同的链臀目动物的体内咬合力和间隙进行了量化,并与模拟肌肉骨骼模型的输出结果进行了比较:Eulemur与Varecia相比颌骨较短,咀嚼周期相对于颌骨长度和体重较慢。在北卡罗来纳州达勒姆的杜克狐猴中心收集了 16 只成年狐猴(链胸狐猴亚目)的咬合力,这些狐猴代表了三个物种:Eulemur flavifrons (n = 6; 3F, 3M)、Varecia variegata (n = 5; 3F, 2M) 和 Varecia rubra (n = 5; 5F)。Varecia 的最大线性间隙和角度间隙明显高于 Eulemur(p = .01),但记录的最大体内咬合力没有明显差异(p = .88)。利用这些类群的结构数据建立的模拟肌肉模型表明,除了纤维长度、纤维工作范围以及与最大咬合力相关的间隙等变量外,这种方法还是一种估算咬合力-间隙权衡的准确方法。我们的活体和建模数据表明,与 Eulemur 的长颚相比,Varecia 的咬合力能力较低,而间隙绝对较宽。重要的是,我们的比较验证了模拟肌肉的方法,可用于估计现生和化石灵长类动物咬合力与间隙的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Morphology
Journal of Morphology 医学-解剖学与形态学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
119
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Morphology welcomes articles of original research in cytology, protozoology, embryology, and general morphology. Articles generally should not exceed 35 printed pages. Preliminary notices or articles of a purely descriptive morphological or taxonomic nature are not included. No paper which has already been published will be accepted, nor will simultaneous publications elsewhere be allowed. The Journal of Morphology publishes research in functional, comparative, evolutionary and developmental morphology from vertebrates and invertebrates. Human and veterinary anatomy or paleontology are considered when an explicit connection to neontological animal morphology is presented, and the paper contains relevant information for the community of animal morphologists. Based on our long tradition, we continue to seek publishing the best papers in animal morphology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信