Enamel thickness variation of deciduous first and second upper molars in modern humans and Neanderthals
Journal of Human Evolution, ISSN: 0047-2484, Vol: 76, Issue: C, Page: 83-91
2014
- 22Citations
- 73Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations22
- Citation Indexes22
- CrossRef22
- 22
- Captures73
- Readers73
- 73
Article Description
Enamel thickness and dental tissue proportions have been recognized as effective taxonomic discriminators between Neanderthal and modern humans teeth. However, most of the research on this topic focused on permanent teeth, and little information is available for the deciduous dentition. Moreover, although worn teeth are more frequently found than unworn teeth, published data for worn teeth are scarce and methods for the assessment of their enamel thickness need to be developed. Here, we addressed this issue by studying the 2D average enamel thickness (AET) and 2D relative enamel thickness (RET) of Neanderthal and modern humans unworn to moderately worn upper first deciduous molars (dm 1 s) and upper second deciduous molars (dm 2 s). In particular, we used 3D μCT data to investigate the mesial section for dm 1 s and both mesial and buccal sections for dm 2 s. Our results confirmed previous findings of an Neanderthal derived condition of thin enamel, and thinner enamel in dm 1 s than dm 2 s in both Neanderthal and modern humans. We demonstrated that the Neanderthal 2D RET indices are significantly lower than those of modern humans at similar wear stages in both dm 1 s and dm 2 s ( p < 0.05). The discriminant analysis showed that using 2D RET from dm 1 and dm 2 sections at different wear stages up to 93% of the individuals are correctly classified. Moreover, we showed that the dm 2 buccal sections, although non-conventionally used, might have an advantage on mesial sections since they distinguish as well as mesial sections but tend to be less worn. Therefore, the 2D analysis of enamel thickness is suggested as a means for taxonomic discrimination between modern humans and Neanderthal unworn to moderately worn upper deciduous molars.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248414001432; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.05.013; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84927673796&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25282273; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0047248414001432; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.05.013
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know