An official website of the United States government
ABSTRACT Bite force and gape are two important performance metrics of the feeding system, and these metrics are inversely related for a given muscle size because of fundamental constraints in sarcomere length–tension relationships. How these competing performance metrics change in developing primates is largely unknown. Here, we quantified in vivo bite forces and gapes across ontogeny and examined these data in relation to body mass and cranial measurements in captive tufted capuchins, Sapajus spp. Bite force and gape were also compared across geometric and mechanical properties of mechanically challenging foods to investigate relationships between bite force, gape and food accessibility (defined here as the ability to breach shelled nuts). Bite forces at a range of gapes and feeding behavioral data were collected from a cross-sectional ontogenetic series of 20 captive and semi-wild tufted capuchins at the Núcleo de Procriação de Macacos-Prego Research Center in Araçatuba, Brazil. These data were paired with body mass, photogrammetric measures of jaw length and facial width, and food geometric and material properties. Tufted capuchins with larger body masses had absolutely higher in vivo bite forces and gapes, and animals with wider faces had absolutely higher bite forces. Bite forces and gapes were significantly smaller in juveniles compared with subadults and adults. These are the first primate data to empirically demonstrate the gapes at which maximum active bite force is generated and to demonstrate relationships to food accessibility. These data advance our understanding of how primates meet the changing performance demands of the feeding system during development.
more »
« less
Tradeoffs between bite force and gape in Eulemur and Varecia
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 toVarecia. 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), andVarecia rubra(n = 5; 5F). Maximum linear and angular gapes were significantly higher forVareciacompared toEulemur(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 suggestVareciahas reduced bite force capacities in favor of absolutely wider gapes compared toEulemurin 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.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10524756
- Publisher / Repository:
- Journal of Morphology
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Morphology
- Volume:
- 285
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 0362-2525
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
ABSTRACT The jaw‐adductor muscles drive the movements and forces associated with primate feeding behaviors such as biting and chewing as well as social signaling behaviors such as wide‐mouth canine display. The past several decades have seen a rise in research aimed at the anatomy and physiology of primate chewing muscles to better understand the functional and evolutionary significance of the primate masticatory apparatus. This review summarizes variation in jaw‐adductor fiber types and muscle architecture in primates, focusing on physiological, architectural, and behavioral performance variables such as specific tension, fatigue resistance, muscle and bite force, and muscle stretch and gape.Paranthropus andAustralopithecusare used as one paleontological example to showcase the importance of these data for addressing paleobiological questions. The high degree of morphological variation related to sex, age, muscle, and species suggests future research should bracket ranges of performance variables rather than focus on single estimates of performance.more » « less
-
ABSTRACT ObjectivesBite force has received significant attention in biological anthropology, but maximum bite force estimates for a single primate species often span hundreds of newtons. In this synthesis, we discuss the definitions of maximum bite force, review and highlight the variability in methods used to assess bite force in primates, and compare bite force ranges in macaques to bracket maximum force estimates between physiological and mechanical maxima. Materials and MethodsMethods of estimating bite force in primates were gathered from the literature along with published estimates of maximum bite force for macaques (Macacasp.). ResultsMaximum bite force can be defined physiologically or mechanically, and methods of estimating bite force can be grouped as in vivo, muscle‐based, and craniodental within these two definitions. Physiological estimates occur under natural conditions modulated by sensorimotor feedback, whereas mechanical maximum bite forces ignore muscular and neural limitations. Published maximum bite forces for macaques at the molars vary from 127 N to 898 N, a 771 N range. Using a bracketing approach suggested here, we narrow the estimated bite force range at the incisors to 487–503 N and 503–898 N for the molars. DiscussionThis synthesis emphasizes the need for comparisons between in vivo, muscle‐based, and craniodental bite force methods in living primates. We propose bracketing bite force estimates between physiological and mechanical maxima in order to provide more reliable bite force estimates and improve understanding of how bite force relates to primate functional morphology and feeding ecology.more » « less
-
Abstract The operating length ranges of mammalian jaw muscles have been estimated using twitch contractions or force measurements at the bite point, prompting a consensus that jaw muscles operate at short lengths on their force-length (FL) curve. However, since activation intensity truncates muscle optimal length (LO), we hypothesized thatLOof rat superficial masseter (SM) would decrease with activation intensity, with high-force biting involving muscle shortening from long lengths on the FL curve. We measured muscle activation, strain, and forcein vivoduring biting on food with varying hardness and mapped thein vivodata from each muscle (N = 6) onto its FL relationship, measuredin situ. SubmaximalLOwas approx. 12% shorter than twitchLO, and SM bite forces averaged 4.1 ± 3.9 N/cm2(mean ± S.D.) and reached 10.6 N/cm2, corresponding to muscle activation and food hardness. Length operation ranged from 7% belowLO(ascending FL plateau), to 27% beyond (descending limb). The finding that jaw muscles operate at long, potentially unstable lengths, particularly during hard food biting significantly expands our understanding of skeletal muscle function, with broad implications for craniofacial evolution, muscle mechanics and control, and healthy as well as pathological function of the jaw musculoskeletal system.more » « less
-
ABSTRACT Dietary ecology and its relationship with both muscle architecture and bite force potential has been studied in many mammalian (and non‐mammalian) taxa. However, despite the diversity of dietary niches that characterizes the superfamily Musteloidea, the masticatory muscle fiber architecture of its members has yet to be investigated anatomically. In this study, we present myological data from the jaw adductors in combination with biomechanical data derived from craniomandibular measurements for 17 species representing all four families (Ailuridae, Mephitidae, Mustelidae, and Procyonidae) of Musteloid. These data are combined to calculate bite force potential at each of three bite points along the dental row. Across our sample as a whole, masticatory muscle mass scaled with isometry or slight positive allometry against both body mass and skull size (measured via a cranial geometric mean). Total jaw adductor physiological cross‐sectional area scaled with positive allometry against both body mass and skull size, while weighted fiber length scaled with negative allometry. From a dietary perspective, fiber length is strongly correlated with dietary size such that taxa that exploit larger foods demonstrated myological adaptations toward gape maximization. However, no consistent relationship between bite force potential and dietary mechanical resistance was observed. These trends confirm previous findings observed within the carnivoran family Felidae (as well as within primates), suggesting that the mechanisms by which masticatory anatomy adapts to dietary ecology may be more universally consistent than previously recognized. Anat Rec, 302:2287–2299, 2019. © 2019 American Association for Anatomymore » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.21699
