1. 1
Project 2: Primate Teeth and Diet
ANTH3000-001
Prof. Michelle Sauther
Due Date: Friday, December 5th
, 2014
By: Matt Highnam

2. 2
Section 1: Answers to Questions About Homodonts and Heterodonts
(A) With respect to feeding, the crocodile would have homodont teeth because it is
considered to be a piscivore, meaning that its diet largely consists of fish. In order to be
effective and survive on such a diet, piscivores need to have sharp and pointed, conical-
shaped teeth so that they are capable of piercing fish and holding them before
swallowing. Thus, there is no need for variety in the tooth forms of crocodiles as their
ability to effectively catch fish, hold them, and swallow them increases with the number
of teeth that they have adapted for such a diet, which is ultimately why they possess
homodont teeth.
(B) Dogs, unlike typical mammals, actually possess 5 different forms of teeth in a sense.
They have a specialized, large pair of teeth, which are modified premolars, in addition to
the other 4 typical forms of mammal teeth. The reason for the heterodont teeth of dogs is
related directly to their diet and how they capture their prey as well as how they process
it before swallowing. Dogs are largely considered to be carnivores and are also widely
known to be called “canines”. If you observe the morphology of their teeth, this
distinction of being referred to as “canines” makes perfect sense. Dogs possess
enlarged canines which reflect their carnivorous diet and prey-capturing style as they
bite and stab prey with their canines initially in order to catch and hold them in their
mouths. In the front of their mouths in front of their canines, they also have moderately
reduced incisors due to the enlarged size of their canines. However, these incisors still
serve to cut the meat initially. Due to the relative reduction in their incisors, dogs have
these modified premolars called carnassials which are specialized to be the major slicing
teeth for them right before the molars. There are a few pairs of non-modified premolars
that somewhat serve the function that they serve in most mammals of crushing food up
but in dogs they also appear to be mildly sharp for further assistance in slicing up food
prior to reaching the major slicing teeth, the carnassials. Finally, the molars at the back
of their mouths display typical mammalian characteristics as they’re mostly flattened with
cusps that serve to grind up and crush food before it is swallowed. This makes sense as
the other enlarged and modified teeth in their mouths effectively slice up their food
before it reaches their molars.
(C) In comparing the differences in the dental morphology of dogs, sheep, and humans,
looking at their diet is the easiest way to initially separate them. Dogs are carnivores,
sheep are herbivores, and humans are omnivores. These are three mammals with three
different diets which results in them all having three distinctly different dental
morphologies as well as skull structures. Dogs have an elongated snout and thus an
elongated skull and this is in order to accommodate their enlarged canines which are
adapted to their carnivorous diet and prey capture process. Also to support this animal-
based diet, their teeth are variable in form and deemed heterodont. Sheep also have
relatively elongated skulls but they are not like that of the dog because they taper off
rapidly and sharply towards the end and come to almost a point. This is in order to
accommodate their diet of grasses and leaves. They nearly have non-existent incisors
and canines and this is because they do not need large cutting teeth since they do not
eat meat and leafy food is easily cut, and they do not need to puncture any of their food
sources. Thus, their skull is pointed and tapers off at the end to allow for them to easily
grasp and bite off or pluck leafy vegetation from soils or plants. The rest of their teeth,
premolars and molars, are essentially identical in order to properly process their leafy
diet since it requires only crushing and grinding before it is swallowed. Also to support
this plant-based diet, their teeth are variable in formed and deemed heterodont as well.
Lastly, humans do not have elongated skulls to any extent. A key reason to this is that
humans have hands to manipulate their prey with as well as skills and means to catch,

3. 3
or “harvest”, prey that do not require their mouths. Humans are also omnivores, meaning
that they have a both animal and plant-based diet. This is reflected in the homodont form
of their teeth as there is no extreme in dietary choice as in sheep and dogs, so they must
be adapted to have a high-variety diet. Thus, humans have the typical mammalian
dental morphology and function which consists of incisors that cut, canines that pierce,
bicuspid premolars that crush and grind food extra well, and molars that crush and rind
food again to ensure it is broken down effectively to be swallowed and processed. Their
premolars and molars are not highly specialized.
Section 2:
TABLE 1. Comparative Primate Diets: The Evidence fromVideo Observations
GENUS
Dietary Group:
Folivore, Frugivore,
Insectivore. You
will determine the
category by
determining the
major emphasis –
fruits? Leaves?
Insects?
Two foods eaten by this
primate.
This could include ripe fruit
(e.g. yellow or red fruits),
unripe fruit (green fruit),
insects, flowers, mature
leaves, leaf buds.
Description of their feeding
behavior. Where do they place
their food? In the front, the side?
Do they use their hands to feed or
simply eat by plucking foods by
mouth?
GALAGO Omnivore
-Major emphasis on
fruit, insects,
and gum
Southern Lesser Galago
shown grabbing hard-bodied
insect out of air with hands
and eating it, and Demidoff
Galago shown eating soft-
bodied insect (ants)
Eat tree gum when food
resources are scarce
Eat mature leaves
Eat ripe fruit
The Southern Lesser Galago
grabbed its food out of the air and
held it with its hands to eat it.
-Initially it bit and gnawed at it with
its front teeth very briefly and then
proceeded to use only its side teeth
The Demidoff Galago licked ants
up off of a tree branch and did not
appear to chew much if at all
ATELES Frugivore
-Major emphasis on
fruits in the canopy
and emergent layer
Ripe Fruits
In times of fruit shortage
they will eat termites, flowers,
and even bark but primarily
furgivorous
Hold fruit with hands and
repeatedly puncture it with
continued manipulation by turning it
and simultaneously lapping/sucking
juices up
ALLOUATTA Foliovore
-Major emphasis on
young buds,
shoots, and mature
leaves
Mature leaves and young
buds
Also shown eating figs, a
soft-bodied, ripe fruit, which it
does when they are in season
but primarily folivorous
Generally no direct hand
manipulation involving putting food
in mouth as they at most pull
branches towards their mouths and
pluck the leaves or buds off
Some hand manipulation briefly
shown in fig consumption but only
involved holding it up to mouth to
take bites

4. 4
Section 3:
TABLE 2. Comparative Primate Diets: The Evidence fromDental Morphology
GENUS
Relative tooth morphology:
Incisors, Canines, Pre-molars,
Molars
Link tooth morphology to diet –
Explain how each primate’s teeth reflect their
major foods you observed them eating in the
videos.
GALAGO Incisors
-Upper are relatively short
Canines
-Relatively long compared to other
teeth and conical shaped
Lower Incisors and Canines are
pectinate and form a toothcomb
Pre-Molars & Molars
-Both are not highly specialized
and have small cusps for grinding
All teeth are sharp-edged with a
V-shape
The Southern Lesser Galago
-The food it was observed eating was a hard-bodied
insect and its sharp-edged and V-shaped teeth
reflect this directly as these are characteristics are
an insectivore. Although it is an omnivore, its diet
does typically consist of many hard-bodied, flying
insects and thus it makes sense for it to have a
dental morphology with insectivore-like
characteristics
The Demidoff Galago
-It was observed licking ants off of a tree branch
and hardly chewing if at all after lapping them up.
This is characteristic of insectivores preying on soft-
bodied insects, which ants are. Their teeth
appeared somewhat reduced which follows along
with their feeding since they use their tongues to
capture their prey and thus can minimize chewing
ATELES
ALLOUATTA

5. 5
Section 3:
TABLE 3. Comparative Primate Dental Morphology- What do human teeth suggest?
GENUS CANINES INCISORS PREMOLARS MOLARS
GALAGO More conical-shaped
and pointed. Also, the
lower ones are
perctinate as part of
the toothcomb. The
upper ones essentially
function in the same
way as humans but
they are pointed and
conical shaped instead
of flat with pointed
edges. Overall,
similarity in
appearance to humans
is low
More elongated bottom
incisors that are
perctinate as part of
the toothcomb. The
upper incisors show a
little more similarity to
humans as they are not
as elongated but are
still more pointed and
conically-shaped. Low
similarity in
appearance to humans
although they use them
to make their initial bite
and cut their food just
as humans do
Very similar to
those of humans
as they are
cusped, sharp-
edged, have a V-
shape, and are
used for crushing
and grinding,
especially in leafy
food consumption
Same as
premolars
ATELES
ALLOUATTA
HOMO Used as primary
means for
stabbing/puncturing
food as they have
sharp, pointed edges
and are slender in
width. Also utilized for
fruit consumption and
tearing of meats and
harder to break apart
foods
Used first when eating
to make the initial bite
cut the food up. This is
reflected by their
straight up orientation
and sharp cutting-edge
along with their
slenderness. This is
something useful to
omnivores for eating
protein sources such
as hard-bodied insects
Flattened and
rounded cusp
teeth for grinding
and crushing
food. This reflects
on humans being
omnivores as
these are key in
processing leafy
vegetation
properly
Essentially the
same as
premolars as
they are the last
teeth that
process food
before
swallowing.
They’re flattened
with rounded
cusps and grind
and crush up
food even more,
which is very
useful in leafy
food
consumption

6. 6
Section 5: The Empirical Study and Answers to Questions from Exercise #2
TABLE 4. My Number of Chews Relative to Food Type
APPLE Number of
Chews
PEANUT Number of
Chews
SPINACH LEAF Number of
Chews
1. 6 1. 2 1. 12
2. 8 2. 1 2. 14
3. 5 3. 2 3. 15
4. 7 4. 1 4. 14
5. 9 5. 2 5. 17
6. 7 6. 1 6. 13
7. 6 7. 2 7. 12
8. 7 8. 2 8. 14
9. 6 9. 1 9. 15
10 6 10. 2 10. 13
MEAN Chews 6.7 MEAN Chews 1.6 MEAN Chews 13.9