Dentition of moustached tamarins (Saguinus mystax mystax) from Padre Isla, Peru, part 1: quantitative variation.

Analyses of dental variation in geographically restricted, wild populations of primates are extremely rare; however, such data form the best source for models of likely degrees of variation within and between fossil species. Data from dental casts of a geographically restricted population of moustached tamarins (Saguinus mystax mystax) from Padre Isla, Peru, document high levels of dental variability, as measured by coefficients of variation, in a nonsexually dimorphic species, despite its isolation and small population size. Like other primates, moustached tamarins show lower variability in the dimensions of the first molars and increased variability in the dimensions of the final molars in the toothrow. Moustached tamarins from Padre Isla have a distinctive pattern of variability in the remaining teeth, including more stable tooth lengths in the anterior and posterior portions of the toothrow, and more stable tooth widths in the midregion of the toothrow. High variability in incisor width may be due to age effects of a distinctive diet and pattern of dental wear.

Dental microwear and diet in Venezuelan primates.

Recent microwear analyses have demonstrated that wear patterns can be correlated with dietary differences. However, much of this work has been based on analyses of museum material where dates and locations of collection are not well known. In view of these difficulties, it would be desirable to compare microwear patterns for different genera collected from the same area at the same time. The opportunity to do this was provided by the collections of the Smithsonian Venezuelan Project (Handley, 1976), in which multiple primate genera were collected from the same humid tropical forest sites within the same month. The monkeys represent a wide range of dietary preferences, and include Saimiri, Cebus, Chiropotes, Ateles, Aotus, Pithecia, and Alouatta. As in previous microwear analyses, epoxy replicas were prepared from dental impressions, as described by Rose (1983) and Teaford and Oyen (1989). Two micrographs were taken of facet 9 on an upper second molar of each specimen. Computations and analyses were the same as described by Teaford and Robinson (1989). Results reaffirm previously documented differences in dental microwear between primates that feed on hard objects versus those that do not--with Pithecia and Alouatta at the extremes of a range of microwear patterns including more subtle differences between species with intermediate diets. The subtle microwear differences are by no means easy to document in museum samples. However, additional results suggest that 1) the width of microscopic scratches may be a poor indicator of dietary differences, 2) large and small pits may be formed differently, and 3) there are very few seasonal differences in dental microwear in the primates at these humid tropical forest sites.

Dental microwear in live, wild-trapped Alouatta palliata from Costa Rica.

One problem with dental microwear analyses of museum material is that investigators can never be sure of the diets of the animals in question. An obvious solution to this problem is to work with live animals. Recent work with laboratory primates has shown that high resolution dental impressions can be obtained from live animals. The purpose of this study was to use similar methods to begin to document rates and patterns of dental microwear for primates in the wild. Thirty-three Alouatta palliata were captured during the wet season at Hacienda La Pacifica near Canas, Costa Rica. Dental impressions were taken and epoxy casts of the teeth were prepared using the methods of Teaford and Oyen (1989a). Scanning electron micrographs were taken of the left mandibular second molars at magnifications of 200x and 500x. Lower magnification images were used to calculate rates of wear, and higher magnification images were used to measure the size and shape of microwear features. Results indicate that, while basic patterns of dental microwear are similar in museum samples and samples of live, wild-trapped animals of the same species, ecological differences between collection locales may lead to significant intraspecific differences in dental microwear. More importantly, rates of microwear provide the first direct evidence of differences in molar use between monkeys and humans.