Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins

Abstract

Reconstructing the diets of extinct hominins is essential to understanding the paleobiology and evolutionary history of our lineage. Dental microwear, the study of microscopic tooth-wear resulting from use1,2,3,4, provides direct evidence of what an individual ate in the past. Unfortunately, established methods5,6,7,8,9,10 of studying microwear are plagued with low repeatability and high observer error11. Here we apply an objective, repeatable approach for studying three-dimensional microwear surface texture to extinct South African hominins. Scanning confocal microscopy12,13 together with scale-sensitive fractal analysis14,15,16,17,18,19 are used to characterize the complexity and anisotropy of microwear. Results for living primates show that this approach can distinguish among diets characterized by different fracture properties. When applied to hominins20, microwear texture analysis indicates that Australopithecus africanus microwear is more anisotropic, but also more variable in anisotropy than Paranthropus robustus. This latter species has more complex microwear textures, but is also more variable in complexity than A. africanus. This suggests that A. africanus ate more tough foods and P. robustus consumed more hard and brittle items, but that both had variable and overlapping diets.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Scale-sensitive fractal analysis.
Figure 2: Microwear texture analyses.
Figure 3: Anisotropy and complexity.

References

  1. 1

    Walker, A. C., Hoeck, H. N. & Perez, L. Microwear of mammalian teeth as an indicator of diet. Science 201, 808–810 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Rensberger, J. M. in Development, Function and Evolution of Teeth (eds Butler, P. M. & Joysey, K. A.) 415–438 (Academic, New York, 1978)

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Ryan, A. S. Anterior dental microwear and its relationship to diet and feeding behaviour in three African primates (Pan troglodytes troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla gorilla, and Papio hamadryas). Primates 22, 533–550 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Gordon, K. D. A study of microwear on chimpanzee molars: implications for dental microwear analysis. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 59, 195–215 (1982)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Solounias, N., Teaford, M. & Walker, A. Interpreting the diet of extinct ruminants: the case of a non-browsing giraffid. Paleobiology 14, 287–300 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Ungar, P. S., Simons, J.-C. & Cooper, J. W. A semiautomated image analysis procedure for the quantification of dental microwear. Scanning 13, 31–36 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Pastor, R. F. Dietary adaptations and dental microwear in Mesolithic and Chalcolithic South Asia. J. Hum. Ecol. (special issue) 2, 215–228 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Molleson, T., Jones, K. & Jones, S. Dietary change and the effects of food preparation on microwear patterns in the Late Neolithic of abu Hureyra, northern Syria. J. Hum. Evol. 24, 455–468 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Teaford, M. F. A review of dental microwear and diet in modern mammals. Scanning Microsc. 2, 1149–1166 (1988)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Strait, S. G. Molar microwear in extant small-bodied faunivorous mammals: an analysis of feature density and pit frequency. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 92, 63–79 (1993)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Grine, F. E., Ungar, P. S. & Teaford, M. F. Error rates in dental microwear quantification using SEM. Scanning 24, 144–153 (2002)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Boyde, A. & Fortelius, M. New confocal LM method for studying local relative microrelief with special references to wear studies. Scanning 13, 429–430 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Ungar, P. S., Brown, C. A., Bergstrom, T. S. & Walker, A. Quantification of dental microwear by tandem scanning confocal microscopy and scale-sensitive fractal analyses. Scanning 25, 189–193 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Brown, C. A. & Savary, G. Describing ground surface texture using contact profilometry and fractal analysis. Wear 141, 211–226 (1991)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Brown, C. A., Charles, P. D., Johnsen, W. A. & Chesters, S. Fractal analysis of topographic data by the patchwork method. Wear 161, 61–67 (1993)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Brown, C. A., Johnsen, W. A. & Hult, K. M. Scale-sensitivity, fractal analysis and simulations. Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manu. 38, 633–637 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    DeChiffre, L. et al. Quantitative characterization of surface texture. Annals CIRP 49, 635–652 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Brown, C. A. & Siegmann, S. Fundamental scales of adhesion and area-scale fractal analysis. Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manu. 41, 1927–1933 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Bergstrom, T. S. & Brown, C. A. Interaction between horizontal scanning instruments and surfaces. Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manu. 41, 1995–2000 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Grine, F. E. & Kay, R. F. Early hominid diets from quantitative image analysis of dental microwear. Nature 333, 765–768 (1988)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Eisenberg, J. F. Mammals of the Neotropics Vol. 1. The Northern Neotropics: Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana 233–261 (Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, 1989)

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Estrada, A. Resource use by howler monkeys (Alouatta palliata). Int. J. Primatol. 5, 105–131 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Neville, M. K., Glander, K. E., Braza, F. & Rylands, A. B. in Ecology and Behavior of Neotropical Primates Vol. 2 (eds Mittermeier, R. A., Rylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & de Fonseca, G. A. B.) 349–453 (World Wildlife Fund, Washington DC, 1988)

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Crompton, R. H., Savage, R. & Spears, I. H. The mechanics of food reduction in Tarsius bancanus: hard-object feeder, soft-object feeder or both? Folia Primatol. 69((suppl. 1)), 41–59 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Grine, F. E. Dental evidence for dietary differences in Australopithecus and Paranthropus. J. Hum. Evol. 15, 783–822 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Wrangham, R. W., Conklin-Brittain, N. L. & Hunt, K. D. Dietary response of chimpanzees and Cercopithecines to seasonal variation in fruit abundance. I. Antifeedants. Int. J. Primatol. 19, 971–998 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Stanford, C. B. & Nkurunungi, J. B. Behavioral ecology of sympatric chimpanzees and gorillas in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda: Diet. Int. J. Primatol. 24, 901–918 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Lambert, J. E., Chapman, C. A., Wrangham, R. W. & Conklin-Brittain, N. L. The hardness of cercopithecine foods: implications for the critical function of enamel thickness in exploiting fallback foods. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 125, 363–368 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Kay, R. F. The evolution of molar occlusion in the Cercopithecidae and early Catarrhines. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop. 46, 327–352 (1977)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    American Society of Mechanical Engineers, National Standard B46.1: Surface Texture, Surface Roughness, Waviness and Lay (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the curators at the US National Museum of Natural History, the Transvaal Museum and the University of the Witwatersrand for permission to study specimens in their care, and thank A. Pérez-Pérez for his help preparing the hominin replicas. This project was funded by the US National Science Foundation.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter S. Ungar.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

C.A.B. owns and operates Surfract (http://www.surfract.com), which developed and markets Kfrax. To the extent that someone might decide to purchase Kfrax as a result of this publication, he could benefit financially. Some features used in the analysis are in beta and development and are not commercially available.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scott, R., Ungar, P., Bergstrom, T. et al. Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins. Nature 436, 693–695 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03822

Download citation

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing