Implications of Enamel Prism Patterns for the Origin of the New World Monkeys

  • D. G. Gantt
Part of the Advances in Primatology book series (AIPR)


The origin and dispersal of the New World monkeys to the South American continent present an interesting dilemma, for paleogeographical evidence indicates that South America had already separated from Africa by the end of the Cretaceous. During the Tertiary, South America remained an island continent isolated from the rest of the world by oceanic barriers, from the Middle Paleocene [ca. 55 million years (m.y.) ago] to the Middle Pliocene (ca. 3.5 m.y. ago) (Hershkovitz, 1977; Hoffsteffer, 1972, 1974; Orlosky and Swindler, 1975). The source of origin of the New World monkeys both from a biogeographic and a phylogenetic perspective is thus uncertain and controversial. Two main hypotheses have been proposed:
  1. 1.

    The Platyrrhini as well as the Catarrhini were independently derived from Laurasian Paleogene primates, presumably an omomyid lower primate. Therefore, the close resemblance of New and Old World monkeys can be interpreted or explained as a result of convergence and/or parallelism from a lower primate ancestor.

  2. 2.

    The Platyrrhini and the Catarrhini were derived from a common ancestral anthropoid stock probably African in origin with the dispersal of the platyrrhine ancestors occurring through direct faunal interchange (rafting) between the southern continents across the South Atlantic Ocean.



World Monkey Lower Primate South American Continent Scan Electron Microscope Microphotograph Prism Body 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boyde, A., 1964, The Structure and Development of Mammalian Enamel. Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
  2. Boyde, A., 1965, The structure of developing mammalian dental enamel, in: Tooth Enamel-I ( R. W. Rearnhead and M. V. Stack, eds.), pp. 163–167, John Wright and Sons, Bristol.Google Scholar
  3. Boyde, A., 1971, Comparative histology of mammalian teeth, in: Dental Morphology and Evolution ( A. Dalberg, ed.), pp. 81–93, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  4. Boyde, A., 1976, Amelogenesis and the structure of enamel, in: Scientific Foundations of Dentistry ( B. Cohen and I. R. H. Kramer, eds.), pp. 335–352, William Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  5. Boyde, A., Jones, S. J., and Reynolds, P. S., 1978, Quantitative and qualitative studies of etching with acid and EDTA, Scanning Electron Microscopy 2: 991–1002.Google Scholar
  6. Gantt, D. G., 1977, Enamel of primate teeth: Its thickness and structure with reference to functional and phyletic implications, Ph.D. Thesis, Washington University, St. Louis, University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  7. Gantt, D. G., 1979a, A method of interpreting enamel prism patterns, Scanning Electron Microscopy 2: 975–981.Google Scholar
  8. Gantt, D. G., 1979b, Taxonomic implications of primate dental tissue, J. Biol. Buccale 7: 149–156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gantt, D. G., 1979c, Comparative enamel histology of primate teeth, in: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Tooth Enamel, J. Dent. Res. 58 (Special Issue B): 1002–1003.Google Scholar
  10. Gantt, D. G., Pilbeam, D. R., Steward, G., 1977, Hominoid enamel prism patterns, Science 198: 1155–1157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hershkovitz, P., 1977, Living New World Monkeys (Platyrrhini), Vol. I, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  12. Hoffstetter, R., 1972, Relationships, origins, and history of the ceboid monkeys and caviomorph rodents: A modern reinterpretation, in: Evolutionary Biology, Vol. 6 ( rh. Dobzhansky, M. K. Hecht, and W. C. Steere, eds.), pp. 323–347, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Hoffstetter, R., 1974, Phylogeny and geographic deployment of the primates, J. Hum. Evol. 3: 327–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lavelle, C. L. B., Shellis, R. P., and Poole, D. F. G., 1977, Evolutionary Changes to the Primate Skull and Dentition, Chapter 5: The calcified dental tissues of Primates, pp. 197–279, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield.Google Scholar
  15. Orlosky, F. J., and Swindler, D. R., 1975, Origin of New World monkeys, J. Hum. Evol. 3: 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Poole, D. F. G., and Brooks, A. W., 1961, The arrangement of crystallites in enamel prisms, Arch. Oral Biol. 5: 14–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rosenberger, A. L., 1977, Xenothrix and ceboid phylogeny, J. Hum. Evol. 4: 461–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosenberger, A. L., 1978a, New data on Branisella and Homunculus, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 48: 431.Google Scholar
  19. Rosenberger, A. L., 1978b, The loss of incisor enamel in marmosets, J. Morphol. 59: 207–208.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. G. Gantt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations