Advertisement

Body Size and Scaling of Long Bone Geometry, Bone Strength, and Positional Behavior in Cercopithecoid Primates

  • William L. Jungers
  • David B. Burr
  • Maria S. Cole

Abstract

Allometry in the strictest biometrical sense—size-correlated differences in shape — explains nothing. It is also not a biological “principle” (Smith, 1980; Jungers, 1984; Jungers et al., 1995; contra Gould, 1975; contra Martin, 1993). Rather, allometry is merely a quantitative description or signal that may or may not serve to test an explicit hypothesis. Without explicit hypotheses of how and why things should change as a function of body size (i.e., similarity criteria), allometry cannot be diagnosed except with respect to the statistical, dimensional null hypothesis of “isometry” or geometric similarity. In special circumstances, isometry can itself be a hypothetical criterion of biological similarity (Alexander et al., 1979; Biewener, 1990; Prothero, 1992). If such criteria cannot be specified and justified a priori, it also follows that even when allometry is discovered, it cannot be assumed that the observed size-correlated differences are evidence of size-required changes sufficient to insure “functional equivalence” (Smith, 1980). Empirical lines used to describe allometric patterns of interspecific scaling can rarely, if ever, be rationalized into meaningful, adaptive “criteria of subtraction” for the subsequent analysis of residuals (Smith, 1984; Jungers et al., 1995). The scaling of mammalian long-bone dimensions makes these points clearly and unequivocally: although long bone robusticity is expected to increase with body size according to most biomechanical theories, positively allometric distortions in the shape of the long bones of larger vertebrates do not produce functional equivalence in any mechanical or behavioral sense. To the contrary, further behavioral and structural modifications are still required to maintain adequate safety factors at larger body sizes (Biewener, 1982, 1990; Rubin and Lanyon, 1984; Selker and Carter, 1989; Bertram and Biewener, 1990; Demes and Jungers, 1993; Jungers and Burr, 1994).

Keywords

Body Size World Monkey Bone Geometry Limb Bone Positive Allometry 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiello LC (1981) The allometry of primate body proportions. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 48:331–358.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander R McN (1980) Forces in animal joints. Engineering in Medicine 9:93–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander R McN (1983) On the massive legs of a Moa (Pachyornis elephantopus, Dinornithes). J. Zool., Lond. 201:363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alexander R McN (1985a) The maximum forces exerted by animals. J. exp. Biol. 115:231–238.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexander R McN (1985b) Body size and limb design in primates and other mammals. In WL Jungers (ed.): Size and Scaling in Primate Biology. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 337–343.Google Scholar
  6. Alexander R McN (1988) Elastic Mechanisms in Animal Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Alexander R McN (1989) Mechanics of fossil vertebrates. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 146:41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Alexander R McN (1991) Elastic mechanisms in primate locomotion. Z. Morph. Anthropol. 78:315–320.Google Scholar
  9. Alexander R McN, Jayes AS, Maloiy GMO, and Wathuta EM (1979) Allometry of the limb bones of mammals from shrews (Sorex) to elephant (Loxodonta). J. Zool., Lond. 189:305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Alexander R McN, and Maloiy GMO (1984) Stride lengths and stride frequencies of primates. J. Zool., Lond. 202:577–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bertram JEA, and Biewener AA (1990) Differential scaling of the long bones in the terrestrial Carnivora and other mammals. J. Morph. 204:157–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Biewener AA (1982) Bone strength in small mammals and bipedal birds: Do safety factors change with body size? J. exp. Biol. 98:289–301.Google Scholar
  13. Biewener AA (1989) Mammalian terrestrial locomotion and size. BioSci. 39:776–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Biewener AA (1990) Biomechanics of mammalian terrestrial locomotion. Science 250:1097–1103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Biewener AA (1991) Musculoskeletal design in relation to body size. J. Biomech. 24(suppl. 1): 19–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Biewener AA (1993) Safety factors in bone strength. Calcif. Tissue Int. 53 (suppl.):S68–S74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Biknevicius AR (1993) Biomechanical scaling of limb bones and differential limb use in caviomorph rodents. J. Mammal. 74:95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Burr DB, Ruff CB, and Johnson C (1989) Structural adaptations of the femur and humerus to arboreal and terrestrial environments in three species of macaque. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 79:357–368.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cant JGH (1994) Positional behavior of arboreal primates and habitat compliance. In B Thierry (ed.): Current Primatology, Vol. 1. Ecology and Evolution. Strasbourg: Université Louis Pasteur, pp. 187–193.Google Scholar
  20. Casinos A, Bou J, Castiella MJ, and Viladiu C (1986) On the allometry of long bones in dogs. J Morph. 190:73–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Clarke MRB (1980) The reduced major axis of a bivariate sample. Biometrika 67:441–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cleveland WS (1981) LOWESS: A program for smoothing scatterplots by robust locally weighted regression. Amer. Statistician 35:54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Crompton RH, Sellers WI, and Gunther MM (1993) Energetic efficiency and ecology as selective forces in the saltatory adaptation of prosimian primates. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond.(B) 254:41–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Demes B, and Jungers WL (1993) Long bone cross-sectional dimensions, locomotor adaptations and body size in prosimian primates. J Hum. Evol. 25:57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Demes B, Jungers WL, Gross TS, and Fleagle JG (1995) Kinetics of leaping primates: Influence of substrate orientation and compliance. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 96:419–430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Demes B, Larson SG, Stern JT Jr., Jungers WL, Biknevicius AR, and Schmitt D (1994) The kinetics of primate quadrupedalism: “hindlimb drive” reconsidered. J. Hum. Evol. 26:353–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Demes B, Jungers WL, and Selpien K (1991) Body size, locomotion, and long bone cross-sectional geometry in indriid primates. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 86:537–547.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Economos AC (1983) Elastic and/or geometric similarity in mammalian design? J. Theor. Biol. 103:167–172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Felsenstein J (1985) Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Natur. 125:1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fleagle JG (1988) Primate Adaptation and Evolution. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  31. Gautier-Hion A (1975) Dimorphisme sexuel et organisation sociale chez les cercopithecines forestiers Africains. Mammalia 39:365–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gilbert JA, Skrzynski MC, and Lester GE (1989) Cross-sectional moment of inertia of the distal radius from absorptiometric data. J. Biomech. 22:751–754.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gould SJ (1975) On the scaling of tooth size in mammals. Am. Zool. 15:351–362.Google Scholar
  34. Grine FE, Jungers WL, Tobias PV, and Pearson OM (1995) Fossil Homo femur from Berg Aukas, Northern Namibia. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 97:151–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hardie W (1990) Applied Nonparametric Regression. Cambridge: Cambridge Universityn Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hildebrand M (1967) Symmetrical gaits of primates. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 26:119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hokkanen JEI (1986) Notes concerning elastic similarity. J. Theor. Biol. 120:499–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jolicoeur P, and Mosimann JE (1968) Intervalles de confiance pour la pente de l’axe majeur d’une distribution normale bidimensionnelle. Biom.-Praxim. 9:121–140.Google Scholar
  39. Jolly CJ (1972) The classification and natural history of Theropithecus (Simopithecus) (Andrews, 1916), baboons of the African Plio-Pleistocene. Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Geol. Ser. 22:1–123.Google Scholar
  40. Jungers WL (1984) Aspects of size and scaling in primate biology with special reference to the locomotor skeleton. Yrbk. Phys. Anthropol. 27:73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jungers WL, and Burr DB (1994) Body size, long bone geometry and locomotion in quadrupedal monkeys. Z. Morph. Anthropol. 80:89–97.Google Scholar
  42. Jungers WL, Falsetti AB, and Wall CE (1995) Shape, relative size, and size-adjustments in morphometrics. Yrbk. Phys. Anthropol. 38:137–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jungers WL and Minns RJ (1979) Computed tomography and biomechanical analysis of fossil long bones. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 50:285–290.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kimura T (1991) Long and robust limb bones of primates. In A Ehara (ed.): Primatology Today. Amsterdam: El-sevier Science Publishers, pp. 495–498.Google Scholar
  45. Kimura T, Okada M, and Ishida H (1979) Kinesiological characteristics of primate walking: its significance in human walking. In M Morbeck, H Preuschoft, and N Gomberg (eds.): Environment, Behavior and Morphology: Dynamic Interactions in Primates. New York: Fischer, pp. 297–311.Google Scholar
  46. Martin RB (1991) Determinants of the mechanical properties of bones. J. Biomech. 24 (suppl. 1):79–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Martin RB, and Burr DB (1984) Non-invasive measurement of long bone cross-sectional moments of inertia by photon absorptiometry. J. Biomech. 17:195–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Martin RD (1993) Allometric aspects of skull morphology in Theropithecus. In NG Jablonski (ed.): Theropithecus. The Rise and Fall of a Primate Genus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 273–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McArdle BH (1988) The structural relationship: regression in biology. Can. J. Zool. 66:2329–2339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McGraw WS (1996) The positional behavior and habitat use of six sympatric monkeys in the Tai Forest, Ivory Coast. Ph.D Dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook.Google Scholar
  51. McMahon TA (1973) Size and shape in biology. Science 179:1201–1204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McMahon TA (1975) Using body size to understand the structural design of animals: quadrupedal locomotion. J. Appl. Physiol. 39:619–627.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. McMahon TA (1984) Muscles, Reflexes, and Locomotion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Mosimann JE, and James FC (1979) New statistical methods for allometry with applications to Florida red-winged blackbirds. Evolution 23:444–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Polk JD, Demes B, Jungers WL, Heinrich RE, Biknevicius AR, and Runestad JA (1997) Cross-sectional properties of primate and nonprimate limb bones. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., suppl. 24:188.Google Scholar
  56. Prange HD (1977) The scaling and mechanics of arthropod exoskeletons. In TJ Pedley (ed.): Scale Effects in Animal Locomotion. London: Academic Press, pp. 169–181.Google Scholar
  57. Prothero J (1992) Scaling of bodily proportions in adult terrestrial mammals. Am. J. Physiol. 262:R492–R503.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Rayner JMV (1985) Linear relationships in biomechanics: the statistics of scaling functions. J. Zool., Lond. 206:415–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Reynolds TR (1985) Stress on the limbs of quadrupedal primates. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 67:351–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ricker WE (1984) Computation and uses of central trend lines. Can. J. Zool. 62:1897–1905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rose MD (1993) Functional anatomy of the elbow and forearm in primates. In DL Gebo (ed.): Postcranial Adaptation in Nonhuman Primates. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, pp. 70–95.Google Scholar
  62. Rowe N (1996) The Pictorial Guide to the Living Primates. East Hampton: Pogonias Press.Google Scholar
  63. Rubin CT (1984) Skeletal strain and the functional significance of bone architecture. Calcif. Tissue Int. 36:S11–S18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rubin CT, and Lanyon LE (1984) Dynamic strain similarity in vertebrates: an alternative to allometric limb bone scaling. J. Theor. Biol. 107:321–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ruff CB (1987) Structural allometry of the femur and tibia in Hominoidea and Macaca. Folia Primatol. 48:9–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ruff CB (1989) New approaches to structural evolution of limb bones in primates. Folia Primatol. 53:142–159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ruff CB and Runestad JA (1992) Primate limb bone structural adaptations. Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 21:407–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ruff CB, Trinkaus E, Walker A, and Larsen CP (1993) Postcranial robusticity in Homo. I: Temporal trends and mechanical interpretation. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 91:21–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. SAS (1985) SAS Users’s Guide: Statistics, Version 5. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  70. Schaffler MB, Burr DB, Jungers WL, and Ruff CB (1985) Structural and mechanical indicators of limb specialization in primates. Folia Primatol. 45:61–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schmitt D (1994) Forelimb mechanics as a function of substrate type during quadrupedalism in two anthropoid primates. J. Hum. Evol. 26:441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schmitt D (1995) A kinematic and kinetic analysis of forelimb use during arboreal and terrestrial quadrupedalism in Old World monkeys. Ph.D Dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook.Google Scholar
  73. Schmitt D (this volume) Forelimb mechanics during arboreal and terrestrial quadrupedalism in primates. In E Strasser, JG Fleagle, AL Rosenberger, and HM McHenry (eds.) Primate Locomotion: Recent Advances. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 175-200.Google Scholar
  74. Schultz AH (1970) The comparative uniformity of the Cercopithecoidea. In J Napier and P Napier (eds.): Old World Monkeys. New York: Academic Press, pp. 39–51.Google Scholar
  75. Selker F, and Carter DR (1989) Scaling of long bone fracture strength with animal mass. J. Biomech. 22:1175–1183.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Shapiro LJ, Anapol FC, and Jungers WL (1997) Interlimb coordination, gait, and neural control of quadrupedal ism in chimpanzees. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 102:177–186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Smith RJ (1980) Rethinking allometry. J. Theor. Bio. 87:97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Smith RJ (1984) Determination of relative size: the “criterion of subtraction” problem in allometry. J. Theor. Bio. 108:131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Smith RJ (1994) Degrees of freedom in interspecific allometry: an adjustment for the effects of phylogenetic constraint. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 93:95–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Smith RJ, and Jungers WL (1997) Body mass in comparative primatology. J. Hum. Evol. 32:523–559.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Strasser E (1992) Hindlimb proportions, allometry, and biomechanics in Old World monkeys (Primates, Cercopithecidae). Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 87:187–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Strasser E and Delson E (1987) Cladistic analysis of cercopithecid relationships. J. Hum. Evol. 16:81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Swartz SM (1990) Curvature of the forelimb bones of anthropoid primates: overall patterns and specializations in suspensory species. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 83:477–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tsutakawa RK, and Hewett JE (1977) Quick test for comparing two populations with bivariate data. Biometrics 33:215–219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Van der Meulen MCH, and Carter DR (1995) Developmental mechanics determine long bone allometry. J. Theor. Biol. 172:323–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yezerinac SM, Lougheed SC, and Handford P (1992) Measurement error and morphometric studies: statistical power and observer experience. Syst. Bio. 41:471–482.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • William L. Jungers
    • 1
  • David B. Burr
    • 2
  • Maria S. Cole
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Anatomical Sciences, School of MedicineSUNY at Stony BrookStony BrookUSA
  2. 2.Departments of Anatomy and Orthopedic Surgery, Biomechanics and Biomaterials Research CenterIndiana University Medical Center at IndianapolisIndianapolisUSA
  3. 3.Department of AnatomyUniversity of Health Sciences, College of Osteopathic MedicineKansas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations