This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
BEECHER AND ROBERT
Dr. Beecher is Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy at Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia, and holds a Ph.D. degree in anthropology from Duke University. Dr. Corruccini is Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, Southern Illinois University in Carbondale. He is a graduate of the University of Colorado, and holds a Ph.D. degree in anthropology and paleontology from the University of California at Berkeley. Address: Dr. Robert M. Beecher Department of Anatomy Wright State University Medicine Dayton, OH 45435
Moderate differences in the hardness of diet are related to significant differences in maxillary width and other measures of facial size. Probably even more important is a relationship to the coordination of growth of different parts of the dentofacial complex. Muscular stimulation mediated through occlusal function seems to play a significant role in the coordinated development of facial structures.
MODERN DIET AND MALOCCLUSION
This study was supported by a Biomedical Research Support Grant from Wright State University.
The prevalence of malocclusions in an urbanized society such as the United States is so high (50%1) that one is led to suspect the involvement of environmental factors in the etiology. Non-western, hunter-gatherer peoples are characterized by much lower frequencies of malocclusion." However, the transition of peoples from rural or aboriginal to urban or industrial living has been rapidly followed by an increase in the incidence of malocclusion. This increase is found whether comparing medieval Europeans to recent ones--- or nonwestern peoples to their immediate descendents living in a westernized environmen t. 2,5-15 There is a strong genetic factor in the development of occlusion. Occlusal patterns within families have been demonstrated to be heritable to some degree,16,17 and ethnic groups have been characterized by the frequencies of particular occlusal patterns.18-21 61
and (4) varying the consistency of the diet from hard to soft.> Disrupted occlusion The prevalence of an occlusion that varies from the ideal is not the norm among mammals.5-2. Experimen Is in effects of function Apart from radical surgery. growing animals responded to this stress by skeletal adaptations.sv-" A crown on the maxillary buccal teeth of rhesus monkeys was used by MeNamara-" to force the mandibular molars to occlude slightly lower than the normal occlusal surface of the uppers. specifically: (1) some posterior bone deposition. Similar differences were also found in soft-diet rats. abnormally-directed muscle tension. Using mature animals and a splint on the anterior teeth to force mandibular protrusion. we believe that environmental factors.62 Beecher and Corruccini probably due to a reduction in muscle use rather than increased. the experimental attempts to induce developmental change in the mammalian masticatory apparatus have used four methods': (I) forcing mouth breathing in animals. Hiniker and RamsIjord= also found dentitional changes as teeth were forced to move to maintain occlusal relationships. or accumulation of genetic mutations. The maxillae of these animals showed reduced vertical and prognathic growth. affect the developing masticatory apparatus and create variations in the occlusal phenotype. The rapid increase in the incidence of malocclusion (often within one generation) gives cause to look beyond genetic explanations such as relaxed selection pressures. (3) lengthened condylar neck. (2) placing devices in the mouth to effect alterations in mastication. racial outcrossing.vSuch effects are common in humans. Several workers have applied stress to the masticatory apparatus or have altered occlusal relationships using appliances fastened to the teeth of rats or rhesus monkeys. especially the physical consistency of the diet. attributed to altered muscle tension as the mandible is held slightly depressed during respiration. Mouth breathing Mouth breathing has been implicated experimentally (using macaques) in the development of open bite and or an abnormally narrow maxillary dental arch. older animals responded with tooth movements to adjust to the new occlusal alignments. While the younger. Schultz= documents that dental crowding is quite rare in primates} and neither any of the specimens he presents nor any of the 400 wild primate dentitions that one of us (RSC) has examined would rate a Treatment Priority Index (TPI) score higher than 2. inbreeding. This movement resulted in short-term periodontal traumas which abated when The Angle Orthodontist . A cornman habit in childhood. mouth breathing is probably a factor in the development of human malocclusions. Based on the available anthropological and experimental evidence. (3) restricting animals to calorie-deprivation diets.0 mm in order to achieve molar occlusion. and ('1) an increase in the angle formed by a line running from the condyle down the ramus with the line representing the occlusal plane. (2) bone resorption of the anterior edges of the glenoid fossa. These are usually designed to force protrusion of the mandible 1. Mandibular protrusion in young animals resulted in changes in the temporomandibular joint.
(5) had smaller masseter and temporalis muscles. with condyles smaller and radiographically less dense. More recently. where muscle force is transmitted to the mandible. especially in the mandible. Sagne and Thilander." Barber. (3) had mandibles that were smaller. The smaller masticatory muscles in soft-diet animals were almost certainly a result of lower work requirement in mastication. maintaining them for one year on a severe calorie-deficient diet."29 The consequences were tooth crowding and abnormal tooth-tooth contacts. which is essential to resist transverse bending. 1981 Development 63 four studies have examined this idea experimentally. were smaller. In young animals. The authors found that their regime resulted in: (I) delayed dental development and eruption. Rehabilitation was only partiall y successful. before attempting to "rehabilitate" some with proper foods. All mandibular structures related to chewing were affected by diet hardness. the dentition migrates to accommodate." and Henrikson. (2) exhibited no molar wear. were smaller.used weanling rats divided into populations eating either pelle ted rat chow as a hard diet or crushed or water-softened chow as a soft diet. the soft-diet animals: (I) were slightly smaller in body mass. where toothfood-tooth contact takes place. Wear of the molar. although with no significant differences in shape. the animals were maintained for approximately four months. was less. and (2) "greater delay in the development and growth of the jaws. Owens and Tonge= used weanling animals. Beecher and Corruccini35 examined a small population of rhesus macaques which had spent a short period during adolescence on contrasting hard/soft diets. These studies demonstrate that forced realignments of occlusal relationships and mandibular movements lead to responses by the most flexible elements of the masticatory apparatus.Diet Consistency jOcclusal the teeth adapted and once again occluded adequately. in older animals. Even buccolingual thickness of the mandible.28.32 Moore. 1 January. and (6) had skulls consistently smaller in mass and in linear dimensions. Green. and COX. The smaller and less-active muscles applied less stress to the bones. Attachment areas for the jawclosing muscles. In all studies. Vol. (4) had less width of the maxillary dental arch. When compared to the harddiet rats. Tonge and McCance. Watt and Williams. there is no evidence to correlate this deficiency with the occlusal problems found in so many urbanized peoples of the western world. the growing skeletal system adjusts. While these experiments are important in assessing the response of the masticatory system to unusual mechanical stress. They . The condyles. 51 No. which responded with less deposition and growth. they do not create conditions likely to be encountered by the developing human masticatory system. was less in the soft-diet animals. Nutrition Experiments concerning the contribution of nutrition to normal occlusal development have taken the form of calorie deprivation of pigs. Dietary consistency Although many workers have commented on the probable influence of the hardness or softness of the diet on the developing masticatory system.29 McCance. which resist bite (especially incisal) reaction force. While calorie deprivation is undoubtedly a factor to consider in severely undernourished people.
Anteroposterior length of condylar articular surface. The second axis is the axis perpendicular to the first that subsumes the largest possible amount of residual variance. Projection of indiThe Angle Orthodontist found significant narrowing of the maxillary arch with no lessening in length in the soft-diet monkeys. This technique. Ninety animals were divided into three groups: Group I was fed pelletted rat chow (Purina Formulab). the same length of time used in previous experiments of this type. it could not be determined whether the masticatory system responded in direct proportion to differences in dietary consistency. Measurements Crable I) were taken as follows: 1. Group II I was fed the soft diet six days. Mandibular length. We found the lab chow to be crumbly. After sacrifice. 2. incisor to Ml. 6. evenly divided between males and females. there has been no attempt to integrate these data in such a way that interactions between different parts of the growing masticatory systems could be measured. the heads were randomly numbered so that the measurer would not be aware of their group membership. 'While a number of measurements have been taken from animals in dietary consistency experiments. Fresh mass of the entire masseter. Least-squares theory is used to rotate orthogonal axes to a position where the major axis subsumes a maximized amount of the total variance. with dry pellets provided every seventh day only. 4. hard and soft diet. Croup 11 was fed a gruel-like porridge consisting of ground chow moistened with water. This indicates that the "hard" diet was minimally harder . acquired at 21 days of age. with only two groups. or whether no differences should be expected until a threshold in dietary consistency difference was reached. The three populations were maintained on their respective diets for four months. We have no way of knowing the consistency of rat diets used in earlier experiments of this type. MATERIALS AND METHODS The experimental animals were Sprague-Dawley rats. Animals were also examined for visible differences in tooth alignments and attritional differences between the three groups. engendering only subtle differences in bite force.ors (also known as directional cosines or latent vectors) summarize the multiple interplay among variables. related to factor analysis. Maxillary arch breadth across buccal points of ?vII. This correlated with the histological findings by Bouvier and Hylander-" that significantly fewer secondary Haversian systems were present in the mandibular corpus of soft-diet monkeys than in the hard-diet monkeys of the same population. 3. Maxillary arch length. finds the major axes of the between-variable correlation matrix. and so on.he correlations among the several variables.64 Beecher and Corruccini than the gruel. Further. easily breaking down into small granules. 5. Body mass. It was to fill these gaps in the experimental record that the following study was carried out. The eigenvect. resulting in a lj uantum change in the morphology of the masticatory system. A principal components analysis was performed on the data in order to discover t. incisor to distal edge of last molar.
32) (0.00 9. The gross differences in the growth of most structures are not very marked.48) Soft Mean (s. Maxillary Breadth (mm) .91 3..43 43.26 38. 1981 . and functional interpretation of the morphological integration among variables..f. Table 3 lists key paramo eters of this analysis.36) (9.64 8.d.65) ( 0.03 1. The population reared on an intermittently hard diet (Group III) is generally intermediate in the size of structures.43 ( 1. this measurement alone shows a differentiation that is too large (relative to within-sample variation) to be reasonably ascribed to chance. The strongest difference is in the growth relation of the masseter muscle.57 4.40) ( 0.79 9.41) (12. 51 No. which is much more integrated with growth in the condyle and upper arch breadth in hard-diet than in soft-diet animals. Breakdown in growth coordination Mcxillary breadth affected most The basic descriptive statistics in Table I show the hard-diet population (Group 1) to be larger in all dimensions and disproportionately so in some. Table 2 indicates the pairwise correlations in the hard and soft diet groups (I and II). Vol.44 at p (0. Inversely related to this. Masseter weight (gm) .) 23.d. but not significantly so.38) ( 0...40) om AoV with 2 and 87 d. Group III is slightly A much more obvious feature of difference is manifested in the COl'relation structure between measurements within samples. In particular.50) (0.1 January. signifying that all structures are more tightly integrated in their growth and covariation.58) ( 0.18 lAO Intermittent Mean (s.72 1.) 24.21' 1.7 I 9.20) ( 0.~6) (0.17) ( 0. a result attributable to the small differences in dietary consistency.92 3..89 3. and the differences are often significant.39 8. The comparison of correlation structure can be more easily accomplished through examination of the principal components of the correlation matrix. although more similar to the soft group.d. but usually closer to Group I.56 ( 1.31 39. For instance..05.39) (11... indicating a greater range of sizes.28) (or Measured Traits F 0. Group I is more variable than Group II in every measurement. Mandibular Length (mm) (mm) . The major (coordinated growth) axis is largest in the hard-diet sample. All correlations are higher in the animals that had more masticatory resistance. the second axis is largest among the softdiet animals. the maxillary breadth is markedly increased in the hard-diet reared animals (Group I).46) ( 0. RESULTS Development 65 more variable than Group I in the maxillary arch measurements. significant < . • 3-sample TABLE I and Significance of Difference Hard Mean (s.Diet Consistency jOcclusal vidual cases onto the principal component axes allows interrpretation of multivariate variabilitv within samples. Thus the residual from Mean. greater variation away [rom a major principal components axis describing general growth could be interpreted as meaning that there is poorer coordination of regional growth rates in those individuals.. Group III is intermediate in standard deviation. Dispersion.) ~:I.01) lAO ( 0.45 8.88) (0.38 2. Condyle Length Body weight (gm) .. Variable Maxillary Length (mm) . Again.
85 Groups Mussel.54 0. condyle length.L 0... Perhaps a decrease in buffering among the growing components is the first step in their decrease in size.Ve examined the occlusal surfaces of the rat molars as a further test of the comparability of our hard chow and that used thirty years ago by Watt and Williams.......... which is significantly greater than expected by random error at P 2. • Significantly larger Max. a decrease in correlation of masticatory structures is more noteworthy than de- = '.5%.. the F-ratio of variation on axis two (dispersion from axis one) between soft and hard samples is 2.. most chewing stress has been removed and little bite force is now called into play in the jaws of the growing child."] ""hile they noted easily observable differences in attrition between soft and hard diet groups.. . and masseter weight. Only in the 19th and 20th centuries (il apIJcars) has food become so processed tha t for practical purposes....66 Body 0.. This increased multivariate variability in soft-diet animals is all the more striking in view of the fact that they were less variable than the hardfood animals in every univariate trait. No caries were observed by us in any animals.78 0..72 Condo 0.37. at the stage of growrh. Condyle length alone shows a notable residual on the second axis in Group I and III.. Maxillary Breadth .. Mandibular Length . IMaxillary Length ... ~ e: 0... Body weight . Ii Mand. TABLE 2 Product-moment Correlations Among Variables Within the Soft (lower triangular half of matrix) and Hard (upper triangular half) Dietary Max..... We noticed no displaced or rotated teeth in any of the animals.75· 0. Condyle Length ..91· 0.89 0. The correlations of variables with the axes show that the breakdown in growth coordination in soft-diet animals is especially marked in maxillary breadth.83· 0..38 Attrition not affected the major growth aXIS (which could be interpreted as error in growth or variation in growth rate) is easily largest in the soft diet sample.19.39 diet sample at p :c ..74 0. we could find none......55 0.60 0.05.H3 0. DISCUSSION Present-day insults to occlusion Oppenheimer" and Lavell-v document the better occlusion that existed in human populations prior to the onset of the industrial revolution. the intermittent-harddiet group (III) is intermediate when compared with Groups I and 11 but more similar to the hard-diet sample.. In all respects. Masseter weight ..79· 0. Masseter weight tends to be inversely correlated with maxillary breadth and condyle length on the second axis in soft animals. Thus... This phenomenon has also been noted in characters that are diminishing in size through natural selection. The Angle Orthodontist ...66 Beecher and Corruccini crease in size of the structures that seems to follow with a stronger dietary differentiation.71 Soft diet ~ r in hard < .differentiation represented by this difference in dietary consistency. 0.79· 0. .93· 0.
14 0.16 -0. the reduction of chewing resistance and related growth stimulation provided by "civilized" man's refined diet may be the strongest causal factor in developmental malocclusions.06 -0.90 0. Tooth spacing and crowding.04 0.05 -0. with the maxillary teeth being more conservative and controlled by a fewer number of genes. 1 January. Potter et alY demonstrate that upper and lower dental arches are under very different sorts of genetic control. experimental evidence which might weight such factors is absent. In particular.92 0.18 -0. since cases of anodontia show restricted growth while cases with muscular paralysis may develop normally.29 0.79 (13) -0. hormonal intervention.50 (8) -0. including mouth breathing.90 0.73 -0.80 One Principal Component Hard Two growth) Intermittent 4. posture.51 0. as shown by the tendency of some indi- Development 67 viduals with anodontia to have average-size mandibles. Thus.41 -0. the mandible may depend on muscular function to grow to average size.23 0. and independence of tooth formation.68 0.89 0. Though the chewing explanation is most predictive of observed occlusal differences in the rats. especially of anterior teeth.97 0.95 4.82 0. 1981 .89 0." also stress the importance of high correlation between tooth and arch size to the development of good occlusion. endocrine disturbance.e-v Lower correlation between upper and lower teeth in maloccluded individuals (as compared with normal) has been noted by Lavelle. but does not give the source of the growth-correlation breakdown.80 0. considerable evidence ties upper-lower correlation diminution with development of mal- TABLE 3 Eigen Values (latent roots) and Eigenvectors (latent vectors) of the Correlation Matrices in Three Dietary Groups Principal Component (coordinated Hard Soft EigenValue ('70 variance) Eigenvector correlations: Maxillary Length Maxillary Breadth Mandibular Length Condyle Length Body weight Masseter weight 4. Because of its widespread occurrence in western society. prenatal insult.94 0.12 0.08 -0.60 (10) -0.10 Vol.42-45 The growth independence of mandible and maxilla in humans has been frequently noted.17 (69) 0. disturbance of synchronous development in separately growing parts.91 0.67 (78) 0.Diet Consistency/Occlusal A number of other environmental factors have been suggested as influences on developing occlusion.57 -0.w Moorrees and Reed.77 0. premature deciduous tooth loss. The aging process also yields different results in upper and lower arches.w Carrr" lists breakdown of synchronous growth in lower and upper jaws as a possible cause of malocclusion. follows different rates and peaks at different ages in the maxilla and mandible.:" Maxillary growth may be under closer genetic programming. oral habits. trauma. it clearly is not favored by many orthodontists as an explanation of the rising rate of occlusal variation in humans.41•42 Some of these may be of minimal or no importance.93 0.68 0.95 (variation in growth) Soft Intermittent 0. 51 No.96 0.96 (83) 0.08 0.06 -0.59 -0.
1968.: Malocclusion in the modern Alaskan Eskimo. W. L. M. Dent. Supp. and muscle function. H. Trans. teeth.: An assessment of occlusion of youths 12·17 years. and continual incisor function in rodents maintains a base level of function regardless of diet that has no parallel in man. Mediolateral maxillary growth seems dependent upon the muscular stimulation provided by rough elements in the diet.: Maxillary dental arch width in Chinese living in Liverpool. 14:34. Klatsky. Bjork. L.: The occlusion of the Australian aborigine. 1976. and Harvey. R. 1977. Am. Genet..: The face in profile. 1948. Res. lium. Res. Replication of these experiments with a laboratory animal more closely related to man in terms of both biology and masticatory system is seen as a vital future need. Dent. Waugh. Res. 23:417-437.v-se Thus. I'. previously noted in certain groups of maloccluded humans and attributed to racial admixture. M.. USPHS. Am. L. Henrikson. A. 17. 1951.: Dental observations among the Eskimos. V. Lombardi. J. Vital and Health Statistics. 10. 4. 2. Dent. Price.68 Beecher and Corruccini REFERENCES occlusion in humans. Oral Bioi. No. 1959. B. and Bailit. S. 1943. M. 36:385. D. Cotton. Soc. R.1936. Lavelle. J.. 7. Am. D. a Melanesian group on Mailaito. Suensk . 22:466-467. the inheritance of different-sized parts that must occlude is attributed to the independent segregation of disharmonious genes from disparate ancestors. Phys. 19:543-553. J. 1951. J. 18. Basel. Lundstrom. 80-93. Waugh. L..: Influence of the diet on the jaws and the face of the American Eskimo. 3. 40 (Suppl. 1961. 9. and Frei. J. Dent. Kraus. 47:406-422. B. Periodont . Wise.: Eskimo and Indian field studies in Alaska and Canada. Alii. The ora! status of the Xavantes of Simoes Lopes. Orthod. 5b). Assoc. The amount of maxillary arch narrowing and collapse can be predicted by the amount of time the animals were chewing on hard food. J. A. 60:344354.-A.1977.. 5. Am. Wood. C.: Investigations concerning the dentitions of the Eskimos of Canada's Eastern Arctic. Eur . 8. 1Dent. Washington. has apparently resulted from lower chewing stress required by a soft dietary consistency. 1937. W. In this animal population the disassociation in size of occlusal features during their growth. K.: Hered· ity and the craniofacial complex. 21 :213-220. 16. Tand. Kargar. W. J.C. W.: Anglo-Saxon and modern British teeth. and Wong.: Mal· occlusion in the Kwaio. A iii.. W. Solomon Islands. Am. Orthod. Anthrop.: Dental condition of two tribes of Taiwan aborigines-Ami and Atayal. E. Takano. 13.: Tooth-Size and Occlusion in Twins. 56:117-126. 1937. 1966. ~ 1. D. 15. 36:283·294. Dent. The prevailing explanation for such lowering of growth correspondence has been the effect of racial admixture between populations. J. J. 47:811815. The Angle Orthodontist . 1. Orthod. Williams. 1972. IG:355-356. and Thilander. H. A. J. Arch. VI!. Lu. S.: Bone. H. Ser. 1972. Goose. The unfused mandibular symphysis in the rat alters force distribution. Hunt.present convincing genetic arguments against this explanation. Chung et al.. CONCLUSION We believe our results suggest future directions for fruitful research based on the following observations. Res. 19.°o and Lombardi and Bailit.. 12. 17:231-233. Tiss. E. 162. Calci]. Angle Orthod. J.: Further studies on the Xavantc Indians.: Malocclusion and civilization. B. A. Am. 11. Sagne. II. 24:1640· 1647. 14. Kelly. 45: 172-207. C. Ortluul.: Studies in the dietaries of contemporary primitive peoples.: The Downs analysis applied to three ethnic groups. L. C. 1948. Assoc. P. Niswander. 6. 1977. J. Assoc. 1947. Clinch.
H. K. Ackerman. and Tonge. 1968. 58:565-577.. Independent genetic determinants. J. S. C. 1973.. Br. Dent. L. 48. C. Dent.: Severe undernutrition in growing and adult animals. Oppenheimer. Weijs. 1977. Orthod. J. Maxillary and mandibular tooth size in different racial groups and in different occlusal categories. 22:257-268. C.. Evolution 19:214-233. Anthrop. Guthrie. in press. 38. 28. Lavelle. L. Orthod. New Guinea. C. Anthrop.: Electromyography and mechanics of mastication in the albino rat. Am. L. R. J. 23: 471-495. Nutr. Chung. 1956. in press. [rosthet. Smith. J. 34.: Anterior displacement of the mandible in adult rhesus monkeys. J. W. A.: A radiographic cephalometric study of the central Australian Aborigine.: The effects of the physical consistency of food on the growth and development of the mandible and maxilla of the rat. 1975. Orthod. J. Christiansen. Am.. Beecher. Am. J. D. Dent. Am. 1965. M. L. 43.: Craniofacial variation in a central Australian tribe. 41. 42. Morph. 44:397412.: Reply. L. Orth od..: Variability in wild and inbred mammalian populations. D. Vargervik. J.Diet Consistency jOcclusal 20.: Cenctic and epidemiologic studies of oral characteristics in Hawaii's schoolchildren. Gam. 1963. Res. Moorrees. Florida Acad.: Problems and methods in research on the genetics of dental occlusion. J . Brown. C. The mouth. H. 1951. and Kau.: The cause and effect of mouthbreathing as related to malocclusion. and HermannStutzmann. 146: 123-131. 1973. 1975. R. and Weinstein. A. 47:6577.. an analysis of Microtus molars. S. 1'. ]. C. McCance. and Reed. S. 63:494-508. Green. 16:503-512. Orthod... Am. Orthod. J. Watt. Charlier. Res. and BaiIit. Curro Anthrop.. R. n. 40. Genet. 28: 12·35. J. 39. Anthrop. 24. Angle Orthod. 29. P. 1954. and teeth of pigs.. 1965. 1966. 44. Angle Orthod. A. F.: Research and malocclusion. Am. 27. 1966. A. 5:419-421. 50. Vol. J. 1. Orthod. M. J. Tonge. H. 22. J. and Corruccini. S. 1971..: Effects of the ph ysical consistency of the diet on the condylar growth of the rat mandible. W. jaws. Orthod. 1966. 51. 24:171. Moore. W. J. J.: Variation in dental occlusion and arches among Melanesians of Bougainville Island. Strnad. 32. R. Phys. H. 31. K. Orthod. 11. 59:1-IR. 19: 14-34.: Primate experiments on oral sensation and dental malocclusions.: Principal factors controlling development of the mandible and maxilla.. J. Br. Nance. and Hylander. 37. age changes. R. D. N. Malocclusion.. Craven. 18. II. Morph. E. D. 15.J.. 64: 578-606. J. J. Am. K. 36. 42:848-851. Niswander. C. R.: Biometrics of crowding and spacing of teeth in the mandible. 1973. Phvs. Hixon.: Neuromuscular and skeletal adaptations to altered function in the orofacial region. Bader.: Severe undernutrition in growing and adult animals. Clin. University of Adelaide. R. 21. S.: A genetic study of class III malocclusion. J.. V. R. 51 No. 1973. Tonge. Thoma. G. 115: 1-22. T. Master's thesis..: A twin study of dental dimensions.. Rhinology XVI:191-196. B. and Dantuma. 30. and the delay and malocclusions produced by calorie deficiencies. Runck. 23.. G. Hiniker.: Normal development of the jaws and teeth in pigs. 61:29-37. R. L.: Variation in the secular changes in the teeth and dental arch. J.. R. 45. 1.: Effects of dietary consistency on maxillary arch breadth in macaques. S. II. 47. Sci. Niswander. W. Schultz. Burstonc. Am. W.. 12:77-88. S. and Chierici. J. G. 73:895-928. A III. W. Bilben.. H. R. January.. 19: 197-206. P. Curro Anthrop. and Davis. Papua. 1976. 1970. sex differences and population comparisons. 25. Am... 47: 195·208. J. 46. 1961. C. Nutr. 1938. and nailit. J. J. and McCance. 19:361-372. 1981 . Owens. Mourrees. 1. Zool. Potter. C. C.: Effects of bone strain on cortical bone structure in macaques. Angle Orthod. Smith. W. R. 47:661-673. Am. L. 49. J. J. B. Anat.. A. H. J. McNamara. E.: Research related to malocclusion. Petrovic.: Masticatory function and skull growth. 33. 1978. The effects of rehabilitation on the teeth and jaws of pigs. M. ]. 1958.. C. and McCance.. 1965. Harvold. and Williams. R. Litton. ]. 1969. Am. 1... 43:412-421. 6:356357. J. 146:1-34. 1965. P. L. and Ramsfjord. and Shapiro. 55:71-74..: Effects of mandibular hyperpropulsion on the prechondroblast ic zone of young rat condyle. Yu. R. 35. Isaacson.-P. M. M.: Genetics of common dental disorders. 1978. 1971.. S. and Cox. F. B. A. A..: Tool use and crowded teeth in Australopithecinae. D. E. M.. Phys. Dent.' 1.. Am. Barber. Development 69 26. Hum. J. Bouvier. J. H. C.: Variability in characters undergoing rapid evolution. Alii. Lavelle. 1972. Methods.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.