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
This movement resulted in short-term periodontal traumas which abated when The Angle Orthodontist . inbreeding. Using mature animals and a splint on the anterior teeth to force mandibular protrusion. 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.vSuch effects are common in humans. The maxillae of these animals showed reduced vertical and prognathic growth. These are usually designed to force protrusion of the mandible 1. (2) bone resorption of the anterior edges of the glenoid fossa. the experimental attempts to induce developmental change in the mammalian masticatory apparatus have used four methods': (I) forcing mouth breathing in animals. especially the physical consistency of the diet. (3) lengthened condylar neck.5-2. we believe that environmental factors. 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. (3) restricting animals to calorie-deprivation diets.0 mm in order to achieve molar occlusion. Mouth breathing Mouth breathing has been implicated experimentally (using macaques) in the development of open bite and or an abnormally narrow maxillary dental arch. Experimen Is in effects of function Apart from radical surgery. Based on the available anthropological and experimental evidence. specifically: (1) some posterior bone deposition. or accumulation of genetic mutations.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. 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. affect the developing masticatory apparatus and create variations in the occlusal phenotype. Mandibular protrusion in young animals resulted in changes in the temporomandibular joint. abnormally-directed muscle tension. growing animals responded to this stress by skeletal adaptations.> Disrupted occlusion The prevalence of an occlusion that varies from the ideal is not the norm among mammals.62 Beecher and Corruccini probably due to a reduction in muscle use rather than increased. attributed to altered muscle tension as the mandible is held slightly depressed during respiration. Hiniker and RamsIjord= also found dentitional changes as teeth were forced to move to maintain occlusal relationships. racial outcrossing. older animals responded with tooth movements to adjust to the new occlusal alignments. and (4) varying the consistency of the diet from hard to soft. A cornman habit in childhood. mouth breathing is probably a factor in the development of human malocclusions. While the younger. The rapid increase in the incidence of malocclusion (often within one generation) gives cause to look beyond genetic explanations such as relaxed selection pressures. (2) placing devices in the mouth to effect alterations in mastication. Similar differences were also found in soft-diet rats.
the soft-diet animals: (I) were slightly smaller in body mass. especially in the mandible. and COX. (3) had mandibles that were smaller. the animals were maintained for approximately four months. The authors found that their regime resulted in: (I) delayed dental development and eruption. Nutrition Experiments concerning the contribution of nutrition to normal occlusal development have taken the form of calorie deprivation of pigs. in older animals. They ." Barber."29 The consequences were tooth crowding and abnormal tooth-tooth contacts. and (2) "greater delay in the development and growth of the jaws. Even buccolingual thickness of the mandible. and (6) had skulls consistently smaller in mass and in linear dimensions. Wear of the molar. although with no significant differences in shape. All mandibular structures related to chewing were affected by diet hardness. Attachment areas for the jawclosing muscles. Green. which responded with less deposition and growth. More recently. Owens and Tonge= used weanling animals. was less. Tonge and McCance.Diet Consistency jOcclusal the teeth adapted and once again occluded adequately. (4) had less width of the maxillary dental arch. where muscle force is transmitted to the mandible. with condyles smaller and radiographically less dense. In all studies. In young animals. the growing skeletal system adjusts. which is essential to resist transverse bending. Rehabilitation was only partiall y successful. was less in the soft-diet animals. The condyles. While calorie deprivation is undoubtedly a factor to consider in severely undernourished people. where toothfood-tooth contact takes place. (2) exhibited no molar wear. Watt and Williams. were smaller. Sagne and Thilander. When compared to the harddiet rats. The smaller masticatory muscles in soft-diet animals were almost certainly a result of lower work requirement in mastication." and Henrikson. 1981 Development 63 four studies have examined this idea experimentally.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. which resist bite (especially incisal) reaction force. the dentition migrates to accommodate.32 Moore.28. (5) had smaller masseter and temporalis muscles. Beecher and Corruccini35 examined a small population of rhesus macaques which had spent a short period during adolescence on contrasting hard/soft diets. The smaller and less-active muscles applied less stress to the bones. were smaller. 1 January. While these experiments are important in assessing the response of the masticatory system to unusual mechanical stress. 51 No. maintaining them for one year on a severe calorie-deficient diet.29 McCance. These studies demonstrate that forced realignments of occlusal relationships and mandibular movements lead to responses by the most flexible elements of the masticatory apparatus. they do not create conditions likely to be encountered by the developing human masticatory system. before attempting to "rehabilitate" some with proper foods. there is no evidence to correlate this deficiency with the occlusal problems found in so many urbanized peoples of the western world. Vol. Dietary consistency Although many workers have commented on the probable influence of the hardness or softness of the diet on the developing masticatory system.
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. 2. The second axis is the axis perpendicular to the first that subsumes the largest possible amount of residual variance. acquired at 21 days of age. The three populations were maintained on their respective diets for four months. 'While a number of measurements have been taken from animals in dietary consistency experiments. Projection of indiThe Angle Orthodontist found significant narrowing of the maxillary arch with no lessening in length in the soft-diet monkeys. and so on. the same length of time used in previous experiments of this type. easily breaking down into small granules. Body mass. incisor to distal edge of last molar. related to factor analysis. or whether no differences should be expected until a threshold in dietary consistency difference was reached. 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. This technique. incisor to Ml. 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. 6. Least-squares theory is used to rotate orthogonal axes to a position where the major axis subsumes a maximized amount of the total variance. We found the lab chow to be crumbly.64 Beecher and Corruccini than the gruel. Group II I was fed the soft diet six days.ors (also known as directional cosines or latent vectors) summarize the multiple interplay among variables. Further.he correlations among the several variables. 3. Animals were also examined for visible differences in tooth alignments and attritional differences between the three groups. with only two groups. resulting in a lj uantum change in the morphology of the masticatory system. This indicates that the "hard" diet was minimally harder . Ninety animals were divided into three groups: Group I was fed pelletted rat chow (Purina Formulab). 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. It was to fill these gaps in the experimental record that the following study was carried out. engendering only subtle differences in bite force. finds the major axes of the between-variable correlation matrix. After sacrifice. Croup 11 was fed a gruel-like porridge consisting of ground chow moistened with water. with dry pellets provided every seventh day only. the heads were randomly numbered so that the measurer would not be aware of their group membership. Fresh mass of the entire masseter. Maxillary arch breadth across buccal points of ?vII. Mandibular length. 5. Maxillary arch length. 4. hard and soft diet. evenly divided between males and females. Anteroposterior length of condylar articular surface. The eigenvect. A principal components analysis was performed on the data in order to discover t.
51 No. All correlations are higher in the animals that had more masticatory resistance.21' 1.65) ( 0.31 39..17) ( 0. this measurement alone shows a differentiation that is too large (relative to within-sample variation) to be reasonably ascribed to chance..00 9.38 2.64 8.20) ( 0..36) (9.Diet Consistency jOcclusal vidual cases onto the principal component axes allows interrpretation of multivariate variabilitv within samples.01) lAO ( 0. Mandibular Length (mm) (mm) .03 1. Group I is more variable than Group II in every measurement..32) (0.) ~:I. Again. indicating a greater range of sizes.26 38. Dispersion. • 3-sample TABLE I and Significance of Difference Hard Mean (s.05. the second axis is largest among the softdiet animals. Condyle Length Body weight (gm) .40) ( 0. In particular. signifying that all structures are more tightly integrated in their growth and covariation. Thus the residual from Mean.43 43. Variable Maxillary Length (mm) .) 24. Group III is slightly A much more obvious feature of difference is manifested in the COl'relation structure between measurements within samples. but usually closer to Group I. The strongest difference is in the growth relation of the masseter muscle.7 I 9..72 1.d.45 8.57 4.41) (12. and the differences are often significant. Masseter weight (gm) . which is much more integrated with growth in the condyle and upper arch breadth in hard-diet than in soft-diet animals. a result attributable to the small differences in dietary consistency.28) (or Measured Traits F 0. 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.91 3.38) ( 0. For instance.d. the maxillary breadth is markedly increased in the hard-diet reared animals (Group I). Inversely related to this. Table 3 lists key paramo eters of this analysis.. The population reared on an intermittently hard diet (Group III) is generally intermediate in the size of structures.39) (11.. but not significantly so. Table 2 indicates the pairwise correlations in the hard and soft diet groups (I and II). The comparison of correlation structure can be more easily accomplished through examination of the principal components of the correlation matrix. The gross differences in the growth of most structures are not very marked. 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. RESULTS Development 65 more variable than Group I in the maxillary arch measurements.46) ( 0. significant < .) 23. Group III is intermediate in standard deviation.18 lAO Intermittent Mean (s. The major (coordinated growth) axis is largest in the hard-diet sample. although more similar to the soft group.1 January.50) (0. 1981 .92 3.56 ( 1.f.~6) (0. Maxillary Breadth (mm) ..43 ( 1. Vol.d.79 9.40) om AoV with 2 and 87 d..44 at p (0.89 3. and functional interpretation of the morphological integration among variables.58) ( 0.88) (0.39 8..48) Soft Mean (s.
79· 0..74 0.79· 0. Body weight . Maxillary Breadth . In all respects. Condyle length alone shows a notable residual on the second axis in Group I and III. 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.55 0.. Ii Mand. Masseter weight tends to be inversely correlated with maxillary breadth and condyle length on the second axis in soft animals.... 0....19..differentiation represented by this difference in dietary consistency. The Angle Orthodontist .83· 0...91· 0. ~ e: 0. • Significantly larger Max..72 Condo 0.85 Groups Mussel... This phenomenon has also been noted in characters that are diminishing in size through natural selection. 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..75· 0.. IMaxillary Length ... the intermittent-harddiet group (III) is intermediate when compared with Groups I and 11 but more similar to the hard-diet sample.... at the stage of growrh..66 Body 0..60 0.78 0. the F-ratio of variation on axis two (dispersion from axis one) between soft and hard samples is 2... and masseter weight. ..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."] ""hile they noted easily observable differences in attrition between soft and hard diet groups.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.66 Beecher and Corruccini crease in size of the structures that seems to follow with a stronger dietary differentiation.93· 0. Thus. . we could find none. We noticed no displaced or rotated teeth in any of the animals...71 Soft diet ~ r in hard < .. a decrease in correlation of masticatory structures is more noteworthy than de- = '. Only in the 19th and 20th centuries (il apIJcars) has food become so processed tha t for practical purposes. most chewing stress has been removed and little bite force is now called into play in the jaws of the growing child...... No caries were observed by us in any animals. The correlations of variables with the axes show that the breakdown in growth coordination in soft-diet animals is especially marked in maxillary breadth.37.. Masseter weight . TABLE 2 Product-moment Correlations Among Variables Within the Soft (lower triangular half of matrix) and Hard (upper triangular half) Dietary Max.54 0.. Perhaps a decrease in buffering among the growing components is the first step in their decrease in size...39 diet sample at p :c ..05.5%. Mandibular Length .89 0... condyle length.. which is significantly greater than expected by random error at P 2.H3 0.L 0. Condyle Length ..
08 0.42-45 The growth independence of mandible and maxilla in humans has been frequently noted. as shown by the tendency of some indi- Development 67 viduals with anodontia to have average-size mandibles. it clearly is not favored by many orthodontists as an explanation of the rising rate of occlusal variation in humans.06 -0.41•42 Some of these may be of minimal or no importance.06 -0.80 0.:" Maxillary growth may be under closer genetic programming.Diet Consistency/Occlusal A number of other environmental factors have been suggested as influences on developing occlusion. endocrine disturbance. since cases of anodontia show restricted growth while cases with muscular paralysis may develop normally. with the maxillary teeth being more conservative and controlled by a fewer number of genes.92 0. follows different rates and peaks at different ages in the maxilla and mandible.89 0.05 -0. Thus.23 0. disturbance of synchronous development in separately growing parts.12 0.18 -0. the mandible may depend on muscular function to grow to average size.59 -0.80 One Principal Component Hard Two growth) Intermittent 4. 1 January.90 0.91 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. Potter et alY demonstrate that upper and lower dental arches are under very different sorts of genetic control.14 0. especially of anterior teeth. trauma.96 (83) 0. In particular.w Moorrees and Reed. including mouth breathing.95 4. 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. The aging process also yields different results in upper and lower arches. posture.60 (10) -0. hormonal intervention.89 0. and independence of tooth formation.94 0.79 (13) -0.90 0." also stress the importance of high correlation between tooth and arch size to the development of good occlusion.77 0.w Carrr" lists breakdown of synchronous growth in lower and upper jaws as a possible cause of malocclusion. premature deciduous tooth loss.68 0.16 -0. Tooth spacing and crowding.68 0.82 0. 51 No.51 0.57 -0.97 0.96 0.95 (variation in growth) Soft Intermittent 0. Because of its widespread occurrence in western society.17 (69) 0.10 Vol. prenatal insult. oral habits.08 -0.e-v Lower correlation between upper and lower teeth in maloccluded individuals (as compared with normal) has been noted by Lavelle.73 -0.41 -0. but does not give the source of the growth-correlation breakdown.29 0. experimental evidence which might weight such factors is absent.93 0. Though the chewing explanation is most predictive of observed occlusal differences in the rats.04 0. 1981 .67 (78) 0.50 (8) -0.
C. Orthod. Orthod.: Studies in the dietaries of contemporary primitive peoples. Calci]. 40 (Suppl. 4. Alii. and muscle function. The amount of maxillary arch narrowing and collapse can be predicted by the amount of time the animals were chewing on hard food. Lu. Am. Periodont . Trans. Mediolateral maxillary growth seems dependent upon the muscular stimulation provided by rough elements in the diet. 1948. Res. USPHS.: The Downs analysis applied to three ethnic groups. Assoc.: Tooth-Size and Occlusion in Twins. L. Clinch. J. Am. Kargar.v-se Thus.. Bjork. Price.. 45: 172-207. Takano.: The occlusion of the Australian aborigine. B. Lavelle. 10. Orthod. Basel. ~ 1. Genet. Suensk . 1.68 Beecher and Corruccini REFERENCES occlusion in humans. 19. D. Supp.: Investigations concerning the dentitions of the Eskimos of Canada's Eastern Arctic. Am. 1972. S. and continual incisor function in rodents maintains a base level of function regardless of diet that has no parallel in man. J.present convincing genetic arguments against this explanation. E. A. Vital and Health Statistics. The Angle Orthodontist . Lombardi. 47:406-422. 1951. lium. Assoc. P. 11. B. and Frei. previously noted in certain groups of maloccluded humans and attributed to racial admixture. L. D. Res. L. J. teeth. Ser. 1Dent. 3. D. Dent. 1937. Dent. L. Henrikson. Lundstrom. Wise. W. A iii. J. 16. M. 1961. Am. 1937. Wood. Niswander. 17:231-233. 24:1640· 1647. 60:344354. M. W. H.: Dental observations among the Eskimos. R. R. 1947. The prevailing explanation for such lowering of growth correspondence has been the effect of racial admixture between populations. Chung et al. C. Anthrop. 12. V. J. J. 1948. 21 :213-220. 17. Kraus. VI!. C. Soc. Goose. Am. Oral Bioi. I'. a Melanesian group on Mailaito. 5b). Waugh. the inheritance of different-sized parts that must occlude is attributed to the independent segregation of disharmonious genes from disparate ancestors. K. Williams. 13. Res. 14. No.: Anglo-Saxon and modern British teeth. 18. Assoc.: Malocclusion in the modern Alaskan Eskimo. The ora! status of the Xavantes of Simoes Lopes. In this animal population the disassociation in size of occlusal features during their growth. 9. W.: Influence of the diet on the jaws and the face of the American Eskimo.: The face in profile. L. has apparently resulted from lower chewing stress required by a soft dietary consistency. and Wong. E.1936. 36:385. Dent. Washington. 80-93. 5. Sagne.°o and Lombardi and Bailit.C.. 2. IG:355-356. A. and Thilander. Klatsky. A. 23:417-437. Solomon Islands. 1943. 19:543-553. Angle Orthod. S.. 47:811815. Arch. W. J. J..: Eskimo and Indian field studies in Alaska and Canada.. J. 1977. Kelly. Tand.. H. J.: Malocclusion and civilization. Eur . A. 56:117-126.: Bone. J. 36:283·294. J. Dent. 1951. 22:466-467. M. 1972. Phys. Hunt.-A. 15. 1977.: Maxillary dental arch width in Chinese living in Liverpool. Dent. Res. 1976. 162. The unfused mandibular symphysis in the rat alters force distribution.: Dental condition of two tribes of Taiwan aborigines-Ami and Atayal. 1968. CONCLUSION We believe our results suggest future directions for fruitful research based on the following observations. B. 14:34.: Hered· ity and the craniofacial complex. and Bailit.: Mal· occlusion in the Kwaio. Tiss. 7. II. Ortluul.1977.: An assessment of occlusion of youths 12·17 years. Waugh. W. 1959. H.: Further studies on the Xavantc Indians. 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. 6. 1966. Am. and Harvey. Cotton. 8..
and Tonge. C.. 19: 14-34.: Neuromuscular and skeletal adaptations to altered function in the orofacial region. L. M. C. J.. Curro Anthrop. L. Lavelle.. J. Am. 1981 .. J. J. Anthrop. and McCance. Am. W.. Potter.: A genetic study of class III malocclusion... 1966. 1975. Nance.. R.: Genetics of common dental disorders. Zool. Am. ]. H. 49. W.: Research and malocclusion. J. 1. C. J. 59:1-IR. F.. M. W.. 30. C. 28. 25. 35. 19:361-372. 36. and Hylander. 47:6577. Oppenheimer. A. Dent. Bilben. University of Adelaide.Diet Consistency jOcclusal 20. Am. G. 22. 47: 195·208. 22:257-268. Hixon. 44:397412. J. C. P. Br.: A twin study of dental dimensions. 1965.. 37. B. Am. 1971. Curro Anthrop. N. 15. Moore. A. S. Maxillary and mandibular tooth size in different racial groups and in different occlusal categories. J. Litton.. T. 1963.: Variation in dental occlusion and arches among Melanesians of Bougainville Island. Vargervik. Orthod. A. 12:77-88. Am. Dent. Orth od. 34. Beecher.. E. H. and Corruccini.-P. jaws. 1968. H. 58:565-577. J.: Electromyography and mechanics of mastication in the albino rat. V. 21. and Chierici.: Variability in characters undergoing rapid evolution. 28: 12·35. R. and Kau. J. 1965.. J. in press. Gam. R. R. S. C. Niswander. sex differences and population comparisons. K. Rhinology XVI:191-196. L. Chung. Moorrees.: Cenctic and epidemiologic studies of oral characteristics in Hawaii's schoolchildren. 146: 123-131. n. Brown. S. and the delay and malocclusions produced by calorie deficiencies. an analysis of Microtus molars. Am. 1'. Angle Orthod. 43. K. C. 40. 1973. 39. The effects of rehabilitation on the teeth and jaws of pigs.: Normal development of the jaws and teeth in pigs. C. ]. D. Morph. Niswander. S. 48. McCance. Tonge. Morph. A. R. C.. 11. D. 55:71-74. 51. W. P. 1973. E. 1966. G. and Weinstein. S. Evolution 19:214-233.. Hiniker.. 32. 19: 197-206. S. Sci. 1951. J. 38. New Guinea. and HermannStutzmann. 1971. Am. D. Orthod. and Ramsfjord. Mourrees.: Biometrics of crowding and spacing of teeth in the mandible. 5:419-421. Ackerman. C. II. J.: Problems and methods in research on the genetics of dental occlusion. 47:661-673. 1938. Nutr. Alii. Master's thesis. Phvs.: Reply. L.. R. M. 1. 24. J. 1973. J. 1972. and teeth of pigs. Development 69 26. Thoma. L. Bouvier. Orthod.: Masticatory function and skull growth. 24:171. J. S. 50. 29. R. in press. Smith.: Primate experiments on oral sensation and dental malocclusions. A.: A radiographic cephalometric study of the central Australian Aborigine. and Davis.: Craniofacial variation in a central Australian tribe. Orthod. J. L.. Phys. Craven.. 115: 1-22.: Effects of the ph ysical consistency of the diet on the condylar growth of the rat mandible. J. 1973. Orthod. R. J .. G. J. 18. A III. Schultz. S. J. 16:503-512. Dent. J. Owens.. 47.: Anterior displacement of the mandible in adult rhesus monkeys. L. 1. J. 1978. Vol. Anthrop. Christiansen. Am.: Effects of bone strain on cortical bone structure in macaques. ]. 23: 471-495. Smith. Bader. Methods.J. Br. Genet. 41. Lavelle.: Effects of mandibular hyperpropulsion on the prechondroblast ic zone of young rat condyle. R. Weijs. and BaiIit. R. 1961. 1969. C. D. 1965. Barber. Anat. 61:29-37. Charlier. R. Orthod. 1958. H. and McCance. Runck. Am. Angle Orthod. 27. Res.. M. 1965. Florida Acad. J.. 23. Angle Orthod.. 31... R.: The cause and effect of mouthbreathing as related to malocclusion. H. [rosthet. 1954. J. Petrovic. F. Am. P. J... 1978. R. and Williams.. L. 63:494-508.' 1. W. 64: 578-606. Phys. Harvold. 51 No. and Reed. Orthod. and Shapiro. D. J. 1975. J. Malocclusion. Guthrie.: Severe undernutrition in growing and adult animals. Clin. 45. Papua.. and nailit. E. Tonge. K. January. Isaacson. W. Anthrop. 6:356357. 1966.: Research related to malocclusion. M.: Variability in wild and inbred mammalian populations.: Effects of dietary consistency on maxillary arch breadth in macaques. M. Nutr.: Variation in the secular changes in the teeth and dental arch. H. Watt.: The effects of the physical consistency of food on the growth and development of the mandible and maxilla of the rat.: Tool use and crowded teeth in Australopithecinae. Yu. Hum. R. 42:848-851. 1970. Orthod. 73:895-928.. A. Independent genetic determinants. Res.: Principal factors controlling development of the mandible and maxilla. Burstonc. J. 44.. Am. 1. age changes. B. Strnad. 1956. 1977.. Green. J. H. The mouth. 46. J.: Severe undernutrition in growing and adult animals. 43:412-421. 42. 146:1-34. A. McNamara. Dent. and Dantuma. II. W. and Cox. C. 33. 1976. B.