Ross C F
Anatomical Sciences, Health Sciences Center, SUNY at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794-8081, USA.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2001 Oct;116(2):108-39. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1106.
The craniofacial haft resists forces generated in the face during feeding, but the importance of these forces for the form of the craniofacial haft remains to be determined. In vivo bone strain data were recorded from the medial orbital wall in an owl monkey (Aotus), rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), and a galago (Otolemur) during feeding. These data were used to determine whether: the interorbital region can be modeled as a simple beam under bending or shear; the face is twisting on the brain case during unilateral biting or mastication; the interorbital "pillar" is being axially compressed during incisor loading and both axially compressed and laterally bent during mastication; and the interorbital "pillar" transmits axial compressive forces from the toothrow to the braincase. The strain data reveal that the interorbital region cannot be modeled as a anteroposteriorly oriented beam bent superiorly in the sagittal plane during incision or mastication. The strain orientations recorded in the majority of experiments are concordant with those predicted for a short beam under shear, although the anthropoids displayed evidence of multiple loading regimes in the medial orbital wall. Strain orientation data corroborate the hypothesis that the strepsirrhine face is twisted during mastication. The hypothesis that the interorbital region is a member in a rigid frame subjected to axial compression during mastication receives some support. The hypothesis that the interorbital region is a member in a rigid frame subjected to lateral bending during mastication is supported by the epsilon1/absolute value epsilon2 ratio data but not by the strain orientation data. The timing of peak shear strains in the medial orbital wall of anthropoids does not bear a consistent relationship to the timing of peak shear strain in the mandibular corpus, suggesting that bite force is not the only external force influencing the medial orbital wall. Strain orientation data suggest the existence of two distinct loading regimes, possibly associated with masseter or medial pterygoid contraction. Regardless of the loading regime, all taxa showed low strain magnitudes in the medial orbital wall relative to the anterior root of the zygoma and the mandibular corpus. The strain gradients documented here and elsewhere suggest that, in anthropoids at least, local effects of external forces are more important than a single global loading regime. The low strain magnitudes in the medial orbital wall and in other thin bony plates around the orbit suggest that these structures are not optimally designed for resisting feeding forces. It is hypothesized that their function is to provide rigid support and protection for soft-tissue structures such as the nasal epithelium, the brain, meninges, and the eye and its adnexa. In contrast with the face of Otolemur, which appears to be subjected to a single predominant loading regime, anthropoids may experience different loading regimes in different parts of the face. This implies that the anthropoid and strepsirrhine facial skulls might be optimized for different functions.
颅面骨柄可抵抗进食时面部产生的力,但这些力对颅面骨柄形态的重要性仍有待确定。在一只夜猴(夜猴属)、恒河猴(猕猴属)和一只婴猴(懒猴属)进食期间,记录了眶内侧壁的体内骨应变数据。这些数据用于确定:眶间区域是否可被建模为在弯曲或剪切作用下的简单梁;在单侧咬或咀嚼时面部是否在脑壳上扭转;在切牙加载时眶间“支柱”是否受到轴向压缩,以及在咀嚼时是否同时受到轴向压缩和侧向弯曲;以及眶间“支柱”是否将轴向压缩力从齿列传递至脑壳。应变数据表明,在切割或咀嚼过程中,眶间区域不能被建模为在矢状面向上弯曲的前后向梁。在大多数实验中记录的应变方向与短梁在剪切作用下预测的方向一致,尽管类人猿在眶内侧壁显示出多种加载方式的证据。应变方向数据证实了狐猴型灵长类动物面部在咀嚼时会扭转的假设。眶间区域在咀嚼时是承受轴向压缩的刚性框架中的一个部件这一假设得到了一些支持。眶间区域在咀嚼时是承受侧向弯曲的刚性框架中的一个部件这一假设得到了ε1/|ε2|比值数据的支持,但未得到应变方向数据的支持。类人猿眶内侧壁峰值剪切应变的时间与下颌体峰值剪切应变的时间没有一致的关系,这表明咬合力不是影响眶内侧壁的唯一外力。应变方向数据表明存在两种不同的加载方式,可能与咬肌或翼内肌收缩有关。无论加载方式如何,所有分类单元在眶内侧壁的应变幅度相对于颧骨前根和下颌体都较低。此处及其他地方记录的应变梯度表明,至少在类人猿中,外力的局部影响比单一的全局加载方式更重要。眶内侧壁及眼眶周围其他薄骨板中的低应变幅度表明,这些结构在抵抗进食力方面并非最优设计。据推测,它们的功能是为诸如鼻上皮、脑、脑膜以及眼及其附属器等软组织结构提供刚性支撑和保护。与似乎承受单一主要加载方式的婴猴面部不同,类人猿面部的不同部位可能会经历不同的加载方式。这意味着类人猿和狐猴型灵长类动物的面部头骨可能针对不同功能进行了优化。