Bartsiokas Antonis
Anaximandrian Institute of Human Evolution, Voula, Greece.
Anat Rec. 2002 May 1;267(1):52-9. doi: 10.1002/ar.10083.
The microstructure of a hominid cranial vault has not previously been studied to determine its tissue histology, and differences in comparison with that of modern humans. We selected the parietals of Omo-Kibish 1, regarded as one of the oldest (about 130,000 years old) anatomically modern humans, and Omo 1 (Howell), which is a very recent human (about 2,000 years old)-both from the same area of Ethiopia. A combination of macrophotography, polarizing microscopy in the incident and transmission illumination mode, and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) was employed to examine thin sections, as well as polished and unpolished block faces of unembedded bone fragments, to minimize specimen destruction as much as possible. The methods enabled remarkably detailed information on bone microstructure and remodeling to be gleaned from tiny fragments of bone. The best method for examining fossilized human bones was shown to be that of incident light microscopy, which was the least destructive while producing the most amount of information. Unless the above methods are used, bone-filling minerals, such as calcite, can cause erroneous estimations of bone thickness, as observations with the naked eye or even a magnifying glass cannot determine the limit between the cortex and the diploe. This is particularly important for sciences such as paleoanthropology, in which, for instance, a thick cranial bone of Homo erectus may be confused with a pathological one of H. sapiens and vice versa. Cross sections of parietal bones revealed differences between Omo-Kibish 1 and Omo 1 (Howell) in diploic histology and in the relative thickness between the cortex and diploe, with the former specimen having an H. erectus ratio despite its H. sapiens gross anatomy. Omo-Kibish 1 may still retain some affinities with H. erectus despite its being classified as H. sapiens. Newly described histological structures, such as the reverse type II osteons, the multicanalled osteons, and the osteocytomata are presented here. A modern human skeletal anatomy does not necessarily imply a modern human cranial bone histology. The outer circumferential lamellae of cranial bones are in essence growth lines. Cranial histology of hominids may provide useful information concerning their taxonomy and life history, including such factors as growth rate, developmental stress, and diet.
此前尚未对原始人类颅顶的微观结构进行研究以确定其组织学特征,以及与现代人类的差异。我们选取了奥莫-基比什1号(被认为是最古老的解剖学意义上的现代人类之一,约13万年历史)和奥莫1号(豪厄尔)(这是一个距今很近的人类个体,约2000年历史)的顶骨,二者均来自埃塞俄比亚的同一地区。采用宏观摄影、入射光和透射光照明模式的偏光显微镜以及共聚焦激光扫描显微镜(CLSM)相结合的方法,对薄片以及未包埋骨碎片的抛光和未抛光块面进行检查,以尽可能减少对标本的破坏。这些方法能够从微小的骨碎片中获取关于骨微观结构和重塑的极为详细的信息。结果表明,检查化石人类骨骼的最佳方法是入射光显微镜检查法,这种方法破坏性最小,同时能产生最多的信息。除非使用上述方法,否则诸如方解石等填充骨的矿物质会导致对骨厚度的错误估计,因为肉眼甚至放大镜观察都无法确定皮质和板障之间的界限。这对于古人类学等学科尤为重要,例如,直立人的厚颅骨可能会与智人的病理性颅骨混淆,反之亦然。顶骨的横截面显示,奥莫-基比什1号和奥莫1号(豪厄尔)在板障组织学以及皮质和板障之间的相对厚度方面存在差异,尽管前者标本具有智人的总体解剖结构,但却具有直立人的比例特征。尽管奥莫-基比什1号被归类为智人,但它可能仍与直立人保留着一些亲缘关系。本文展示了新描述的组织学结构,如反向II型骨单位、多管骨单位和骨细胞瘤。现代人类的骨骼解剖结构并不一定意味着具有现代人类的颅骨组织学特征。颅骨的外周板层本质上是生长线。原始人类的颅骨组织学可能会提供有关其分类和生活史的有用信息,包括生长速率、发育压力和饮食等因素。