Falk D
Department of Anthropology, SUNY, Albany 12222.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 1989 Nov;80(3):335-9. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330800307.
I have identified and illustrated a spherical "dimple" or "depression" on the Taung endocast as indicating the most likely position of the medial end of the lunate sulcus but have not drawn an actual lunate sulcus on Taung because one is not visible. In a recent paper, R. L. Holloway (Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 77:27-33, 1988) drew a lunate sulcus on his copy of the Taung endocast, incorrectly attributed this sulcus to me, and used it to obtain a ratio of 0.254 to describe "Falk's" position of the lunate sulcus. My published ratio of 0.242 for Taung (Falk: Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 67:313-315, 1985a) was not considered, although the focus of Holloway's paper was my assessment of the position of the lunate sulcus. Holloway also excluded published ratios for a chimpanzee in my collection from his statistical analysis but, even so, my published ratio for Taung is still only 1.5 standard deviations from his chimpanzee mean. If my chimpanzee brain is included in the sample, the ratio for Taung is 1.2 standard deviations from the mean. Furthermore, one of Holloway's own chimpanzees (B60-7) has a ratio of 0.241, just 0.001 below my ratio for Taung. There is no sulcus where Holloway has drawn one on Taung, his "F(LS)" is not mine, his 2 mm error is not mine, and the correct ratio for my measurement of Taung is the one that I published, not the one that Holloway attributes to me. Assessment of Holloway's chimpanzee data supports my claim that the dimple on the Taung endocast is within the chimpanzee range for the medial end of the lunate sulcus.
我已在汤恩头骨模型上识别并标注出一个球形“凹痕”或“凹陷”,以此表明月状沟内侧端最可能的位置,但未在汤恩头骨模型上画出实际的月状沟,因为它不可见。在最近一篇论文中,R. L. 霍洛韦(《美国体质人类学杂志》77:27 - 33, 1988)在他的汤恩头骨模型副本上画出了一条月状沟,错误地将此沟归为我所画,并以此得出0.254的比例来描述月状沟的“福尔克”位置。他没有考虑我发表的汤恩头骨模型比例0.242(福尔克:《美国体质人类学杂志》67:313 - 315, 1985a),尽管霍洛韦论文的重点是我对月状沟位置的评估。霍洛韦在其统计分析中还排除了我所收藏的一只黑猩猩的已发表比例,但即便如此,我发表的汤恩头骨模型比例与他的黑猩猩平均比例仍仅相差1.5个标准差。如果将我的黑猩猩大脑纳入样本,汤恩头骨模型的比例与平均值相差1.2个标准差。此外,霍洛韦自己的一只黑猩猩(B60 - 7)比例为0.241,仅比我发表的汤恩头骨模型比例低0.001。霍洛韦在汤恩头骨模型上所画沟的位置并无实际沟存在,他的“F(LS)”不是我的,他的2毫米误差也不是我的,我测量汤恩头骨模型的正确比例是我发表的那个,而非霍洛韦归到我名下的那个。对霍洛韦黑猩猩数据的评估支持了我的观点,即汤恩头骨模型上的凹痕处于黑猩猩月状沟内侧端的范围内。