Xia Jing, Zheng Jing, Huang Diaodiao, Tian Z Ryan, Chen Lei, Zhou Zhongrong, Ungar Peter S, Qian Linmao
Tribology Research Institute, Key Laboratory of Advanced Technologies of Materials, Ministry of Education of China, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, People's Republic of China;
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701; Institute of Nanoscale Science and Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701;
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Aug 25;112(34):10669-72. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1509491112. Epub 2015 Aug 3.
Paleoanthropologists and vertebrate paleontologists have for decades debated the etiology of tooth wear and its implications for understanding the diets of human ancestors and other extinct mammals. The debate has recently taken a twist, calling into question the efficacy of dental microwear to reveal diet. Some argue that endogenous abrasives in plants (opal phytoliths) are too soft to abrade enamel, and that tooth wear is caused principally by exogenous quartz grit on food. If so, variation in microwear among fossil species may relate more to habitat than diet. This has important implications for paleobiologists because microwear is a common proxy for diets of fossil species. Here we reexamine the notion that particles softer than enamel (e.g., silica phytoliths) do not wear teeth. We scored human enamel using a microfabrication instrument fitted with soft particles (aluminum and brass spheres) and an atomic force microscope (AFM) fitted with silica particles under fixed normal loads, sliding speeds, and spans. Resulting damage was measured by AFM, and morphology and composition of debris were determined by scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Enamel chips removed from the surface demonstrate that softer particles produce wear under conditions mimicking chewing. Previous models posited that such particles rub enamel and create ridges alongside indentations without tissue removal. We propose that although these models hold for deformable metal surfaces, enamel works differently. Hydroxyapatite crystallites are "glued" together by proteins, and tissue removal requires only that contact pressure be sufficient to break the bonds holding enamel together.
几十年来,古人类学家和脊椎动物古生物学家一直在争论牙齿磨损的病因及其对理解人类祖先和其他已灭绝哺乳动物饮食的意义。最近,这场争论出现了转折,有人质疑牙齿微磨损揭示饮食的有效性。一些人认为,植物中的内源性磨蚀剂(蛋白石植硅体)太软,无法磨损牙釉质,牙齿磨损主要是由食物上的外源性石英砂粒造成的。如果是这样,化石物种之间微磨损的差异可能更多地与栖息地有关,而不是与饮食有关。这对古生物学家具有重要意义,因为微磨损是化石物种饮食的常见替代指标。在这里,我们重新审视了比牙釉质软的颗粒(如二氧化硅植硅体)不会磨损牙齿的观点。我们使用配备软颗粒(铝球和黄铜球)的微加工仪器以及在固定法向载荷、滑动速度和跨度下配备二氧化硅颗粒的原子力显微镜对人类牙釉质进行评分。通过原子力显微镜测量产生的损伤,并通过带有能量色散X射线光谱的扫描电子显微镜确定碎片的形态和成分。从表面去除的牙釉质碎片表明,在模拟咀嚼的条件下,较软的颗粒会产生磨损。以前的模型假定,这些颗粒会摩擦牙釉质,并在凹痕旁形成脊,而不会去除组织。我们认为,尽管这些模型适用于可变形的金属表面,但牙釉质的工作方式不同。羟基磷灰石微晶通过蛋白质“胶合”在一起,去除组织只需要接触压力足以打破将牙釉质结合在一起的键即可。