Vitek N S, Roseman C C, Bloch J I
Department of Ecology & Evolution, Stony Brook University, 632 Life Sciences Building, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245, USA.
Florida Museum of Natural History and Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Integr Org Biol. 2020 Jul 24;2(1):obaa020. doi: 10.1093/iob/obaa020. eCollection 2020.
Mammalian molar crowns form a module in which measurements of size for individual teeth within a tooth row covary with one another. Molar crown size covariation is proposed to fit the inhibitory cascade model (ICM) or its variant the molar module component (MMC) model, but the inability of the former model to fit across biological scales is a concern in the few cases where it has been tested in Primates. The ICM has thus far failed to explain patterns of intraspecific variation, an intermediate biological scale, even though it explains patterns at both smaller organ-level and larger between-species biological scales. Studies of this topic in a much broader range of taxa are needed, but the properties of a sample appropriate for testing the ICM at the intraspecific level are unclear. Here, we assess intraspecific variation in relative molar sizes of the cotton mouse, , to further test the ICM and to develop recommendations for appropriate sampling protocols in future intraspecific studies of molar size variation across Mammalia. To develop these recommendations, we model the sensitivity of estimates of molar ratios to sample size and simulate the use of composite molar rows when complete ones are unavailable. Similar to past studies on primates, our results show that intraspecific variance structure of molar ratios within the rodent does not meet predictions of the ICM or MMC. When we extend these analyses to include the MMC, one model does not fit observed patterns of variation better than the other. Standing variation in molar size ratios is relatively constant across mammalian samples containing all three molars. In future studies, analyzing average ratio values will require relatively small minimum sample sizes of two or more complete molar rows. Even composite-based estimates from four or more specimens per tooth position can accurately estimate mean molar ratios. Analyzing variance structure will require relatively large sample sizes of at least 40-50 complete specimens, and composite molar rows cannot accurately reconstruct variance structure of ratios in a sample. Based on these results, we propose guidelines for intraspecific studies of molar size covariation. In particular, we note that the suitability of composite specimens for averaging mean molar ratios is promising for the inclusion of isolated molars and incomplete molar rows from the fossil record in future studies of the evolution of molar modules, as long as variance structure is not a key component of such studies.
哺乳动物的臼齿冠形成一个模块,在这个模块中,齿列中单个牙齿的大小测量值彼此协变。臼齿冠大小的协变被认为符合抑制级联模型(ICM)或其变体臼齿模块组件(MMC)模型,但在灵长类动物中进行测试的少数案例中,前一种模型无法跨生物尺度拟合是一个问题。到目前为止,ICM未能解释种内变异模式,即中间生物尺度的变异模式,尽管它解释了较小器官水平和较大物种间生物尺度的变异模式。需要在更广泛的分类群中对这个主题进行研究,但适合在种内水平测试ICM的样本特性尚不清楚。在这里,我们评估棉鼠相对臼齿大小的种内变异,以进一步测试ICM,并为未来哺乳动物臼齿大小变异的种内研究制定合适的采样方案建议。为了制定这些建议,我们模拟了臼齿比率估计值对样本大小的敏感性,并在无法获得完整臼齿列时模拟了复合臼齿列的使用。与过去对灵长类动物的研究类似,我们的结果表明,啮齿动物种内臼齿比率的方差结构不符合ICM或MMC的预测。当我们将这些分析扩展到包括MMC时,一个模型并不比另一个模型更能拟合观察到的变异模式。在包含所有三颗臼齿的哺乳动物样本中,臼齿大小比率的静态变异相对恒定。在未来的研究中,分析平均比率值需要相对较小的最小样本量,即两个或更多完整的臼齿列。即使是每个齿位四个或更多标本的基于复合样本的估计也能准确估计平均臼齿比率。分析方差结构需要相对较大的样本量,至少40 - 50个完整标本,并且复合臼齿列无法准确重建样本中比率的方差结构。基于这些结果,我们提出了臼齿大小协变种内研究的指导方针。特别是,我们指出,只要方差结构不是此类研究的关键组成部分,复合标本用于平均平均臼齿比率的适用性有望在未来臼齿模块进化研究中纳入来自化石记录的孤立臼齿和不完整臼齿列。