Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

PCV performed on a M2 of Alouatta seniculus (USNM-281673, triangle count = 10,000, morphosource.org).

Brighter areas of the tooth have higher PCV. Note that the tips of the cusps and edges of the crests have higher PCV values than the bottom of the basins, sides of the tooth, and along the cervical margin.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

PCV contour plots on a sequence of Paranthropus robustus LM2s (left to right: SK25, SK55b, SK1587b, SK858, SK1586) showing increasing levels of wear (left to right, modified Scott’s wear scores: 1, 1.6, 3, 4, 5.2 [17]).

All are right molars except SK1586, which was mirrored for visual comparison. PCV scale: black = 0, white = 1. Scale in bottom right corner = 5 mm. Note that when the cusps wear, the wear facets become whiter, indicating higher PCV values. Dentin pools (SK1586, right) have reduced PCV values relative to the worn dentin. The PCV values for these teeth are, from left to right, 0.547, 0.552, 0.571, 0.584, and 0.653.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Two way ANOVA showing the effects of diet and group on topographic variables.

All factors and interaction variables are significant with the exception of the OPCR interaction variable. P values of 0 are less than 0.0005.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

Boxplots of topographic variables for platyrrhines (grey) and prosimians (white).

Ins = insectivore, fol = folivore, omn = omnivore, frug = frugivore, and hof = hard-object feeder.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics of topographic metrics separated by group and diet.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Results of one-way ANOVAs, investigating for differences in mean topographic variables between diets in platyrrhines and prosimians.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Tukey HSD results for prosimian ANOVAs.

Differences between group means are reported, followed by the adjusted p-value in parentheses. P-values of zero are <0.0005, bold cells are significant.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Tukey HSD results for prosimian ANOVAs.

Differences between group means are reported, followed by the adjusted p-value in parentheses. P-values of zero are <0.0005, bold cells are significant.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Coefficients of correlation between topographic variables.

P-values of zero are <0.0005, bold cells are significant. Significance at a Bonferroni corrected p-value of 0.01.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Percent of successful classifications for linear DFAs using leave-one-out cross-validation and equal prior probabilities.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 4.

Density distributions of differences in OPCR values for a set of 216 individuals.

Difference = OPCRWinchester et al., 2014 –OPCRBerthaume et al., 2019. 93.5% of the OPCR values published here are higher than in [15].

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Boxplot of differences in OPCR values.

Ins = insectivore, fol = folivore, omn = omnivore, frug = frugivore, and hof = hard-object feeder.

More »

Fig 5 Expand