SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

LITERATURE CITED

  • Ackermann RR, Krovitz GE. 2002. Common patterns of facial ontogeny in the hominid lineage. Anat Rec 269: 142147.
  • Aiello L, Dean C. 1990. An introduction to human evolutionary anatomy. London: Academic Press/Harcourt Brace & Company. 596 p
  • Alberch P. 1990. Natural selection and developmental constraints: external versus internal determinants of order in nature. In: DeRousseauCJ, editor. Primate life history and evolution. New York: Wiley-Liss. p 1535.
  • Arsuaga JL, Gracia A, Lorenzo C. 1997. The Sima de los Huesos crania (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain). A comparative study. J Hum Evol 33: 219281.
  • Atchley WR, Hall BK. 1991. A model for development and evolution of complex morphological structures. Biol Rev 66: 101157.
  • Bastir M, Rosas A, Kuroe K. 2004. Petrosal orientation and mandibular ramus breadth: evidence of a developmental integrated petroso-mandibular unit. Am J Phys Anthropol 123: 340350.
  • Bastir M, Rosas A, Sheets DH. The morphological integration of the hominoid skull: a partial least squares and PC analysis with morphogenetic implications for European Mid-Pleistocene mandibles. In: SliceD, editor. Developments in primatology: progress and prospects. Kluwer Academic/Plenum (in press).
  • Bermúdez de Castro JM, Sarmiento S, Cunha E, Rosas A, Bastir M. 2001. Dental size variation in the Atapuerca-SH middle pleistocene hominids. J Hum Evol 41: 195209.
  • Bermúdez de Castro JM, Martinon-Torres M, Sarmiento S, Lozano M, Arsuaga J-L, Carbonell E. 2004. Rates of anterior tooth wear in middle pleistocene hominins from Sima de los Huesos (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100: 1199211996.
  • Bischoff JL, Fitzpatrick JA, León L, Arsuaga J-L, Falgueres JJB, Bullen T. 1997. Geology and preliminary dating of the hominid-bearing sedimentary fill of the Sima de los Huesos Chamber, Cueva Mayor of the Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain. J Hum Evol 33: 129155.
  • Bischoff JL, Shamp DD, Aramburu A, Arsuaga JL, Carbonell E, Bermúdez de Castro JM. 2002. J Archaeol Sci 30: 275280.
  • Björk A. 1969. Prediction of mandibular growth. Am J Orthod 55: 585599.
  • Björk A. 1991. Facial growth rotation—reflections on definitions and cause. Proc Fin Dent Soc 87: 5158.
  • Bookstein FL. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 455 p
  • Bookstein FL. 1996. Combining the tools of geometric morphometrics. In: MarcusLF, editor. Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum Press. p 131151.
  • Chernoff B, Magwene PM. 1999. Afterword. In: OlsonEC, MillerPL, editors. Morphological integration. Chicago: University of Chicago. p 319353.
  • Cheverud JM. 1982. Relationships among ontogenetic, static an evolutionary allometry. Am J Phys Anthropol 59: 139149.
  • Dryden IL, Mardia KV. 1998. Statistical shape analysis. Chichester: Wiley.
  • Emerson SB, Bramble DM. 1993. Scaling, allometry and skull design. In: HankenJ, HallBK, editors. The skull. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p 384421.
  • Enlow DH. 1968. The human face: an account of the postnatal growth and development of the craniofacial skeleton. New York: Harper & Row. 423 p
  • Enlow DH, Hans MG. 1996. Essentials of facial growth. Philadelphia/London/New York: W.B. Saunders Company. 303 p.
  • Franciscus RG, Trinkaus E. 1995. Determinants of retromolar space presence in Pleistocene Homo mandibles. J Hum Evol 28: 577595.
  • Godfrey L, Sutherland M. 1996. Paradox of peramorphic paedomorphosis: heterochrony and human evolution. Am J Phys Anthropol 99: 1742.
  • Kendall DG. 1977. The diffusion of shape. Adv Appl Probabil 9: 428430.
  • Klingenberg CP. 1998. Heterochrony and allometry: the analysis of evolutionary change in ontogeny. Biol Rev 73: 79123.
  • Klingenberg CP, Leamy LJ. 2001. Quantitative genetics of geometric shape in the mouse mandible. Evolution 55: 23422352.
  • Klingenberg CP. 2002. Morphometrics and the role of the phenotype in studies of the evolution of developmental systems. Gene 287: 310.
  • Klingenberg CP, Mebus K, Auffray J-C. 2003. Developmental integration in a complex morphological structure: how distinct are the modules in the mouse mandible? Evol Dev 5: 522531.
  • Lieberman DE, McBratney BM, Krovitz G. 2002. The evolution and development of cranial form in Homo sapiens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99: 11341139.
  • Martinez-Maza C, Rosas A. 2002. Bone remodeling in the Atapuerca-SH mandibles. Implications for growth patterns in Middle Pleistocene hominids. Am J Phys Anthropol 115: 107108.
  • Maynard Smith J, Burian R, Kauffman S, Alberch P, Campbell J, Goodwin B, Lande R, Raup D, Wolpert L. 1985. Developmental constraints and evolution. Q Rev Biol 60: 265287.
  • Moss M, Young RW. 1960. A functional approach to craniology. Am J Phys Anthropol 45: 281292.
  • Penin X, Berge C, Baylac M. 2002. Ontogenetic study of the skull in modern humans and the common chimpanzees: neotenic hypothesis reconsidered with a tridimensional Procrustes analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 118: 5062.
  • Ponce de León M, Zollikofer C. 2001. Neandertal cranial ontogeny and its implications for late hominid diversity. Nature 412: 534538.
  • Rohlf FJ, Slice D. 1990. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst Zool 39: 4059.
  • Rohlf FJ. 1996. Morphometric spaces, shape components and the effects of linear transformations. In: MarcusLF, editor. Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum Press. p 117128.
  • Rohlf FJ, Loy A, Corti M. 1996. Morphometric analysis of Old World talpidae (Mammalia, Insectivora) using partial warp scores. Syst Biol 45: 344362.
  • Rohlf F. 1998a. tpsREGR. version 1.27. Stony Brook NY: State University of New York.
  • Rohlf F. 1998b. SMALL. version 1.19. Stony Brook NY: State University of New York.
  • Rohlf F. 1998c. tpsRELW. version 1.30. Stony Brook NY: State University of New York.
  • Rosas A. 1992. Ontogenia y filogenia de la mandíbula en la evolución de los homínidos. Aplicación de un modelo de morfogénesis a las mandíbulas fósiles de Atapuerca. In. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.
  • Rosas A. 1995. Seventeen new mandibular specimens from the Atapuerca/Ibeas Middle Pleistocene hominids sample (1985–1992). J Hum Evol 28: 533559.
  • Rosas A. 1997. A gradient of size and shape for the Atapuerca sample and Middle Pleistocene hominid variability. J Hum Evol 33: 319331.
  • Rosas A. 1998. Modelos de crecimiento en mandíbulas fósiles de homínidos. Atapuerca, un nuevo paradigma. In: AguirreE, editor. Atapuerca y la Evolución Humana. Madrid: Fundación Ramón Areces. p 239275.
  • Rosas A. 2000. Ontogenic approach to variation in Middle Pleistocene hominids. Evidence from the Atapuerca-SH mandibles. Hum Evol 15: 8398.
  • Rosas A. 2001. Occurrence of Neandertal features in mandibles from the Atapuerca-SH Site. Am J Phys Anthropol 114: 7491.
  • Rosas A, Bastir M. 2002. Thin-plate spline analysis of allometry and sexual dimorphism in the human craniofacial complex. Am J Phys Anthropol 117: 236245.
  • Rosas A, Bastir M, Martínez Maza C, Bermúdez de Castro JM. 2002a. Sexual dimorphism in the Atapuerca-SH hominids. The evidence from the mandibles. J Hum Evol 42: 451474.
  • Rosas A, Bastir M, Martinez-Maza C. 2002b. Morphological integration and predictive value of the mandible in the craniofacial system of hominids: a test with the Atapuerca SH mandibular sample. Coll Antropol 26: 171172.
  • Sheets DH. 2001. IMP, integrated morphometric package. http://www.canisius.edu/∼sheets/morphsoft.html; Sheets, David H.
  • Slice D. 2001. Landmark coordinates aligned by Procrustes analysis do not lie in Kendall's shape space. Syst Biol 50: 141149.
  • Smith KK. 1993. The form of the feeding apparatus in terrestrial vertebrates. In: HankenJ, HallBK, editors. The skull. Chicago/London: Chicago University Press. p 150196.
  • Zelditch ML, Lundrigan BL, David Sheets H, Garland T. 2003. Do precocial mammals develop at a faster rate? A comparison of rates of skull development in Sigmodon fulviventer and Mus musculus domesticus. J Evol Biol 16: 708720.