Tooth Enamel Microstructure: Proceedings of the enamel microstructure workshop, University of Bonn, Andernach, Rhine, 24-28 July 1994

289 Pages·2020·111.187 MB·English

by  Koenigswald, W. von, Sander, P.M

TOOTHENAMELMICROSTRUCTURE

PROCEEDINGSOFTHEENAMELMICROSTRUCTUREWORKSHOP
UNIVERSITYOFBONN/ANDERNACH/RHINE/24-28JULY 1994
TOOTH ENAMEL
MICROSTRUCTURE
Editedby
WIGHARTV. KOENIGSWALD &~ MARTINSANDER
InstitutfiirPaliiontologie, UniversitiitBonn, Germany
A.A.BALKEMA/ ROTTERDAM/BROOKFIELD/ 1997
Authorizationtophotocopy itemsforinternalorpersonal use,ortheinternalorpersonal useofspecific
clients, isgranted by A.A.Balkema, Rotterdam, provided that the base fee of US$I.50 per copy,plus
US$0.10 per page is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers,
MA 01923,USA.ForthoseorganizationsthathavebeengrantedaphotocopylicensebyCCC,aseparate
systemofpayment hasbeenarranged.ThefeecodeforusersoftheTransactional ReportingService is:
9054106670/97US$I.50+US$0.10.
Published by
A.A.Balkema,EO.Box1675,3000BRRotterdam,Netherlands (Fax:[phone])
A.A.BalkemaPublishers,OldPostRoad,Brookfield,VT05036-9704,USA(Fax:[phone])
ISBN9054106670
© 1997A.A.Balkema,Rotterdam
PrintedintheNetherlands
Toothenamelmicrostructure, W.v.Koenigswald&P.M.Sander(eds)©1997Balkema, Rotterdam
Contents
Listof contributors VII
Introduction 1
W.V. KOENIGSWALD& P.M. SANDER
Ontogeny
1 Theontogeny ofmammalianenamel 5
L. MOSS-SALENTDN, M.L. Moss& M.S. YUAN
Crystallite level
2 A shortreview ofstudies on chemical and physicalproperties ofenamel
crystallites 31
T. SAKAE, K. SUZUKI&Y. KOZAWA
Prism level
3 Non-mammaliansynapsidenamel and the originofmammalianenamel
prisms: The bottom-upperspective 41
P.M. SANDER
4 The earliestprisms in mammalianand reptilianenamel 63
C.B. WOOD& D.N. STERN
5 Characterizationofenamelmicrostructure terminology and application of
the origins ofprismatic structures in systematic analyses 85
W.A. CLEMENS
6 Tubules in Australian marsupials 113
C.F. GILKESON
Enameltype level
7 Differentiationsin Hunter-Schregerbands ofcarnivores 123
C. STEFEN
v
VI Contents
Schmelzmusterlevel
8 Briefsurvey ofenamel diversity at the schmelzmusterlevel in Cenozoic
placentalmammals 137
W.V. KOENIGSWALD
9 Incisorenamel microstructure and systematics in rodents 163
T. MARTIN
10 Theenamel structureofsome fossil and recentwhales from the Indian
subcontinent 177
A. SAHNI& W.V. KOENIGSWALD
Dentition level
11 The variabilityofenamel structureat the dentition level 193
W.V. KOENIGSWALD
Evolution
12 Evolutionarytrends in the differentiationofmammalianenamel
ultrastructure 203
W.V. KOENIGSWALD
Biomechanics
13 Mechanical adaptationin enamel 237
J.M. RENSBERGER
14 Schmelzmusterdifferentiation in leading andtrailingedges, a specific
biomechanical adaptationin rodents 259
W.V. KOENIGSWALD& P.M. SANDER
Terminology
15 Glossaryofterms usedfor enamel microstructures 267
W.V. KOENIGSWALD& P.M. SANDER
Toothenamelmicrostructure, W.v.Koenigswa/d&P.M.Sander(eds)@1997Ba/kema, Rotterdam
List of contributors
Prof. Dr William A. Clemens, Museum of Paleontology, University of California,
Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
Coral F. Gilkeson, Philips Scientific & Industrial Electronics, ACN 008 445 743, 34
WaterlooRoad (P.O. Box 119), NorthRide, NSW 2113, Australia.
Prof. Dr Wighart v. Koenigswald, Institut fur Palaontologie der Universitat Bonn,
Nussallee 8,D-53115, Bonn, Germany.
Dr Yukishige Kozawa, Nihon University School of Dentistry at Matsudo, Chiba
Ken 271, Japan.
Dr Thomas Martin, Institutfur Palaontologie der Freien UniversitatBerlin, Malteser
strape74-100, Haus D, D-12249, Berlin, Germany.
Melvin L. Moss, DDS, PhD, Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology, Columbia
University, 630 West 168thStreet, New York, NY 10032-3702,USA.
Letty Moss-Salentijn, DDS, PhD, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology,
ColumbiaUniversity, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY 10032-3702,USA.
Dr John M. Rensberger, Department of Geological Sciences and Burke Museum,
University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105, USA.
Prof. Dr Ashok Sahni, Centre of Advanced Studies in Geology, Panjab University,
Chandigarh 160014, India.
Dr Toshiro Sakae, Nihon University, School of Dentistry at Matsudo, Chiba-Ken
271, Japan.
PO Dr P. MartinSander, Institutfur Palaontologieder Universitat Bonn, Nussallee 8,
0-53115, Bonn, Germany.
Dr Clara Stefen, Institut fur Palaontologie der Universitat Bonn, Nussallee 8, 0
53115 Bonn, Germany.
Dr Doris Stem, ForsythDentalCenter, 140TheFenway, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Dr Kunihiro Suzuki, Nihon University School of Dentistry at Matsudo, Chiba-Ken
271, Japan.
Dr Craig B.Wood, Biology Department, Providence College, Providence, RI 02918,
USA.
Michael Sheng-tien Yuan, DDS, MA, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology,
ColumbiaUniversity, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY 10032-3702,USA.
VII

Toothenamelmicrostructure, W.v.Koenigswald&P.M.Sander(eds)©1997Balkema, Rotterdam
Introduction
WIGHART v. KOENIGSWALD &P. MARTINSANDER
InstitutfurPaliiontologieder UniversitiitBonn, Germany
Enamel, the shiny material covering the teeth of vertebrates is the hardest tissue the
vertebrate body can produce and one ofthe most impressive products of biominerali
zation. This hard tissue is closely related to feeding, the first part in the energy intake
process so basic to vertebrate life. Enamel has a complex internal microstructure full
of phylogenetic and biomechanic information.
Research was centered around human enamel which, however, is not representa
tive for the structural diversity seen in the mammalian spectrum. In addition, ontoge
netic models for enamel formation deduced from human enamel are not sufficient to
describe enamel formation in general. For instance, the formation of such a com
monly observed structure as uniserial HSB in rodent incisors has to be incorporated
in ageneral model ofamelogenesis in prismatic enamel.
The history of enamel research is closely linked to the advances in microscope
technology. Enamel received renewed interest with each step in the development of
modern microscope technology. First observations on a structure within the enamel
were already made in the 18th century without the aide ofa transmitted light micro
scope by HUNTER (1778) and SCHREGER (1800). Based on histological techniques
and much improved light microscopes, a second research tradition was established
by TOMES (1850) who focused on the formation ofenamel. This tradition spreading
out from Britain culminated in the work of BOYDE(1964 ff) using scanning electron
microscopy and tandem scanningreflecting lightmicroscopy.
The descriptive approach which includes the investigation of fossil teeth was
pushed forward by KORVENKONTIO (1934) examining the great variety ofrodent in
cisors. He made the point, that enamel structure contains important characters for
phylogenetic studies. In Japan SHOBUSAWA(1952) and KAWAI (1955) made inven
tories ofprism cross sections and the thickness ofHunter-Schregerbands.
Significant biomechanical aspects became obvious when KOENIGSWALD (1980)
studied rodent molars and found a close relationship between the distribution of the
enamel types (schmelzmuster) and functional requirements.
Scanning electron microscopy encouraged many workers to investigate tooth
enamel, not the least triggered by the aesthetic quality of the observed structures.
However, the powerful magnification capabilities ofthe SEM draws the attention to
very small structures at very high magnifications. This detailed view often obscures
the recognition offeatures at a somewhat larger scale which are necessary to under-