Literature DB >> 15801591

Wide faces or large canines? The attractive versus the aggressive primate.

Eleanor M Weston1, Adrian E Friday, Rufus A Johnstone, Friedemann Schrenk.   

Abstract

Hominids display marked body size dimorphism, suggestive of strong sexual selection, yet they lack significant sex differences in canine size that are commonly associated with intrasexual competition in primates. We resolve this paradox by examining sex differences in hominoid facial morphology. We show that chimpanzees, but not gorillas, exhibit clear sexual dimorphism in face width, over and above that expected based on sex differences in body size. We show that this facial dimorphism, expressed as an index, is negatively correlated with canine dimorphism among anthropoid primates. Our findings suggest that a lack of canine dimorphism in anthropoids is not owing to weak sexual selection, but rather is associated with strong sexual selection for broader face width. Enlarged cheek-bones are linked with attractiveness in humans, and we propose that the evolution of a broad face and loss of large canines in hominid males results from mate choice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15801591      PMCID: PMC1810116          DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2004.0203

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  10 in total

1.  Menstrual cycle alters face preference.

Authors:  I S Penton-Voak; D I Perrett; D L Castles; T Kobayashi; D M Burt; L K Murray; R Minamisawa
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-06-24       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Sexual dimorphism in primate evolution.

Authors:  J M Plavcan
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.868

3.  Intraspecific variation and sexual dimorphism in cranial and dental variables among higher primates and their bearing on the hominid fossil record.

Authors:  B A Wood; Y Li; C Willoughby
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 2.610

4.  Intrasexual competition and canine dimorphism in anthropoid primates.

Authors:  J M Plavcan; C P van Schaik
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 2.868

5.  Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes.

Authors:  J E Scheib; S W Gangestad; R Thornhill
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1999-09-22       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Size and diet in the evolution of African ape craniodental form.

Authors:  B T Shea
Journal:  Folia Primatol (Basel)       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 1.246

7.  What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness.

Authors:  M R Cunningham; A P Barbee; C L Pike
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1990-07

8.  Sexual dimorphism and interspecific cranial form in two capuchin species: Cebus albifrons and C. apella.

Authors:  T J Masterson
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 2.868

9.  Interpreting hominid behavior on the basis of sexual dimorphism.

Authors:  J M Plavcan; C P van Schaik
Journal:  J Hum Evol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.895

10.  Testosterone increases perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human males.

Authors:  John P Swaddle; Gillian W Reierson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

  10 in total
  13 in total

Review 1.  Does geometric morphometrics serve the needs of plasticity research?

Authors:  Katrin Schaefer; Fred L Bookstein
Journal:  J Biosci       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.826

2.  Personality and facial morphology: Links to assertiveness and neuroticism in capuchins (Sapajus [Cebus] apella).

Authors:  V Wilson; C E Lefevre; F B Morton; S F Brosnan; A Paukner; T C Bates
Journal:  Pers Individ Dif       Date:  2014-02-01

Review 3.  Balancing costs and benefits in primates: ecological and palaeoanthropological views.

Authors:  Cécile Garcia; Sébastien Bouret; François Druelle; Sandrine Prat
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Lack of support for the association between facial shape and aggression: a reappraisal based on a worldwide population genetics perspective.

Authors:  Jorge Gómez-Valdés; Tábita Hünemeier; Mirsha Quinto-Sánchez; Carolina Paschetta; Soledad de Azevedo; Marina F González; Neus Martínez-Abadías; Mireia Esparza; Héctor M Pucciarelli; Francisco M Salzano; Claiton H D Bau; Maria Cátira Bortolini; Rolando González-José
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Facial width-to-height ratio relates to dominance style in the genus Macaca.

Authors:  Marta Borgi; Bonaventura Majolo
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Getting to the Bottom of Face Processing. Species-Specific Inversion Effects for Faces and Behinds in Humans and Chimpanzees (Pan Troglodytes).

Authors:  Mariska E Kret; Masaki Tomonaga
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Biometric evidence that sexual selection has shaped the hominin face.

Authors:  Eleanor M Weston; Adrian E Friday; Pietro Liò
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-08-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  In your face: facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players.

Authors:  Justin M Carré; Cheryl M McCormick
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Facial width-to-height ratio relates to alpha status and assertive personality in capuchin monkeys.

Authors:  Carmen Emilia Lefevre; Vanessa A D Wilson; F Blake Morton; Sarah F Brosnan; Annika Paukner; Timothy C Bates
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Facial Width-To-Height Ratio (fWHR) Is Not Associated with Adolescent Testosterone Levels.

Authors:  Carolyn R Hodges-Simeon; Katherine N Hanson Sobraske; Theodore Samore; Michael Gurven; Steven J C Gaulin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.