| Literature DB >> 34403015 |
Abstract
Human impact influences morphological variation in animals, as documented in many captive and domestic animal populations. However, there are different levels of human impact, and their influence on the pattern and rate of morphological variation remains unclear. This study contributes to the ongoing debate via the examination of cranial and mandibular shape and size variation and pace of change in Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata). This species is ideal for tackling such questions because different wild, wild-provisioned, and captive populations have been monitored and collected over seven decades. Linear measurements were taken on 70 skulls from five populations, grouped into three 'human impact groups' (wild, wild-provisioned, and captive). This made it possible to investigate the pattern and pace of skull form changes among the human impact groups as well as over time within the populations. It was found that the overall skull shape tends to differ among the human impact groups, with captive macaques having relatively longer rostra than wild ones. Whether these differences are a result of geographic variation or variable human impact, related to nutritional supply and mechanical properties of the diet, is unclear. However, this pattern of directed changes did not seem to hold when the single captive populations were examined in detail. Although environmental conditions have probably been similar for the two examined captive populations (same captive locality), skull shape changes over the first generations in captivity were mostly different. This varying pattern, together with a consistent decrease in body size in the captive populations over generations, points to genetic drift playing a role in shaping skull shape and body size in captivity. In the captive groups investigated here, the rates of change were found to be high compared to literature records from settings featuring different degrees of human impact in different species, although they still lie in the range of field studies in a natural context. This adds to the view that human impact might not necessarily lead to particularly fast rates of change.Entities:
Keywords: Anthropophily; Captive; Macaca fuscata; Rate of change; Rate of evolution; Wild
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34403015 PMCID: PMC8526449 DOI: 10.1007/s10329-021-00933-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Primates ISSN: 0032-8332 Impact factor: 2.163
Intensities of human–animal relationships
| Grade of intensity of human–animal interaction | Description |
|---|---|
Anthropophily (sensu lato) (e.g., urban red foxes and blackbirds in Europe) | Wild animals attracted to human environments and activities |
Commensalism (sensu lato) (e.g., black rats in Northern Europe) | Special case of anthropophily Living within human buildings |
Captivity (e.g., animals in zoos, working elephants from India and South East Asia) | Humans maintaining wild animals in captivity Not necessarily including human-controlled reproduction in captivity |
Domestication (e.g., domestic dogs and chickens worldwide) | Adaptation into the human-dominated ecological niche, including reproductive change Not necessarily including reproduction being controlled by humans |
Livestock/pet breeding (e.g., specialised cattle breeds for high-yield meat or milk production) | Special case of the domestication process Deliberate, artificial selection (control of reproduction) for aesthetic or productive traits In itself variable in degree (extensive to intensive) Leading to landrace/breed formation |
Human–animal interactions can be described as a gradient, consisting of different, nested grades of increasing intensity (increasing intensity from top to bottom, with some grades being nested within others) (Vigne 2011; Zeder 2012). Descriptions are partially based on Hulme-Beaman et al. (2016) and Sánchez-Villagra (2021)
Fig. 1Japanese macaque populations sampled for this study. Approximate geographic position of the populations are shown on a simplified map of Japan. For each of the five sampled populations, the human impact group (wild, wild-provisioned, captive; Nakagawa et al. 2010), the total number of specimens studied (n; note that for some analyses the sample size was reduced, see text), the years of birth/death/collection covered, and the number and sample size of studied generations (if known) are given. KUPRI = Primate Research Institute of the Kyoto University. Source of map: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:JapanGrey.png
Measurements of the cranium, mandible, and humerus used in this study
| No. | Measurement | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cranial length | Most anterior point of the premaxilla, at the level of the alveoli of the first incisors in ventral view (alveolare), to the rostral border of the foramen magnum (basion) |
| 2 | Cranial breadth | Maximum breadth of the zygomatic arches, perpendicular to the long axis of the cranium |
| 3 | Length of rostrum | Most anterior point of the premaxilla at the level of the alveoli of the first incisors in dorsal view (prosthion) to the most anteromedial edge of the orbit |
| 4 | Palatal breadth | Maximum breadth of the palate, measured at the internal margins of the left and right upper tooth rows between M1 and M2 at the level of the alveoli |
| 5 | Height of rostrum | Vertical height of the rostrum, measured from the intersection of nasal, premaxilla, and maxilla to the alveolar edge between P4 and M1 |
| 6 | Length of postcanine tooth row | Length of the tooth row posterior to the canine teeth (including two premolars and three molars), measured at the level of the alveoli and on the buccal side of the tooth row |
| 7 | Breadth of M1 | Maximum buccolingual width of the upper first molar, measured at the enamel-dentin junction |
| 8 | Postorbital constriction breadth | Minimum breadth of the narrowing of the cranium behind the orbits |
| 9 | Braincase length | Most protruding point of the frontals between the eyes (at about the position of the nasofrontal sutures) to the most posteriorly protruding point of the external occipital protuberance |
| 10 | Braincase width | Widest part of the parietal and/or squamosal (temporal) bones, right above the external auditory meatus |
| 11 | Braincase height | From the level of the basioccipital bone to the highest point on the top of the cranial vault, excluding the sagittal crest if present, and approximately where the frontoparietal and interparietal sutures meet |
| 12 | Orbital width | Maximum mediolateral extension of the orbit, measured at the fronto-zygomatic suture on the lateral side and the maxilofrontal suture on the medial side |
| 13 | Orbital height | Maximum dorsoventral extension of the orbit, parallel to the medial line of the face |
| 14 | Foramen magnum width | Maximum mediolateral extension of the foramen magnum |
| 15 | Foramen magnum height | Maximum dorsoventral extension of the foramen magnum |
| 16 | Interforaminal distance | Distance between posterior edge of foramen ovale and anterior edge of stylomastoid foramen |
| 17 | Mandibular length | Distance between the tip of the mandible, at the level of the alveoli of the first incisors, to the most distal point of the condylar process |
| 18 | Mandibular height | Vertical distance between the highest point of the coronoid process to the base of the ascending ramus of the mandible |
| 19 | Humerus shaft diameter | Mediolateral diameter of the shaft of the humerus in posterior view, measured directly distal to the deltoid tuberosity and in a right angle to the long axis of the bone |
Measurements are according to Snell-Rood and Wick (2013) and Geiger and Sánchez-Villagra (2018), or developed for the present study. For depictions see Fig. 2
Fig. 2Measurements taken in this study. Numbers correspond to the detailed descriptions in Table 2. Cranium is specimen KUPRI # 8896, humerus and mandible are specimen KUPRI # 3013. KUPRI = Primate Research Institute of the Kyoto University
Fig. 3Comparison of cranial and mandibular shape in different human impact groups of Japanese macaques. Principal component analysis of non-allometry-adjusted (a) and allometry-adjusted (c) cranial and mandibular measurements. Black convex hulls indicate the shape space of the different human impact groups (see text, Fig. 1). Grey straight lines indicate contributions of the different measurements to principal components (PC) 1 and 2, with longer lines indicating greater influence in the direction of the line. Measurements contributing the most for each PC are indicated in orange. (For more detailed information on the loadings see Online Resource 2, Fig. S1.) Box plots (with jittered points) indicate the distribution of PC1 scores based on non-allometry-adjusted (b) and allometry-adjusted (d) measurements among the human impact groups. Asterisks indicate the groups that are significantly different from each other on a 5% level
Results of correlations of non-allometry-adjusted and allometry-adjusted PC1 scores on year or birth/collection
| Population, human impact group, number of specimens | Used proxy for time and studied time span | Correlation of non-allometry-adjusted PC1 scores with time | Correlation of allometry-adjusted PC1 scores with time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arashiyama, wild-provisioned/captive, | Year of birth: 1962–2001 | ||
| Koshima islet, wild-provisioned, | Year of birth: 1966–2000 | ||
| Kinkazan island, wild, | Year of collection: 1984–2016 | ||
| Takahama, wild/captive, | Year of birth: 1972–1999 |
Bold font indicates correlations with at least a medium effect correlation coefficient (r ≥ 0.3) as well as low significance values (p ≤ 0.1); n number of specimens
Differences in medians and rates of change among generations in the wild-provisioned/captive Arashiyama and the wild/captive Takahama populations regarding non-allometry-adjusted and allometry-adjusted measurements
| Measurements | Arashiyama | Takahama | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-allometry-adjusted | Allometry-adjusted | Rate of changea | Non-allometry-adjusted | Allometry-adjusted | Rate of changea | |||||
| Cranial length | 7.590 | 2.266 | 0.322 | Na | 84.500 | 0.702 | 57.000 | 0.292 | Na | |
| Cranial breath | 4.792 | 0.136 | 0.934 | Na | 75.000 | 0.936 | 53.000 | 0.202 | Na | |
| Length of rostrum | 3.403 | 0.182 | 2.949 | 0.229 | Na | 105.000 | 0.132 | 95.000 | 0.345 | Na |
| Palatal breadth | 1.124 | 0.570 | 0.638 | 0.727 | Na | 54.000 | 0.371 | 51.000 | 0.285 | Na |
| Height of rostrum | 3.998 | 0.136 | 4.296 | 0.117 | Na | 76.000 | 0.439 | 61.000 | 0.926 | Na |
| Length of postcanine tooth row | 1.533 | 0.465 | 0.809 | 0.667 | Na | 58.000 | 0.501 | 52.000 | 0.312 | Na |
| Breadth of M1 | 6.007 | 5.059 | −0.591, −0.866 | 46.500 | 0.177 | 41.000 | Na, 0.915 | |||
| Postorbital constriction breadth | 5.370 | 9.394 | 1.376, −1.108 | 85.000 | 0.396 | 79.000 | 0.625 | Na | ||
| Braincase length | 2.722 | 0.256 | 4.764 | 1.412, Na | 9.000 | 0.429 | 3.000 | 0.429 | Na | |
| Braincase width | 3.889 | 0.143 | 1.833 | 0.400 | Na | 9.000 | 0.429 | 8.000 | 0.643 | Na |
| Braincase height | 2.333 | 0.311 | 2.333 | 0.311 | Na | 3.000 | 0.429 | 2.000 | 0.286 | Na |
| Orbital width | 5.017 | 3.542 | 0.170 | Na | 56.000 | 0.267 | 56.000 | 0.267 | Na | |
| Orbital height | 0.439 | 0.803 | 0.192 | 0.909 | Na | 38.000 | 37.000 | Na, 0.640 | ||
| Foramen magnum width | 0.466 | 0.792 | 0.179 | 0.914 | Na | 63.500 | 1.000 | 64.000 | 0.975 | Na |
| Foramen magnum height | 1.529 | 0.466 | 1.876 | 0.391 | Na | 75.000 | 0.477 | 73.000 | 0.557 | Na |
| Interforaminal distance | 4.726 | 3.998 | 0.136 | Na | 95.500 | 0.324 | 86.000 | 0.648 | Na | |
| Mandibular length | 5.000 | 3.520 | 0.172 | Na | 85.000 | 0.687 | 60.000 | 0.373 | Na | |
| Mandibular height | 1.533 | 0.465 | 6.188 | 0.622, 1.010 | 92.000 | 0.434 | 80.000 | 0.893 | Na | |
| Humerus shaft diameter | 5.150 | Na | Na | −0.939, −0.542 | 108.000 | Na | Na | Na, −0.585 | ||
H Kruskal–Wallis test statistic, h Haldane estimates of rate of change (standard deviation per generation; only calculated for allometry-adjusted data), Na not applicable, p significance value, U Mann–Whitney test statistic. Bold cells indicate significance values < 0.1. Allometry-adjusted comparisons that are indicated in bold are visualised in Fig. 4
aFeaturing only allometry-adjusted measurements, except humerus shaft diameter; estimates are given from generation 0–1 before the comma and from generation 1–2 after the comma in the Arashiyama population (except for braincase length, where only one specimen could be measured in generation 2, and there is subsequently no rate estimate from generation 1–2) and from generation 1–2 in the Takahama population
Fig. 4Comparisons of allometry-adjusted cranial and mandibular measurements among generations in the wild-provisioned/captive Arashiyama and the wild/captive Takahama populations. Shown are allometry-adjusted skull measurements that were found to exhibit some degree of difference between the generations (if p < 0.1), as well as humerus shaft diameter as a proxy for body mass (Table 4)