Lab Write Up
Courtney Jablonowski
Dr. Peterson
Lab Report 1
June 17, 2012
Results
The tooth formula is a shorthand technique that biologist use to keep track of the teeth on a particular jaw. The formula consisted of two lines, top jaw and bottom jaw, which were used to count how many incisors, canines, premolars, and molar teeth a species had. Species A, Odocoileus virginiaus (white-tailed deer), had a tooth formula of 0033/3133. On the top jaw, the deer had zero incisor and canine teeth but have three of both the premolars and molars. On the bottom jaw, the deer had three incisors, one canine, three premolars, and three molars. Species B, Canis latrans (coyote), had a tooth formula of 3142/3143. On the top jaw, the coyote had three incisors, one canine, four premolars, and two molars. On the bottom jaw, the coyote has three incisors, one canine, four premolars, and three molars. Both the deer and coyote skull were long and skinny towards the nose and mouth. The coyote skull had a much rounder nose than the deer. Species C, Homo sapiens (human), had a tooth formula of 2122/2122. On both the top and bottom jaws, there were two incisors, one canine, two premolars, and two molars. In comparison to the deer and coyote skull, the human was an outcast. The human skull was a short distance from the back of the skull to the front. The human skull was very different in bone structure and longer in height than the deer and coyote skulls. The tooth width from the deer, coyote, and human had a wide range in variety (Figure 1). There was a direct relationship between premolars one and two
Figure 1. Different tooth types in deer, coyote, and human compared by tooth width (cm). using the deer and human. The coyote had much smaller premolars than the deer and human. Figure 1 shows how similar the tooth width of a deer and coyote are. The cusps on the molars were very similar between the coyote and the human. The coyote and human molar cusps were
Dr. Peterson
Lab Report 1
June 17, 2012
Results
The tooth formula is a shorthand technique that biologist use to keep track of the teeth on a particular jaw. The formula consisted of two lines, top jaw and bottom jaw, which were used to count how many incisors, canines, premolars, and molar teeth a species had. Species A, Odocoileus virginiaus (white-tailed deer), had a tooth formula of 0033/3133. On the top jaw, the deer had zero incisor and canine teeth but have three of both the premolars and molars. On the bottom jaw, the deer had three incisors, one canine, three premolars, and three molars. Species B, Canis latrans (coyote), had a tooth formula of 3142/3143. On the top jaw, the coyote had three incisors, one canine, four premolars, and two molars. On the bottom jaw, the coyote has three incisors, one canine, four premolars, and three molars. Both the deer and coyote skull were long and skinny towards the nose and mouth. The coyote skull had a much rounder nose than the deer. Species C, Homo sapiens (human), had a tooth formula of 2122/2122. On both the top and bottom jaws, there were two incisors, one canine, two premolars, and two molars. In comparison to the deer and coyote skull, the human was an outcast. The human skull was a short distance from the back of the skull to the front. The human skull was very different in bone structure and longer in height than the deer and coyote skulls. The tooth width from the deer, coyote, and human had a wide range in variety (Figure 1). There was a direct relationship between premolars one and two
Figure 1. Different tooth types in deer, coyote, and human compared by tooth width (cm). using the deer and human. The coyote had much smaller premolars than the deer and human. Figure 1 shows how similar the tooth width of a deer and coyote are. The cusps on the molars were very similar between the coyote and the human. The coyote and human molar cusps were