Lab Write Up Essay Sample
The tooth expression is a stenography technique that life scientist usage to maintain path of the dentitions on a peculiar jaw. The expression consisted of two lines. top jaw and underside jaw. which were used to number how many incisors. eyetooths. bicuspids. and molar dentitions a species had. Species A. Odocoileus virginiaus ( white-tailed cervid ) . had a tooth expression of 0033/3133. On the top jaw. the cervid had zero incisor and eyetooth dentitions but have three of both the bicuspids and grinders. On the bottom jaw. the cervid had three incisors. one eyetooth. three bicuspids. and three grinders. Species B. Canis latrans ( prairie wolf ) . had a tooth expression of 3142/3143.
On the top jaw. the prairie wolf had three incisors. one eyetooth. four bicuspids. and two grinders. On the bottom jaw. the prairie wolf has three incisors. one eyetooth. four bicuspids. and three grinders. Both the cervid and prairie wolf skull were long and scraggy towards the olfactory organ and oral cavity.
The prairie wolf skull had a much libertine nose than the cervid. Speciess C. Homo sapiens ( human ) . had a tooth expression of 2122/2122. On both the top and bottom jaws. there were two incisors. one eyetooth. two bicuspids. and two grinders. In comparing to the cervid and prairie wolf skull. the homo was an castaway. The human skull was a short distance from the dorsum of the skull to the forepart. The human skull was really different in bone construction and thirster in tallness than the cervid and prairie wolf skulls.
The tooth breadth from the cervid. prairie wolf. and human had a broad scope in assortment ( Figure 1 ) . There was a direct relationship between bicuspids one and two
Figure 1. Different tooth types in cervid. prairie wolf. and human compared by tooth breadth ( centimeter ) . utilizing the cervid and homo. The prairie wolf had much smaller bicuspids than the cervid and human. Figure 1 shows how similar the tooth breadth of a cervid and prairie wolf are. The cusps on the grinders were really similar between the prairie wolf and the human. The prairie wolf and human grinder cusps were really similar in grinders one and two.
In Figure 1. the homo and coyote tooth breadth are about displayed the same. On molar three. the cusp sizes were really similar between the cervid and prairie wolf. The jaw length of a cervid. 6. 151 centimeter. is closest to a prairie wolf. 5. 507 centimeter. doing the grinders towards the dorsum of the jaw more similar to each other than worlds. Figure 1 gives a ocular on the Numberss for informations and comparings.
The tooth acuteness of each animate being depended on the type of diet each animate being had ( Figure 2 ) . The bicuspids had a additive form between the three animate beings.
Figure 2: Different tooth types of cervid. prairie wolf. and worlds compared by tooth acuteness ( deg. ) . Coyote’s had the sharpest bicuspids. deer’s mediate. and human’s with the dullest bicuspids. Figure 2 compares the grades of each bicuspid and each clip. the form was followed. The grinders had no relationship between each animate being. Molar one cusp one and two are most closely related in both cervid and worlds. Molar two cusps one and two are most closely related to deer and human out of the three animate beings.
The cusps were similar but have about a ten-degree acuteness difference. The grinders and cusps human’s and deer’s and human’s were similar but have about a twelve-degree difference between acuteness. In the 2nd grinder of the homo. the cusps were less crisp than the cervid. Figure 2 shows that there was no form between the grinders of the three animate beings.
Taking the deliberate figure of tooth breadth and spliting it by the fiting jaw length found comparative tooth breadth ( Figure 3 ) . Relative tooth breadth displays the tooth width relation to the length of the jaw. The jaw length of a cervid was 6. 151 centimeter.
Figure 3: Displaies three different animate beings and how their tooth breadth is related to their jaw length. which was the longest jaw out of all species compared in this experiment. The prairie wolf had a jaw length of 5. 507cm while the human had a jaw length of 2. 932 centimeter. Premolar one of the cervid was most similar to the prairie wolf. Premolar’s 1. 2. and 3 were in proportion between the human and cervid. The comparative tooth breadth of the cervid was really near in scope while the prairie wolf was non. By looking at Figure 3. this can be determined. The homo has the highest comparative tooth width out of the three species being compared.
