Abstract
In studies of ontogenetic allometry, ontogenetic scaling has often been invoked to explain cranial morphological differences between smaller and larger forms of closely related taxa. These scaled variants in shape have been hypothesized to be the result of the extension or truncation of common growth allometries. In this scenario, change in size is the determining factor, perhaps under direct selection, and changes in cranial shapes are byproducts, not under direct selection themselves. However, many of these conclusions are based on studies that used bivariate generalizations of shape. Even among multivariate analyses of growth allometries, there are discrepancies as to the prevalence of ontogenetic scaling among primates, how shared the trajectories need to be, and which taxa evince properties of scaled variants. In this investigation, we use a large, comparative ontogenetic sample, geometric morphometric methods, and multivariate statistical tests to examine ontogenetic allometry and evaluate if differences in cranial shape among closely related catarrhines of varying sizes are primarily driven by size divergence, that is, ontogenetic scaling. We then evaluate the hypothesis of size as a line of least evolutionary resistance in catarrhine cranial evolution. We found that patterns of ontogenetic allometry vary among taxa, indicating that ontogenetic scaling sensu stricto does not often account for most morphological differences and that large and small taxa within clades are generally not scaled variants. The presence of a variety of ontogenetic pathways for the evolution of cranial shapes provides indirect evidence for selection acting directly on the cranial shape, rather than on size alone.