Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T01:09:33.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - Cranial mechanics of mammalian carnivores: recent advances using a finite element approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

Stephen Wroe
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales
Anjali Goswami
Affiliation:
University College London
Anthony Friscia
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Analyses of functional morphology typically apply phenomenological methodologies, where investigators seek to identify links between morphological and ecological data, or mechanistic approaches, where engineering principles are applied to explain how and why particular morphologies are associated with specific behaviours and ecologies. Often these two are combined within a comparative context.

Although there is certainly debate over basic assumptions and the degree to which structure might be expected to predict function (Gould, 2002), for the majority of biologists, determining relationships between form and function is fundamental to understanding the evolution of behaviours and ecologies, the nature of morphological convergence, and the prediction of habitus in living and extinct taxa.

With respect to the mammalian carnivore skull, numerous studies invoking a range of phenomenological and mechanistic approaches have identified some correspondence between these variables (Savage, 1977; Buckland-Wright, 1978; Radinsky, 1981a, 1981b; Werdelin, 1986; Van Valkenburgh, 1989; Therrien, 2005a; Wroe et al., 2005; Christiansen and Wroe, 2007; Wroe and Milne, 2007). However, the degree to which any skull might be optimised for feeding is not well understood. The vertebrate skull is not simply a food- processing mechanism, it also houses major sensory and neural apparatuses (Dumont et al., 2005), and, in mammalian carnivores, it may be subject to considerable external stresses generated in the subjugation and killing of prey (Preuschoft and Witzel, 2004). Consequently, skull morphology may represent compromise between various competing influences (Hylander et al., 1991; Preuschoft and Witzel, 2004). Identifying such compromise is difficult to achieve using traditional methods.

Type
Chapter
Information
Carnivoran Evolution
New Views on Phylogeny, Form and Function
, pp. 466 - 485
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akersten, W. (1985). Canine function in Smilodon (Mammalia, Felidae, Machairodontinae). Los Angeles County Museum Contributions in Science, 356, 1–22.Google Scholar
Anderson, C. (1929). Palaeontological note no. 1. Macropus titan Owen and Thylacoleo carnifex Owen. Records of the Australian Museum, 17, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anyonge, W. (1996). Locomotor behaviour in Plio-Pleistocene sabre-tooth cats: a biomechanical analysis. Journal of Zoology (London), 238, 395–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bicknevicus, A. R. and Van Valkenburgh, B. (1996). Design for killing: craniodental adaptations of predators. In Carnivore Behavior, Ecology and Evolution, ed. Gittleman, J. L.. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 393–428.Google Scholar
Bourke, J., Wroe, S., Moreno, K., McHenry, C. and Clausen, P. (2008). Effects of gape and tooth position on bite force and skull stress in the dingo (Canis lupus dingo) using a 3-dimensional finite element approach. PLoS ONE, 3 (e2200).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buckland-Wright, J. C. (1978). Bone structure and the patterns of force transmission in the cat skull (Felis catus). Journal of Morphology, 155, 35–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, P. (2007). Comparative bite forces and canine bending strength in feline and sabretooth felids: implications for predatory ecology. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 151, 423–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, P. and Wroe, S. (2007). Bite forces and evolutionary adaptations to feeding ecology in carnivores. Ecology, 88, 347–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clausen, P., Wroe, S., McHenry, C., Moreno, K. and Bourke, J. (2008). The vector of jaw muscle force as determined by computer-generated three dimensional simulation: a test of Greaves' model. Journal of Biomechanics, 41, 3184–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corbett, L. (1995). The Dingo in Australia and Asia. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar
Daniel, T. L., Helmuth, B. S., Saunders, W. B. and Ward, P. D. (1997). Septal complexity in ammonoid cephalopods increased mechanical risk and limited depth. Paleobiology, 24, 470–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vis, C. W. (1883). On tooth-marked bones of extinct marsupials. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales, 8, 187–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumont, E. R. and Herrel, A. (2003). The effect of gape angle and bite point on bite force in bats. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 206, 2117–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumont, E. R., Piccirillo, J. and Grosse, I. R. (2005). Finite-element analysis of biting behavior and bone stress in the facial skeletons of bats. The Anatomical Record Part A, 283A, 319–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewer, R. F. (1969). Some observations on the killing and eating of prey by two dasyurid marsupials: the mulgara, Dasycercus cristicauda, and the Tasmanian devil, Sarcophilus harrisii. Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie, 26, 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fields, H. W., Proffitt, W. R., Case, J. C. and Vig, K. W. L. (1986). Variables affecting measurements of vertical occlusal force. Journal of Dental Research, 62, 135–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flower, W. H. (1868). On the affinities and probable habits of of the extinct Australian marsupial Thylacoleo carnifex Owen. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 24, 307–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, P. W. and Lemen, C. (2007). An experimental approach to modeling the strength of canine teeth. Journal of Zoology, 271, 162–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. (2002). The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Greaves, W. S. (1982). A mechanical limitation on the position of the jaw muscles in mammals: the one third-rule. Journal of Mammalogy, 63, 261–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosse, I. R., Dumont, E. R., Coletta, C. and Tolleson, A. (2007). Techniques for modeling muscle-induced forces in finite element models of skeletal structures. The Anatomical Record, 290, 1069–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guillet, A., Doyle, W. S. and Ruther, H. (1985). The combination of photogrammetry and finite elements for a fine grained functional analysis of anatomical structures. Zoomorphology, 105, 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, S. W. and Herring, S. E. (1974). The superficial masseter and gape in mammals. American Naturalist, 108, 561–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hylander, W. L., Picq, P. G. and Johnson, K. R. (1991). Masticatory-stress hypotheses and the supraorbital region of primates. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 86, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jenkins, I., Thomason, J. J. and Norman, D. B. (2002). Primates and engineering principles: applications to craniodental mechanisms in ancient terrestrial predators. Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 82, 223–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, C. N. and Wroe, S. (2003). Causes of extinction of vertebrates during the Holocene of mainland Australia: arrival of the dingo, or human impact?The Holocene, 13, 941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M. E. (2003). Convergence in ecomorphology and guild structure among marsupial and placental carnivores. In Predators with Pouches: The Biology of Carnivorous Marsupials, ed. Jones, M. E., Dickman, C. and Archer, M.. Collingwood: CSIRO Publishing, pp. 265–89.Google Scholar
Kupczik, K., Dobson, C. A., Fagan, M. J., Crompton, R. H., Oxnard, C. E. and O'Higgins, P. (2007). Assessing mechanical function of the zygomatic region in macaques:validation and sensitivity testing of finite element models. Journal of Anatomy, 210, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kupczik, K., Dobson, C. A., Crompton, R. H., et al. (2008). Masticatory loading and bone adaptation in the supraorbital torus of developing macaques. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 9999, NA.Google Scholar
Lindauer, S. J., Gay, T. and Rendell, J. (1993). Effect of jaw opening on masticatory muscle EMG-force characteristics. Journal of Dental Research, 72, 51–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McHenry, C. R., Clausen, P. D., Daniel, W. J. T., Meers, M. B. and Pendharkar, A. (2006). The biomechanics of the rostrum in crocodilians: a comparative analysis using finite element modelling. Anatomical Record, Part A, 288, 827–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHenry, C. R., Wroe, S., Clausen, P. D., Moreno, K. and Cunningham, E. (2007). Supermodeled sabercat, predatory behavior in Smilodon fatalis revealed by high-resolution 3D computer simulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 104, 16010–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreno, K., Wroe, S., Clausen, P., et al. (2008). Cranial performance in the Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) as revealed by high-resolution 3-D finite element analysis. Journal of Anatomy, 212, 736–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Owen, R. (1859). On the fossil mammals of Australia. Part II. Description of an almost entire skull of the Thylacoleo carnifex, Owen, from a freshwater deposit, Darling Downs Queensland. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 149, 309–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paddle, R. (2000). The Last Tasmanian Tiger: The History and Extinction of the Thylacine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Preuschoft, H. and Witzel, U. (2004). A biomechanical approach to craniofacial shape in primates, using FESA. Annals of Anatomy, 186, 397–404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruim, G. J., De Jongh, H. J. and Ten Bosch, J. J. (1980). Forces acting on the mandible during bilateral static biting at different bite force levels. Journal of Biomechanics, 13, 755–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radinsky, L. B. (1981a). Evolution of skull shape in carnivores. II. Additional modern carnivores. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 16, 337–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radinsky, L. B. (1981b). Evolution of skull shape in carnivores. I. Representative modern carnivores. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 15, 369–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayfield, E. J. (2005). Aspects of comparative cranial mechanics in the theropod dinosaurs Coelophysis, Allosaurus and Tyrannosaurus. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 144, 309–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayfield, E. J., Norman, D. B., Horner, C. C., et al. (2001). Cranial design and function in a large theropod dinosaur. Nature, 409, 1033–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richmond, B. G., Wright, B. W., Grosse, I., et al. (2005). Finite element analysis in functional morphology. The Anatomical Record, Part A, 283A, 259–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybicki, E. F., Simonen, F. A. and Weis, E. B. (1972). On the mathematical analysis of stress in the human femur. Journal of Biomechanics, 5, 203–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savage, R. J. G. (1977). Evolution in carnivorous mammals. Palaeontology, 20, 237–71.Google Scholar
Strait, D. S., Richmond, B. G., Spencer, M. A., Ross, C. F., Dechow, P. C. and Wood, B. A. (2007). Masticatory biomechanics and its relevance to early hominid phylogeny: an examination of palatal thickness using finite-element analysis. Journal of Human Evolution, 52, 585–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strait, D. S., Wang, Q., Dechow, P. C., et al. (2005). Modeling elastic properties in finite-element analysis: how much precision is needed to produce an accurate model?The Anatomical Record, Part A, 283A, 275–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Therrien, F. (2005a). Mandibular force profiles of extant carnivorans and implications for the feeding behaviour of extinct predators. Journal of Zoology, 267, 249–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Therrien, F. (2005b). Feeding behaviour and bite force of sabretoothed predators. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 145, 393–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, J. J. (1991). Cranial strength in relation to estimated biting forces in some mammals. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 69, 2326–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Valkenburgh, B. (1989). Carnivore dental adaptations and diet: a study of trophic diversity within guilds. In Carnivore Behaviour, Ecology and Evolution, ed. Gittleman, J. L.. New York, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 410–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhulp, E. (2006). Analyses of Trabecular Bone Failure, vol. PhD. Eindhoven: University of Technology.Google Scholar
Verrue, V., Dermaut, L. and Verhegghe, B. (2001). Three-dimensional finite element modelling of a dog skull for the simulation of initial orthopaedic displacements. European Journal of Orthodontics, 23, 517–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warren, J. C. (1853). Remarks on Felis smylodon. Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, 4, 256–58.Google Scholar
Weijs, W. A. and Hillen, B. (1985). Cross-sectional areas and estimated intrinsic strength of the human jaw muscles. Acta Morphology Neerlandiae-Scandinaviae, 23, 267–74.Google ScholarPubMed
Wells, R. T., Horton, D. R. and Rogers, P. (1982). Thylacoleo carnifex Owen (Thylacoleonidae): marsupial carnivore? In Carnivorous Marsupials, ed. Archer, M.. Sydney: Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, pp. 573–86.Google Scholar
Werdelin, L. (1986). Comparison of skull shape in marsupial and placental carnivores. Australian Journal of Zoology, 34, 109–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, W. D. and Oxnard, C. E. (2001). Evolutionary radiations and convergences in the structural organization of mammalian brains. Nature, 409, 710–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wroe, S. (2002). A review of terrestrial mammalian and reptilian carnivore ecology in Australian fossil faunas and factors influencing their diversity: the myth of reptilian domination and its broader ramifications. Australian Journal of Zoology, 49, 603–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wroe, S. (2008). Cranial mechanics compared in extinct marsupial and extant African lions using a finite-element approach. Journal of Zoology (London), 274, 332–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wroe, S. and Milne, N. (2007). Convergence and remarkable constraint in the evolution of mammalian carnivore skull shape. Evolution, 61, 1251–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wroe, S., Brammall, J. and Cooke, B. (1998). The skull of Ekaltadeta ima (Marsupialia, Hypsiprymnodontidae) an analysis of some marsupial cranial features and a reinvestigation of propleopine phylogeny, with notes on the inference of carnivory in mammals. Journal of Paleontology, 72, 735–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wroe, S., McHenry, C. and Thomason, J. (2005). Bite club: comparative bite force in big biting mammals and the prediction of predatory behaviour in fossil taxa. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 272, 619–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wroe, S., Clausen, P., McHenry, C., Moreno, K. and Cunningham, E. (2007a). Computer simulation of feeding behaviour in the thylacine and dingo as a novel test for convergence and niche overlap. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 274, 2819–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wroe, S., Moreno, K., Clausen, P., McHenry, C. and Curnoe, D. (2007b). High resolution three-dimensional computer simulation of hominid cranial mechanics. The Anatomical Record, Part A, 290, 1248–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wroe, S., Lowry, M. B. and Anton, M. (2008a). How to build a mammalian super-predator. Zoology, 111, 196–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wroe, S., Huber, D., Lowry, M., et al. (2008b). Three-dimensional computer analysis of white shark jaw mechanics: how hard can a great white bite?Journal of Zoology (London), 276, 336–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×