Biodiversity Literature Repository
Published December 31, 2008 | Version v1
Journal article Open

The shape of the mandibular corpus in large fissiped carnivores: allometry, function and phylogeny

Creators

Description

Meloro, Carlo, Raia, Pasquale, Piras, Paolo, Barbera, Carmela, O, Paul, Higgins (2008): The shape of the mandibular corpus in large fissiped carnivores: allometry, function and phylogeny. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 154 (4): 832-845, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2008.00429.x, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article-lookup/doi/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2008.00429.x

Files

source.pdf

Files (365.2 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:543ce49c2bd4e198bc46e0d699c15444
365.2 kB Preview Download

Linked records

Additional details

Identifiers

LSID
urn:lsid:plazi.org:pub:543CFF9CFFD4FF98BC46FFD6FFC15444

Related works

Has part
Figure: 10.5281/zenodo.5445728 (DOI)
Figure: 10.5281/zenodo.5445730 (DOI)
Figure: 10.5281/zenodo.5445732 (DOI)
Figure: 10.5281/zenodo.5445734 (DOI)
Figure: 10.5281/zenodo.5445738 (DOI)

References

  • Andersson K. 2004. Elbow-joint morphology as a guide to forearm function and foraging behaviour in mammalian carnivores. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 142: 91-104.
  • Barone R. 1980. Anatomia Comparata dei Mammiferi Domestici. Vol. 1. Osteologia. Bologna: EDAGRICOLE.
  • Biknevicius AR, Leigh SR. 1997. Patterns of growth of the mandibular corpus in spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) and cougars (Puma concolor). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 120: 139-161.
  • Biknevicius AR, Ruff BC. 1992. The structure of the mandibular corpus and its relationship to feeding behaviours in extant carnivorans. Journal of Zoology 228: 479- 507.
  • Biknevicius AR, Van Valkenburgh B. 1996. Design for killing: craniodental adaptations of mammalian predators. In: Gittleman JL, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution, Vol. 2. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 393- 428.
  • Bininda-Emonds ORP, Cardillo M, Jones KE, MacPhee RDE, Beck RMD, Grenyer R, Price SA, Vos RA, Gittleman JL, Purvis A. 2007. The delayed rise of present-day mammals. Nature 446: 507-512.
  • Bookstein FL. 1989. 'Size and shape': a comment on semantics. Systematic Zoology 38: 173-180.
  • Bookstein FL. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data. Geometry and biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bryant NH. 1991. Phylogenetic relationships and systematics of the Nimravidae (Carnivora). Journal of Mammology 72: 56-68.
  • Bryant NH. 1996. Explicitness, stability, and universality in the phylogenetic definition and usage of taxon names: a case study of the phylogenetic taxonomy of the Carnivora (Mammalia). Systematic Biology 45: 174-189.
  • Calder W. 1996. Size, function, and life history. New York: Dover edition.
  • Cardini A. 2003. The geometry of the marmot (Rodentia: Sciuridae) mandible: phylogeny and patterns of morphological evolution. Systematic Biology 52: 186-205.
  • Cardini A, O'Higgins P. 2005. Post-natal ontogeny of the mandible and ventral cranium in Marmota (Rodentia, Sciuridae): allometry and phylogeny. Zoomorphology 124: 189- 203.
  • Caumul R, Polly PD. 2005. Phylogenetic and environmental components of morphological variation: skull, mandible, and molar shape in marmots (Marmota, Rodentia). Evolution 59: 2460-2472.
  • Christiansen P, Adolfssen JS. 2005. Bite forces, canine strength and skull allometry in carnivores (Mammmalia, Carnivora). Journal of Zoology London 266: 133-151.
  • Christiansen P, Wroe S. 2007. Bite forces and evolutionary adaptations to feeding ecology in carnivores. Ecology 88: 347-358.
  • Crusafont-Pairo M, Truyols-Santonja J. 1956. A biometric study of evolution of fissiped carnivores. Evolution 10: 314- 332.
  • Crusafont-Pairo M, Truyols-Santonja J. 1957. Estudios masterometricos en la evolucion Fisipedos. I. Los modulos angulares a y b. II. Los parametros lineales P, C, y T. Boletino Instituto Geologico y Minero Espana 68: 1-140.
  • Crusafont-Pairo M, Truyols-Santonja J. 1958. A quantitative study of stasigenesis in fissipede carnivores. Nature 181: 289-290.
  • Diniz-Filho JAF, Torres NM. 2002. Phylogenetic comparative methods and the geographic range size-body size relationship in new world terrestrial carnivora. Evolutionary Ecology 16: 351-367.
  • Dryden IL, Mardia KV. 1998. Statistical shape analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Felsenstein J. 1985. Phylogenies and the comparative method. The American Naturalist 125: 1-15.
  • Finarelli JA, Flynn JJ. 2006. Ancestral state reconstruction of body size in the Caniformia (Carnivora, Mammalia): the effects of incorporating data from the fossil record. Systematic Biology 55: 301-313.
  • Garland T Jr, Bennett AF, Rezende EL. 2005. Phylogenetic approaches in comparative physiology. Journal of Experimental Biology 208: 3015-3035.
  • Garland T Jr, Dickerman AW, Janis CM, Jones JA. 1993. Phylogenetic analysis of covariance by computer simulation. Systematic Biology 42: 265-292.
  • Garland T Jr, Harvey PH, Ives AR. 1992. Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Systematic Biology 41: 18-32.
  • Geffen E, Gompper ME, Gittleman JL, Luh HK, MacDonald DW, Wayne RK. 1996. Size, life history traits, and social organization in the Canidae: a reevalution. The American Naturalist 147: 140-160.
  • Gittleman JL. 1985. Carnivore body size: ecological and taxonomic correlates. Oecologia 67: 540-554.
  • Gittleman JL. 1999. Hanging bears from phylogenetic trees: investigating patterns of macroevolution. Ursus 11: 29-40.
  • Gould SJ. 2002. The structure of evolutionary theory. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
  • Greaves WS. 1983. A functional analysis of carnassial biting. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 20: 353-363.
  • Greaves WS. 1985. The generalized carnivore jaw. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 85: 267-274.
  • Greaves WS. 1995. Functional predictions from theoretical models of the skull and jaws in reptiles and mammals. In: Thomason J, ed. Functional morphology in vertebrate paleontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 99-115.
  • Holliday JA, Steppan SJ. 2004. Evolution of hypercarnivory: the effect of specialization on morphological and taxonomic diversity. Paleobiology 30: 108-128.
  • Howell FC, Petter G. 1985. Comparative observations on some Middle and Upper Miocene hyaenids. Genera: Percrocuta Kretzoi, Allohyaena Kretzoi, Adcrocuta Kretzoi (Mammalia, Carnivora, Hyaenidae). Geobios 18: 419-476.
  • Klingenberg CP, Leamy LJ. 2001. Quantitative genetics of geometric shape in the mouse mandible. Evolution 55: 2342-2352.
  • Kruuk H. 1972. The spotted hyena. A study of predation and social behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Langenbach GEJ, Eijden TMGJ. 2001. Mammalian feeding motor patterns. American Zoologist 41: 1338- 1351.
  • Levington JS. 1983. Stasis in progress: the empirical basis of macroevolution. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 14: 103-137.
  • MacLeod N. 2001. The role of phylogeny in quantitative paleobiological data analysis. Paleobiology 27: 226-240.
  • Martin LD. 1989. Fossil history of terrestrial Carnivora. In: Gittleman JL, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution, Vol. 1. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 536-568.
  • Martins EP, Diniz-Filho JAF, Housworth EA. 2002. Adaptive constraints and the phylogenetic comparative method: a computer simulation test. Evolution 56: 1-13.
  • Martins EP, Hansen TF. 1997. Phylogenies and the comparative method: a general approach to incorporating phylogenetic information into the analysis of interspecific data. The American Naturalist 149: 646-667.
  • McKitrick MC. 1993. Phylogenetic constraint in evolutionary theory: has it any explanatory power? Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 24: 307-330.
  • Meiri S, Dayan T, Simberloff D. 2005. Variability and correlations in carnivore crania and dentition. Functional Ecology 19: 337-343.
  • Miles DB, Dunham AE. 1993. Historical perspectives in ecology and evolutionary biology: the use of phylogenetic comparative analyses. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 24: 587-619.
  • Monteiro LR. 1999. Multivariate regression models and geometric morphometrics: the search for causal factors in the analysis of shape. Systematic Biology 48: 192-199.
  • Monteiro LR, Bonato V, dos Reis SF. 2005. Evolutionary integration and morphological diversification in complex morphological structures: mandible shape convergence in spiny rats (Rodentia: Echimyidae). Evolution & Development 7: 429-439.
  • Monteiro LR, Reis SF. 2005. Morphological evolution in the mandible of spiny rats, genus Trinomys (Rodentia: Echimyidae). Journal of Zoological Systematics & Evolutionay Research 43: 332-338.
  • Morlo M, Peigne S, Nagel D. 2004. A new species of Prosansanosmilus: implications fort he systematic relationships of the family Barburofelidae new rank (Carnivora, Mammalia). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 140: 43-61.
  • Munthe K. 1989. The skeleton of the Borophaginae (Carnivora, Canidae): morphology and function. University of California publications in Geological Science 133. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Munoz-Garcia A, Williams JB. 2005. Basal metabolic rate in carnivores is associated with diet after controlling for phylogeny. Physiological and Biochemical Zoology 78: 1039- 1056.
  • Ortolani A, Caro TM. 1996. The adaptive significance of color patterns in carnivores: phylogenetic tests of classic hypotheses. In: Gittleman JL, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution, Vol. 2. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 132-186.
  • O'Higgins P. 1999. Ontogeny and phylogeny: morphometric approaches to the study of skeletal growth and evolution. In: Chaplain MAJ, Singh GD, McLachlan J, eds. On growth and form: spatio-temporal patterning in biology. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 373-393.
  • Peigne S. 2003. Systematic review of European Nimravinae (Mammalia, Carnivora, Nimravidae) and the phylogenetic relationships of Palaeogene Nimravidae. Zoologica Scripta 32: 199-229.
  • Polly PD. 1998. Variability, selection, and constraints: development and evolution in viverravid (Carnivora, Mammalia) molar morphology. Paleobiology 24: 409-429.
  • Polly PD. 2001. Paleontology and the comparative method: ancestral node reconstructions versus observed node values. The American Naturalist 157: 596-609.
  • Polly PD. 2002. Phylogenetic tests for differences in shape and the importance of divergence times: Eldredge's enigma explor. In: MacLeod N, Forey P, eds. Morphology, shape, and phylogenetics. Abingdon, UK: Taylor and Francis, 220- 246.
  • Popowics TE. 1998. Ontogeny of postcanine tooth form in the ferret: Mustela putorius (Carnivora: Mammalia), and the evolution of dental diversity within the Mustelidae. Journal of Morphology 237: 69-90.
  • Radinsky LB. 1981a. Evolution of skull shape in carnivores, 1: representative modern carnivores. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 15: 369-388.
  • Radinsky LB. 1981b. Evolution of skull shape in carnivores, 2: additional modern carnivores. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 16: 337-355.
  • Radinsky LB. 1982. Evolution of skull shape in carnivores 3. The origin and early radiation of modern carnivores families. Paleobiology 8: 177-195.
  • Radinsky LB. 1985. Approaches in evolutionary morphology: a search for patterns. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 16: 1-14.
  • Raia P. 2004. Morphological correlates of tough food consumption in carnivores. Italian Journal of Zoology 71: 45-50.
  • Rohlf FJ. 1993. Relative warp analysis and an example of its application to mosquito wings. In: Marcus LF, Bello E, Garcia-Valdecasas A, eds. Contributions to morphometrics. Madrid: Monografias del Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, 131-159.
  • Rohlf FJ. 1996. Morphometric spaces, shape components and the effects of linear transformations. In: Marcus LF, Corti M, Loy A, Naylor GJP, Slice DE, eds. Advances in morphometrics. NATO ASI Series Vol. 284. New York: Plenum Press, 117-129.
  • Rohlf FJ. 1999. Shape statistics: procrustes superimposition and tangent spaces. Journal of Classification 16: 197-223.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2000a. Shape distances, shape spaces and the comparison of morphometric methods. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 6: 217-220.
  • Rolhf FJ. 2000b. On the use of shape space to compare morphometrics methods. HYSTRIX, Italian Journal of Mammalogy 11: 9-26.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2001. Comparative methods for the analysis of continuous variables: geometric interpretations. Evolution 55: 2143-2160.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2003. tpsSmall v. 1.20. Stony Brook, NY: Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2005. tpsRegr v. 1.31. Stony Brook, NY: Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2006a. tpsDig 2.10. Stony Brook, NY: Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2006b. tpsRelw v. 1.44. Stony Brook, NY: Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2006c. A comment on phylogenetic correction. Evolution 60: 1509-1515.
  • Rohlf FJ. 2006d. NTSYSpc v. 2.20k. New York: Exeter Software.
  • Rohlf FJ, Slice DE. 1990. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Systematic Zoology 39: 40-59.
  • Ruber L, Adams DC. 2004. Evolutionary convergence of body shape and trophic morphology in cichlids from Lake Tanganyika. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14: 325-332.
  • Sacco T, Van Valkenburgh B. 2004. Ecomorphological indicators of feeding behaviour in the bears (Carnivora: Ursidae). Journal of Zoology, London 263: 41-54.
  • Therrien F. 2005a. Mandibular force profiles of extant carnivorans and implications for the feeding behaviour of extinct predators. Journal of Zoology, London 267: 249-270.
  • Therrien F. 2005b. Feeding behaviour and bite force of sabretoothed predators. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 145: 393-426.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 1985. Locomotor diversity between past and present guilds of large predatory mammals. Paleobiology 11: 406-428.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 1988. Trophic diversity in past and present guilds of large predatory mammals. Paleobiology 14: 155-173.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 1989. Carnivore dental adaptations and diet: a study of trophic diversity within guilds. In: Gittleman JL, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution, Vol. 1. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 410-436.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 1991. Iterative evolution of hypercarnivory in canids (Mammalia: Carnivore): evolutionary interactions among sympatric predators. Paleobiology 17: 340- 362.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 1996. Feeding behaviour in freeranging, large African carnivore. Journal of Mammalogy 77: 240-254.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 1999. Major patterns in the history of carnivorous mammals. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science 27: 463-493.
  • Van Valkenburgh B. 2007. Deja vu: the evolution of feeding morphologies in the Carnivora. Integrative and Comparative Biology 1-17.
  • Van Valkenburgh B, Sacco T, Wang X. 2003. Pack hunting in Miocene Borophagine dogs: evidence from craniodental morphology and body size. Bulletin American Museum of Natural History 279: 147-162.
  • Van Valkenburgh B, Wang X, Damuth J. 2004. Cope's rule, hypercarnivory and extinction in North American canids. Science 306: 101-104.
  • Viranta S. 1996. European Miocene Amphicyonidae - taxonomy, systematics and ecology. Acta Zoologica Fennica 204: 1-61.
  • Weijs WA. 1994. Evolutionary approach of masticatory motor patterns in mammals. Advances in Comparative Environmental Physiology 18: 281-320.
  • Werdelin L. 1989. Constraint and adaptation in the bonecracking canid Osteoborus (Mammalia: Canidae). Paleobiology 15: 387-401.
  • Werdelin L. 1996. Carnivoran ecomorphology: a phylogenetic perspective. In: Gittleman JL, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution, Vol. 1. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 582-624.
  • Werdelin L, Solounias N. 1991. The Hyaenidae: taxonomy, systematics and evolution. Fossils and Strata 30: 1- 104.
  • Wesley-Hunt GD. 2005. The morphological diversification of carnivores in North America. Paleobiology 31: 35-55.
  • Wesley-Hunt GD, Flynn JJ. 2005. Phylogeny of the Carnivora: basal relationships among the carnivoramorphans, and assessment of the position of 'Miacoidea' relative to Carnivora. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 3: 1-28.
  • Wesley-Hunt GD, Werdelin L. 2005. Basicranial morphology and phylogenetic position of the upper Eocene carnivoramorphan Quercygale. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 50: 837-846.
  • Wroe S, McHenry C, 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 B 272: 619-625.
  • Wyss AR, Flynn JJ. 1993. A phylogenetic analysis and definition of the Carnivora. In: Szalay F, Novacek M, McKenna M, eds. Mammal phylogeny: placentals. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 32-52.
  • Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheets HD, Fink WL. 2004. Geometric morphometrics for biologists. A primer. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

This site uses cookies. Find out more on how we use cookies