Cargando…

Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles

BACKGROUND: Crocodilians exhibit a spectrum of rostral shape from long snouted (longirostrine), through to short snouted (brevirostrine) morphologies. The proportional length of the mandibular symphysis correlates consistently with rostral shape, forming as much as 50% of the mandible’s length in lo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Walmsley, Christopher W., Smits, Peter D., Quayle, Michelle R., McCurry, Matthew R., Richards, Heather S., Oldfield, Christopher C., Wroe, Stephen, Clausen, Phillip D., McHenry, Colin R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3547052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23342027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053873
_version_ 1782256166853672960
author Walmsley, Christopher W.
Smits, Peter D.
Quayle, Michelle R.
McCurry, Matthew R.
Richards, Heather S.
Oldfield, Christopher C.
Wroe, Stephen
Clausen, Phillip D.
McHenry, Colin R.
author_facet Walmsley, Christopher W.
Smits, Peter D.
Quayle, Michelle R.
McCurry, Matthew R.
Richards, Heather S.
Oldfield, Christopher C.
Wroe, Stephen
Clausen, Phillip D.
McHenry, Colin R.
author_sort Walmsley, Christopher W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Crocodilians exhibit a spectrum of rostral shape from long snouted (longirostrine), through to short snouted (brevirostrine) morphologies. The proportional length of the mandibular symphysis correlates consistently with rostral shape, forming as much as 50% of the mandible’s length in longirostrine forms, but 10% in brevirostrine crocodilians. Here we analyse the structural consequences of an elongate mandibular symphysis in relation to feeding behaviours. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Simple beam and high resolution Finite Element (FE) models of seven species of crocodile were analysed under loads simulating biting, shaking and twisting. Using beam theory, we statistically compared multiple hypotheses of which morphological variables should control the biomechanical response. Brevi- and mesorostrine morphologies were found to consistently outperform longirostrine types when subject to equivalent biting, shaking and twisting loads. The best predictors of performance for biting and twisting loads in FE models were overall length and symphyseal length respectively; for shaking loads symphyseal length and a multivariate measurement of shape (PC1– which is strongly but not exclusively correlated with symphyseal length) were equally good predictors. Linear measurements were better predictors than multivariate measurements of shape in biting and twisting loads. For both biting and shaking loads but not for twisting, simple beam models agree with best performance predictors in FE models. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Combining beam and FE modelling allows a priori hypotheses about the importance of morphological traits on biomechanics to be statistically tested. Short mandibular symphyses perform well under loads used for feeding upon large prey, but elongate symphyses incur high strains under equivalent loads, underlining the structural constraints to prey size in the longirostrine morphotype. The biomechanics of the crocodilian mandible are largely consistent with beam theory and can be predicted from simple morphological measurements, suggesting that crocodilians are a useful model for investigating the palaeobiomechanics of other aquatic tetrapods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3547052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35470522013-01-22 Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles Walmsley, Christopher W. Smits, Peter D. Quayle, Michelle R. McCurry, Matthew R. Richards, Heather S. Oldfield, Christopher C. Wroe, Stephen Clausen, Phillip D. McHenry, Colin R. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Crocodilians exhibit a spectrum of rostral shape from long snouted (longirostrine), through to short snouted (brevirostrine) morphologies. The proportional length of the mandibular symphysis correlates consistently with rostral shape, forming as much as 50% of the mandible’s length in longirostrine forms, but 10% in brevirostrine crocodilians. Here we analyse the structural consequences of an elongate mandibular symphysis in relation to feeding behaviours. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Simple beam and high resolution Finite Element (FE) models of seven species of crocodile were analysed under loads simulating biting, shaking and twisting. Using beam theory, we statistically compared multiple hypotheses of which morphological variables should control the biomechanical response. Brevi- and mesorostrine morphologies were found to consistently outperform longirostrine types when subject to equivalent biting, shaking and twisting loads. The best predictors of performance for biting and twisting loads in FE models were overall length and symphyseal length respectively; for shaking loads symphyseal length and a multivariate measurement of shape (PC1– which is strongly but not exclusively correlated with symphyseal length) were equally good predictors. Linear measurements were better predictors than multivariate measurements of shape in biting and twisting loads. For both biting and shaking loads but not for twisting, simple beam models agree with best performance predictors in FE models. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Combining beam and FE modelling allows a priori hypotheses about the importance of morphological traits on biomechanics to be statistically tested. Short mandibular symphyses perform well under loads used for feeding upon large prey, but elongate symphyses incur high strains under equivalent loads, underlining the structural constraints to prey size in the longirostrine morphotype. The biomechanics of the crocodilian mandible are largely consistent with beam theory and can be predicted from simple morphological measurements, suggesting that crocodilians are a useful model for investigating the palaeobiomechanics of other aquatic tetrapods. Public Library of Science 2013-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3547052/ /pubmed/23342027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053873 Text en © 2013 Walmsley et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Walmsley, Christopher W.
Smits, Peter D.
Quayle, Michelle R.
McCurry, Matthew R.
Richards, Heather S.
Oldfield, Christopher C.
Wroe, Stephen
Clausen, Phillip D.
McHenry, Colin R.
Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles
title Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles
title_full Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles
title_fullStr Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles
title_full_unstemmed Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles
title_short Why the Long Face? The Mechanics of Mandibular Symphysis Proportions in Crocodiles
title_sort why the long face? the mechanics of mandibular symphysis proportions in crocodiles
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3547052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23342027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053873
work_keys_str_mv AT walmsleychristopherw whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT smitspeterd whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT quaylemicheller whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT mccurrymatthewr whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT richardsheathers whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT oldfieldchristopherc whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT wroestephen whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT clausenphillipd whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles
AT mchenrycolinr whythelongfacethemechanicsofmandibularsymphysisproportionsincrocodiles