1985
DOI: 10.1007/bf00312146
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Domes, arches and urchins: The skeletal architecture of echinoids (Echinodermata)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
66
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
66
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Bending in the axial direction can break the layer by simply pulling the first order lamellae apart from each other, while bending in the transverse direction cannot break the layer without breaking each first order lamellae across its long axis (Currey and Kohn, 1976). The bending tendency of the plates will depend on the boundary conditions at the ambitus (Telford, 1985). Possible ''abutment'' effects of the girdle and concave substratum, and ''tie rod'' effects of the muscular system will both increase the bending tendency.…”
Section: The Biomechanical Role Of the Inherent Materiality Of The Inmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Bending in the axial direction can break the layer by simply pulling the first order lamellae apart from each other, while bending in the transverse direction cannot break the layer without breaking each first order lamellae across its long axis (Currey and Kohn, 1976). The bending tendency of the plates will depend on the boundary conditions at the ambitus (Telford, 1985). Possible ''abutment'' effects of the girdle and concave substratum, and ''tie rod'' effects of the muscular system will both increase the bending tendency.…”
Section: The Biomechanical Role Of the Inherent Materiality Of The Inmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The rigidity of the [test] is more apparent than real, for the entire structure is, in a sluggish way, plastic..." (Thompson, 1917;p. 662) Thompson's (Thompson, 1917) insightful discussion of the mechanical forces influencing the morphogenesis of the echinoderm test has influenced several models of test growth and morphology (Raup, 1968;Seilacher, 1979;Telford, 1985;Dafni, 1986;Baron, 1991;Ellers, 1993;Abou Chakra and Stone, 2008;Zachos, 2009). Although these approaches can account for much of the shape variation observed among taxa, the plastic nature of the shape of the test has not been demonstrated experimentally.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moss and Mehan 1968;Raup 1968;Seilacher 1979; Telford 1985;Phillipi and Nachtigall 1996;Zachos 2009;Chakra and Stone 2011;Mihaljević et al 2011). Moss and Mehan 1968;Raup 1968;Seilacher 1979; Telford 1985;Phillipi and Nachtigall 1996;Zachos 2009;Chakra and Stone 2011;Mihaljević et al 2011).…”
Section: Structural Analysis and Modeling Of Echinoids And Crinoidsmentioning
confidence: 99%