2019
DOI: 10.1002/ar.24219
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: The extinct nonavian dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex, considered one of the hardest biting animals ever, is often hypothesized to have exhibited cranial kinesis, or, mobility of cranial joints relative to the braincase. Cranial kinesis in T. rex is a biomechanical paradox in that forcefully biting tetrapods usually possess rigid skulls instead of skulls with movable joints. We tested the biomechanical performance of a tyrannosaur skull using a series of static positions mimicking possible excursions of the palate t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
76
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(79 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
3
76
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Also, a rather uniform palate module is formed in Euparkeria, whereas the palate bones are either integrated into the snout (vomer, palatine) or into the lower adductor chamber module (pterygoid) in Tyrannosaurus. Werneburg et al [60] hypothesized that the unique skull modularity of Tyrannosaurus is-particularly the presence of an upper and lower snout module-related to the suggested behaviour of tearing flesh from its prey, although effective functional integration of the tyrannosaur cranium may preclude this [174]. The small body size of Euparkeria precludes a hypercarnivorous behaviour as in Tyrannosaurus and may explain some of these differences in modularity.…”
Section: Diet and Evolution Of The Archosaur Feeding Apparatusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, a rather uniform palate module is formed in Euparkeria, whereas the palate bones are either integrated into the snout (vomer, palatine) or into the lower adductor chamber module (pterygoid) in Tyrannosaurus. Werneburg et al [60] hypothesized that the unique skull modularity of Tyrannosaurus is-particularly the presence of an upper and lower snout module-related to the suggested behaviour of tearing flesh from its prey, although effective functional integration of the tyrannosaur cranium may preclude this [174]. The small body size of Euparkeria precludes a hypercarnivorous behaviour as in Tyrannosaurus and may explain some of these differences in modularity.…”
Section: Diet and Evolution Of The Archosaur Feeding Apparatusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…powered prokinesis). This may also explain why Cost et al (2019) found the protractor loading on Tyrannosaurus rex to have little effect on loading of the palate as the animal has a relatively robust braincase and a relatively small protractor force. Comparative studies of skull shape and protractor function across reptiles are needed to address this hypothesis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Biological applications of FEA, an engineering approach used to evaluate how structures perform under different loads and constraints, have grown in recent years (e.g. Rayfield, 2007;Parr et al, 2012;Sellers et al, 2017;Cost et al, 2019). FEA has been used to explore hypotheses of cranial form and function (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Manuscript to be reviewed force, with a more rigid or akinetic skull being more capable of producing a strong bite (Erickson, Lappin & Vliet, 2003;Wroe, McHenry & Thomason, 2005;Tseng & Binder, 2010;Cost et al, 2020). Thus, the varying degrees of kinesis in lizard and tuatara skulls can certainly impact bite force within Lepidosauria (Frazzetta, 1962).…”
Section: Manuscript To Be Reviewedmentioning
confidence: 99%