Florida State University Dr. Parker Ifs 2087 Stegoceras

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Florida State University Dr. Parker Ifs 2087 Stegoceras FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY DR. PARKER IFS 2087 STEGOCERAS FORM OF DEFENSE: HEAD-BUTTING OR FLANK-BUTTING? By Angela Ging Draft 2 November 23rd 2015 Word Count: 2184 ABSTRACT Stegoceras was discovered by Lawrence M. Lambe in 1902. Their skeletons have been uncovered across the North American continent. After numerous years of researching the dinosaur, there have been speculations about how they defended themselves and their bone structure. Stegoceras is one of few dinosaurs that had full skeleton sets discovered from one dig. The main controversy regarding Stegoceras concerns head-butting as a form of defense. The uncertainty of the shape of their necks and the air pathway in their skull are the two key forms of evidence regarding this controversy. They also had increasingly thick skulls, which would lead paleontologists to believe that they would withstand a head-butt attack. Researchers propose the idea that instead of head-butting, Stegoceras may have been better at flank-butting. This paper considers if Stegoceras’ skull could withstand a lifetime of head-butting and I conclude that Stegoceras were able to defend themselves through the use of head-butting due to the strength of their skulls and the shape of their neck. INTRODUCTION Stegoceras roamed the earth during the Cretaceous period, during the Mesozoic Era (The Age of Reptiles), approximately 70 million years ago. They were discovered by Lawrence M. Lambe, a paleontologist from Canada, in 1902. (All About Dinosaurs 2015) Lambe was born in 1849 and died in 1934. He not only discovered and named Stegoceras, but also named multiple other dinosaurs including Chasmosaurus, Edmontosaurus, Euoplocephalus and Styracosaurus. Lambe worked for the Geological Survey of Canada and was held accountable for discovering fossils in fossil beds in Alberta, Canada. (Strauss 2015) He is commonly known for his discoveries Stegoceras (Google Images 2015) in paleontology. However, he made even more influential accomplishments during his lifetime. He was appointed a specialist in prehistoric fishes of the Devonian period and named the Canadian fossil crocodile Leidysuchus after an American paleontologist, Joseph Leidy. (Strauss 2015) “Stegoceras” means roof horn, and was inspired by the shape of its skull and is classified as Chordata, Reptilia, Dinosauria, Ornithischia, Pachycephalosauria. Stegoceras evolved from a Hypsilophodon and were approximately 2 meters long and 1.3 meters tall. Their weight is estimated to be around 78 kilograms (170 lbs.). (All About Dinosaurs 2015) More recently, different versions of Stegoceras skeletons with variations in size, have been found “from southwest/central Canada to the southwestern states of the USA.” (Prehistoric Wildlife 2011) Three specific regions where partial skeletons have been found are in Alberta, Canada, and in New Mexico and Montana in the United States. “The Stegoceras was first discovered on the Judith River Wedge, on the east side of the Red Deer River, in Alberta, Canada.” (Hamilton 2010) Stegoceras were bipedal herbivorous dinosaurs, but were not always thought to be this way. In earlier years, the Stegoceras were commonly mistaken for Troodon due to its similar tooth structure. (Holtz 1998) Stegoceras had small, sharp curved teeth. “The similarity of troodontid teeth to those of herbivorous dinosaurs continues to lead many paleontologists to believe that these animals were omnivores.” (Sternberg 1945) However, Stegoceras were classified as different dinosaurs because the Troodon was proved to have more omnivorous traits and sharper teeth. Stegoceras had numerous different characteristics that have been found in fossils. Their back legs were three times the size of their forearms. They had large eyes, equally spaced and both facing forward in the front of its head, meaning it had depth perception. Stegoceras also had a large head, suggesting that it had a large brain and a thick skull (around 8 centimeters thick). Males had thicker skulls than females, along with older Stegoceras having thicker skulls than younger generations. (Hamilton 2010) They also breathed heavier than traditional dinosaurs due to its nasal passages through openings in the skull structure. (Mancini 2015) The most controversial topic concerning Stegoceras has been about their skull structure and how they defended themselves on a daily basis. At the time of discovery, they were believed to defend themselves by using the technique of head-butting. Researchers have further investigated the topic by conducting more studies and analysis concerning their skull structure to see if they were actually able to withstand the impact of a head-butt attack. (Mancini 2015) On the contrary, researchers have proposed the idea that Stegoceras used the technique of flank-butting rather than head-butting. (Carpenter 1997) The difference between the two is that head-butting is when the predator uses force in the front of it’s head in order to ram into its opponent and flank- butting is when the predator faces its opponent directly parallel and aims the peak of its skull towards its opponent. Along with the skull structure, researchers also evaluated the airflow of Stegoceras through the thickness of their skulls and the shape of their necks. DISCUSSION Head-butting and flank-butting are similar tactics in relation to form of defense but they use different parts of the skull. Head-butting is when the predator uses force in the front of it’s head in order to ram into its opponent. Flank-butting is when the predator faces its opponent directly parallel and aims the peak of its skull towards its opponent. There are two types of flank- butting due to dome shape of the skull. Stegoceras are classified in type one, “all of which have tall, rounded frontoparietal domes. Such Visual representation of Stegoceras air passageway (Google Images 2015) domes would maximize the mass of the head in flank-directed blows. Pain would be felt by the opponent without causing serious injury.” (Carpenter 1997) One trait that the Stegoceras has that leads researchers to believe that it was more likely to flank-butt rather than head-butt is the structure of it’s airways in the skull. Stegoceras are believed to be heavy breathers due to the bone structure of the skull. They breathed from the tip of their skull and up through an open airway in the skull towards the middle of their skull, similar to how humans breathe through their noses. “ ’The biggest difference between Stegoceras and [humans] (in terms of breathing) is that it would have breathed more like a bird or reptile in that it took longer, deeper breaths.’ says Ohio University doctoral student Jason Bourke. Bourke performed a CT scan of a Stegoceras skull in 2014 and discovered each breath likely helped keep its brain from overheating by cooling cranial blood vessels. Also, because reptiles lack nose hairs, Stegoceras must have relied heavily on mucous to avoid inhaling small, airborne objects.” (Mancini 2015) The Stegoceras air path is compatible in the idea that they would use flank- butting as a form of defense because their airways are towards the front of the skull. Numerous scientific texts and studies make claims regarding Stegoceras air passageways. According to The Science Book, “The Stegoceras specimens that were supposed to be from ‘the median line of head in advance of the nasals’ are to be interpreted rather as representing the frontal nasal elements of the skull.” (Brian 2011) If Stegoceras was to use head-butting instead, it could potentially crush it’s airways if the impact was too strong against the bone structure. If a Stegoceras were to have the front portion of their skull crushed from the impact of another dinosaur's skull, they would be unable to breathe and eventually suffocate. Flank- butting would be the Stegoceras preferred method of defense because it is equally as effective as using the peak of their heads to the front of their heads because they will still have the same amount of force exerted on their opponent. By using flank-butting over head-butting, their Stegoceras Skull (Google Images 2015) airways are more protected from damage than if they used head-butting. Stegoceras are also speculated to be unable to head-butt due to the shape of its neck and skull structure. Stegoceras is also categorized under pachycephalosaurus. “The angle between the skull and the neck of Stegoceras means that, when the head was down in the butting position, the neck would have been more or less in line with the force. The trunk vertebrae of pachycephalosaurus interlock in a way that seems likely to have made the spine rather rigid, and there were bony tendons or ligaments in the back as Neck structure of Stegoceras (Carpenter 1997) well as the tail. Scientists have interpreted these signs as showing that pachycephalosaurus had very stiff backs and have pictured them colliding with their backs ramrod straight.” (McNeill Alexander 1990) The fossil’s structure leads researchers to believe that the Stegoceras neck was a S or U shape curve, meaning it would be unable to withstand the pressure of a head-butt encounter. “This shape results from the nonparallel nature of the centrum articular face of the cervicals and anterior dorsals. The ventral margin of these centra may be longer or shorter than the dorsal margin at the left of the neural canal, producing a beveled, or wedge-shaped, centrum. Articulating these vertebrae so that the articular faces of sequential centra are parallel...produces a natural curve to the neck.” (Carpenter 1997) This bone structure provides researchers with evidence that Stegoceras were inclined to use flank-butting rather than head-butting due to their neck structure. The Stegoceras skull structure is believed to be another reason why they used flank-butting over head-butting as a form of defense. “Like with all pachycephalosaurus, the skull of Stegoceras is noted for having extreme thickening, which would have resulted in a dome-like structure on top of the skull.” (Prehistoric Wildlife 2011) Due to the thickness at the top of the skull, rather than the front, Stegoceras are believed to use flank-butting over head-butting because their skull can withstand more force at the dome than the front of the skull.
Recommended publications
  • A Neoceratopsian Dinosaur from the Early Cretaceous of Mongolia And
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01222-7 OPEN A neoceratopsian dinosaur from the early Cretaceous of Mongolia and the early evolution of ceratopsia ✉ Congyu Yu 1 , Albert Prieto-Marquez2, Tsogtbaatar Chinzorig 3,4, Zorigt Badamkhatan4,5 & Mark Norell1 1234567890():,; Ceratopsia is a diverse dinosaur clade from the Middle Jurassic to Late Cretaceous with early diversification in East Asia. However, the phylogeny of basal ceratopsians remains unclear. Here we report a new basal neoceratopsian dinosaur Beg tse based on a partial skull from Baruunbayan, Ömnögovi aimag, Mongolia. Beg is diagnosed by a unique combination of primitive and derived characters including a primitively deep premaxilla with four pre- maxillary teeth, a trapezoidal antorbital fossa with a poorly delineated anterior margin, very short dentary with an expanded and shallow groove on lateral surface, the derived presence of a robust jugal having a foramen on its anteromedial surface, and five equally spaced tubercles on the lateral ridge of the surangular. This is to our knowledge the earliest known occurrence of basal neoceratopsian in Mongolia, where this group was previously only known from Late Cretaceous strata. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that it is sister to all other neoceratopsian dinosaurs. 1 Division of Vertebrate Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, New York 10024, USA. 2 Institut Català de Paleontologia Miquel Crusafont, ICTA-ICP, Edifici Z, c/de les Columnes s/n Campus de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain. 3 Department of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA. 4 Institute of Paleontology, Mongolian Academy of Sciences, ✉ Ulaanbaatar 15160, Mongolia.
    [Show full text]
  • MEET the DINOSAURS! WHAT’S in a NAME? a LOT If You Are a Dinosaur!
    MEET THE DINOSAURS! WHAT’S IN A NAME? A LOT if you are a dinosaur! I will call you Dyoplosaurus! Most dinosaurs get their names from the ancient Greek and Latin languages. And I will call you Mojoceratops! And sometimes they are named after a defining feature on their body. Their names are made up of word parts that describe the dinosaur. The name must be sent to a special group of people called the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to be approved! Did You The word DINOSAUR comes from the Greek word meaning terrible lizard and was first said by Know? Sir Richard Owen in 1841. © 2013 Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium® | 3 SEE IF YOU CAN FIND OUT THE MEANING OF SOME OF OUR DINOSAUR’S NAMES. Dinosaur names are not just tough to pronounce, they often have meaning. Dinosaur Name MEANING of Dinosaur Name Carnotaurus (KAR-no-TORE-us) Means “flesh-eating bull” Spinosaurus (SPY-nuh-SORE-us) Dyoplosaurus (die-o-pluh-SOR-us) Amargasaurus (ah-MAR-guh-SORE-us) Omeisaurus (Oh-MY-ee-SORE-us) Pachycephalosaurus (pak-ee-SEF-uh-low-SORE-us) Tuojiangosaurus (toh-HWANG-uh-SORE-us) Yangchuanosaurus (Yang-chew-ON-uh-SORE-us) Quetzalcoatlus (KWET-zal-coe-AT-lus) Ouranosaurus (ooh-RAN-uh-SORE-us) Parasaurolophus (PAIR-uh-so-ROL-uh-PHUS) Kosmoceratops (KOZ-mo-SARA-tops) Mojoceratops (moe-joe-SEH-rah-tops) Triceratops (try-SER-uh-TOPS) Tyrannosaurus rex (tuh-RAN-uh-SORE-us) Find the answers by visiting the Resource Library at Carnotaurus A: www.OmahaZoo.com/Education. Search word: Dinosaurs 4 | © 2013 Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium® DINO DEFENSE All animals in the wild have to protect themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Offer Your Guests a Visually Stunning and Interactive Experience They Won’T Find Anywhere Else World of Animals
    Creative Arts & Attractions Offer Your Guests a Visually Stunning and Interactive Experience They Won’t Find Anywhere Else World of Animals Entertain guests with giant illuminated, eye-catching displays of animals from around the world. Animal displays are made in the ancient Eastern tradition of lantern-making with 3-D metal frames, fiberglass, and acrylic materials. Unique and captivating displays will provide families and friends with a lifetime of memories. Animatronic Dinosaurs Fascinate patrons with an impressive visual spectacle in our exhibitions. Featured with lifelike appearances, vivid movements and roaring sounds. From the very small to the gigantic dinosaurs, we have them all. Everything needed for a realistic and immersive experience for your patrons. Providing interactive options for your event including riding dinosaurs and dinosaur inflatable slides. Enhancing your merchandise stores with dinosaur balloons and toys. Animatronic Dinosaur Options Abelisaurus Maiasaura Acrocanthosaurus Megalosaurus Agilisaurus Olorotitan arharensis Albertosaurus Ornithomimus Allosaurus Ouranosaurus nigeriensis Ankylosaurus Oviraptor philoceratops Apatosaurus Pachycephalosaurus wyomingensis Archaeopteryx Parasaurolophus Baryonyx Plateosaurus Brachiosaurus Protoceratops andrewsi Carcharodontosaurus Pterosauria Carnotaurus Pteranodon longiceps Ceratosaurus Raptorex Coelophysis Rugops Compsognathus Spinosaurus Deinonychus Staurikosaurus pricei Dilophosaurus Stegoceras Diplodocus Stegosaurus Edmontosaurus Styracosaurus Eoraptor Lunensis Suchomimus
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Morphometric Techniques Applied to The
    UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS DE TELECOMUNICACIÓN ADVANCED MORPHOMETRIC TECHNIQUES APPLIED TO THE STUDY OF HUMAN BRAIN ANATOMY TESIS DOCTORAL Yasser Alemán Gómez Ingeniero en Tecnologías Nucleares y Energéticas Máster en Neurociencias Madrid, 2015 DEPARTAMENTO DE INGENIERÍA ELECTRÓNICA ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS DE TELECOMUNICACIÓN PHD THESIS ADVANCED MORPHOMETRIC TECHNIQUES APPLIED TO THE STUDY OF HUMAN BRAIN ANATOMY AUTHOR Yasser Alemán Gómez Ing. en Tecnologías Nucleares y Energéticas MSc en Neurociencias ADVISOR Manuel Desco Menéndez, MScE, MD, PhD Madrid, 2015 Departamento de Ingeniería Electrónica Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Ph.D. Thesis Advanced morphometric techniques applied to the study of human brain anatomy Tesis doctoral Técnicas avanzadas de morfometría aplicadas al estudio de la anatomía cerebral humana Author: Yasser Alemán Gómez Advisor: Manuel Desco Menéndez Committee: Andrés Santos Lleó Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Javier Pascau Gonzalez-Garzón Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Raymond Salvador Civil FIDMAG – Germanes Hospitalàries, Barcelona, Spain Pablo Campo Martínez-Lage Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Juan Domingo Gispert López Universidad Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain María Jesús Ledesma Carbayo Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Juan José Vaquero López Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Esta Tesis ha sido desarrollada en el Laboratorio de Imagen Médica de la Unidad de Medicina y Cirugía Experimental del Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón y en colaboración con el Servicio de Psiquiatría del Niño y del Adolescente del Departamento de Psiquiatría del Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón de Madrid, España. Tribunal nombrado por el Sr.
    [Show full text]
  • At Carowinds
    at Carowinds EDUCATOR’S GUIDE CLASSROOM LESSON PLANS & FIELD TRIP ACTIVITIES Table of Contents at Carowinds Introduction The Field Trip ................................... 2 The Educator’s Guide ....................... 3 Field Trip Activity .................................. 4 Lesson Plans Lesson 1: Form and Function ........... 6 Lesson 2: Dinosaur Detectives ....... 10 Lesson 3: Mesozoic Math .............. 14 Lesson 4: Fossil Stories.................. 22 Games & Puzzles Crossword Puzzles ......................... 29 Logic Puzzles ................................. 32 Word Searches ............................... 37 Answer Keys ...................................... 39 Additional Resources © 2012 Dinosaurs Unearthed Recommended Reading ................. 44 All rights reserved. Except for educational fair use, no portion of this guide may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any Dinosaur Data ................................ 45 means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other without Discovering Dinosaurs .................... 52 explicit prior permission from Dinosaurs Unearthed. Multiple copies may only be made by or for the teacher for class use. Glossary .............................................. 54 Content co-created by TurnKey Education, Inc. and Dinosaurs Unearthed, 2012 Standards www.turnkeyeducation.net www.dinosaursunearthed.com Curriculum Standards .................... 59 Introduction The Field Trip From the time of the first exhibition unveiled in 1854 at the Crystal
    [Show full text]
  • A Phylogenetic Analysis of the Basal Ornithischia (Reptilia, Dinosauria)
    A PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF THE BASAL ORNITHISCHIA (REPTILIA, DINOSAURIA) Marc Richard Spencer A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December 2007 Committee: Margaret M. Yacobucci, Advisor Don C. Steinker Daniel M. Pavuk © 2007 Marc Richard Spencer All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Margaret M. Yacobucci, Advisor The placement of Lesothosaurus diagnosticus and the Heterodontosauridae within the Ornithischia has been problematic. Historically, Lesothosaurus has been regarded as a basal ornithischian dinosaur, the sister taxon to the Genasauria. Recent phylogenetic analyses, however, have placed Lesothosaurus as a more derived ornithischian within the Genasauria. The Fabrosauridae, of which Lesothosaurus was considered a member, has never been phylogenetically corroborated and has been considered a paraphyletic assemblage. Prior to recent phylogenetic analyses, the problematic Heterodontosauridae was placed within the Ornithopoda as the sister taxon to the Euornithopoda. The heterodontosaurids have also been considered as the basal member of the Cerapoda (Ornithopoda + Marginocephalia), the sister taxon to the Marginocephalia, and as the sister taxon to the Genasauria. To reevaluate the placement of these taxa, along with other basal ornithischians and more derived subclades, a phylogenetic analysis of 19 taxonomic units, including two outgroup taxa, was performed. Analysis of 97 characters and their associated character states culled, modified, and/or rescored from published literature based on published descriptions, produced four most parsimonious trees. Consistency and retention indices were calculated and a bootstrap analysis was performed to determine the relative support for the resultant phylogeny. The Ornithischia was recovered with Pisanosaurus as its basalmost member.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule Booklet
    Dig for fossils, build skeletons, and attract the most visitors to your museum! TM SCAN FOR VIDEO RULES AND MORE! FOSSILCANYON.COM Dinosaurs of North America edimentary rock formations of western North America are famous for the fossilized remains of dinosaurs The rules are simple enough for young players, but and other animals from the Triassic, Jurassic, and serious players can benefit Cretaceous periods of the Mesozoic Era. Your objective from keeping track of the cards that is to dig up fossils, build complete skeletons, and display have appeared, reasoning about them in your museum to attract as many visitors as possible. probabilities and expected returns, and choosing between aggressive Watch your museum’s popularity grow using jigsaw-puzzle and conservative plays. scoring that turns the competition into a race! GAME CONTENTS TM 200,000300,000 160,000 VISITORS VISITORS PER YEAR 140,000 VISITORS PER YEAR 180,000 VISITORS PER YEAR 400,000 VISITORS PER YEAR Dig for fossils, build skeletons, and 340,000 VISITORS PER YEAR RD COLOR ELETONS CA GENUS PERIODDIET SK FOSSIL VISITORSPARTS 360,000 VISITORS PER YEAR PER YEAR attract the most visitors to your museum! VISITORS PER YEAR PER YEAR Tyrannosaurus K C 1 4 500,000 Brachiosaurus J H 1 3 400,000 ON YOUR TURN: TM SCAN FOR VIDEO Triceratops K H 1 3 380,000 RULES AND MORE! Allosaurus J C 2 Dig3 a first360,000 card. If it is a fossil, keep it hidden. FOSSILCANYON.COM Ankylosaurus K H 2 If it3 is an340,000 action card, perform the action.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating Sexual Dimorphism in Ceratopsid Horncores
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2013-01-25 Investigating Sexual Dimorphism in Ceratopsid Horncores Borkovic, Benjamin Borkovic, B. (2013). Investigating Sexual Dimorphism in Ceratopsid Horncores (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/26635 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/498 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Investigating Sexual Dimorphism in Ceratopsid Horncores by Benjamin Borkovic A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES CALGARY, ALBERTA JANUARY, 2013 © Benjamin Borkovic 2013 Abstract Evidence for sexual dimorphism was investigated in the horncores of two ceratopsid dinosaurs, Triceratops and Centrosaurus apertus. A review of studies of sexual dimorphism in the vertebrate fossil record revealed methods that were selected for use in ceratopsids. Mountain goats, bison, and pronghorn were selected as exemplar taxa for a proof of principle study that tested the selected methods, and informed and guided the investigation of sexual dimorphism in dinosaurs. Skulls of these exemplar taxa were measured in museum collections, and methods of analysing morphological variation were tested for their ability to demonstrate sexual dimorphism in their horns and horncores.
    [Show full text]
  • The Utility of Geometric Morphometrics to Elucidate Pathways of Cichlid Fish Evolution
    SAGE-Hindawi Access to Research International Journal of Evolutionary Biology Volume 2011, Article ID 290245, 8 pages doi:10.4061/2011/290245 Review Article The Utility of Geometric Morphometrics to Elucidate Pathways of Cichlid Fish Evolution Michaela Kerschbaumer and Christian Sturmbauer Department of Zoology, Karl-Franzens University of Graz, Universit¨atsplatz 2, 8010 Graz, Austria Correspondence should be addressed to Michaela Kerschbaumer, [email protected] Received 22 December 2010; Accepted 29 March 2011 Academic Editor: Tetsumi Takahashi Copyright © 2011 M. Kerschbaumer and C. Sturmbauer. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Fishes of the family Cichlidae are famous for their spectacular species flocks and therefore constitute a model system for the study of the pathways of adaptive radiation. Their radiation is connected to trophic specialization, manifested in dentition, head morphology, and body shape. Geometric morphometric methods have been established as efficient tools to quantify such differences in overall body shape or in particular morphological structures and meanwhile found wide application in evolutionary biology. As a common feature, these approaches define and analyze coordinates of anatomical landmarks, rather than traditional counts or measurements. Geometric morphometric methods have several merits compared to traditional morphometrics, particularly for the distinction and analysis of closely related entities. Cichlid evolutionary research benefits from the efficiency of data acquisition, the manifold opportunities of analyses, and the potential to visualize shape changes of those landmark-based methods. This paper briefly introduces to the concepts and methods of geometric morphometrics and presents a selection of publications where those techniques have been successfully applied to various aspects of cichlid fish diversification.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revision of the Ceratopsia Or Horned Dinosaurs
    MEMOIRS OF THE PEABODY MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY VOLUME III, 1 A.R1 A REVISION orf tneth< CERATOPSIA OR HORNED DINOSAURS BY RICHARD SWANN LULL STERLING PROFESSOR OF PALEONTOLOGY AND DIRECTOR OF PEABODY MUSEUM, YALE UNIVERSITY LVXET NEW HAVEN, CONN. *933 MEMOIRS OF THE PEABODY MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY YALE UNIVERSITY Volume I. Odontornithes: A Monograph on the Extinct Toothed Birds of North America. By Othniel Charles Marsh. Pp. i-ix, 1-201, pis. 1-34, text figs. 1-40. 1880. To be obtained from the Peabody Museum. Price $3. Volume II. Part 1. Brachiospongidae : A Memoir on a Group of Silurian Sponges. By Charles Emerson Beecher. Pp. 1-28, pis. 1-6, text figs. 1-4. 1889. To be obtained from the Peabody Museum. Price $1. Volume III. Part 1. American Mesozoic Mammalia. By George Gaylord Simp- son. Pp. i-xvi, 1-171, pis. 1-32, text figs. 1-62. 1929. To be obtained from the Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. Price $5. Part 2. A Remarkable Ground Sloth. By Richard Swann Lull. Pp. i-x, 1-20, pis. 1-9, text figs. 1-3. 1929. To be obtained from the Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. Price $1. Part 3. A Revision of the Ceratopsia or Horned Dinosaurs. By Richard Swann Lull. Pp. i-xii, 1-175, pis. I-XVII, text figs. 1-42. 1933. To be obtained from the Peabody Museum. Price $5 (bound in cloth), $4 (bound in paper). Part 4. The Merycoidodontidae, an Extinct Group of Ruminant Mammals. By Malcolm Rutherford Thorpe. In preparation.
    [Show full text]
  • Histology and Ontogeny of Pachyrhinosaurus Nasal Bosses By
    Histology and Ontogeny of Pachyrhinosaurus Nasal Bosses by Elizabeth Kruk A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Systematics and Evolution Department of Biological Sciences University of Alberta © Elizabeth Kruk, 2015 Abstract Pachyrhinosaurus is a peculiar ceratopsian known only from Upper Cretaceous strata of Alberta and the North Slope of Alaska. The genus consists of three described species Pachyrhinosaurus canadensis, Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai, and Pachyrhinosaurus perotorum that are distinguishable by cranial characteristics, including parietal horn shape and orientation, absence/presence of a rostral comb, median parietal bar horns, and profile of the nasal boss. A fourth species of Pachyrhinosaurus is described herein and placed into its phylogenetic context within Centrosaurinae. This new species forms a polytomy at the crown with Pachyrhinosaurus canadensis and Pachyrhinosaurus perotorum, with Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai falling basal to that polytomy. The diagnostic features of this new species are an apomorphic, laterally curved Process 3 horns and a thick longitudinal ridge separating the supraorbital bosses. Another focus is investigating the ontogeny of Pachyrhinosaurus nasal bosses in a histological context. Previously, little work has been done on cranial histology in ceratopsians, focusing instead on potential integumentary structures, the parietals of Triceratops, and how surface texture relates to underlying histological structures. An ontogenetic series is established for the nasal bosses of Pachyrhinosaurus at both relative (subadult versus adult) and fine scale (Stages 1-5). It was demonstrated that histology alone can indicate relative ontogenetic level, but not stages of a finer scale. Through Pachyrhinosaurus ontogeny the nasal boss undergoes increased vascularity and secondary remodeling with a reduction in osteocyte lacunar density.
    [Show full text]
  • A Practical Introduction to Landmark-Based Geometric Morphometrics
    A PRACTICAL INTRODUCTION TO LANDMARK-BASED GEOMETRIC MORPHOMETRICS MARK WEBSTER Department of the Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago, 5734 South Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637 and H. DAVID SHEETS Department of Physics, Canisius College, 2001 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14208 ABSTRACT.—Landmark-based geometric morphometrics is a powerful approach to quantifying biological shape, shape variation, and covariation of shape with other biotic or abiotic variables or factors. The resulting graphical representations of shape differences are visually appealing and intuitive. This paper serves as an introduction to common exploratory and confirmatory techniques in landmark-based geometric morphometrics. The issues most frequently faced by (paleo)biologists conducting studies of comparative morphology are covered. Acquisition of landmark and semilandmark data is discussed. There are several methods for superimposing landmark configu- rations, differing in how and in the degree to which among-configuration differences in location, scale, and size are removed. Partial Procrustes superimposition is the most widely used superimposition method and forms the basis for many subsequent operations in geometric morphometrics. Shape variation among superimposed con- figurations can be visualized as a scatter plot of landmark coordinates, as vectors of landmark displacement, as a thin-plate spline deformation grid, or through a principal components analysis of landmark coordinates or warp scores. The amount of difference in shape between two configurations can be quantified as the partial Procrustes distance; and shape variation within a sample can be quantified as the average partial Procrustes distance from the sample mean. Statistical testing of difference in mean shape between samples using warp scores as variables can be achieved through a standard Hotelling’s T2 test, MANOVA, or canonical variates analysis (CVA).
    [Show full text]