Page 168 - Introduction to Paleobiology and The Fossil Record
P. 168

FOSSIL FORM AND FUNCTION  155


             the knee at mid-stance and this would require   hypotheses. Clues about the lifestyle of an
             the muscles at the back of the leg to act in    ancient plant or animal may come from the
             order to balance the force in front. Living     enclosing rocks, associated fossil remains,
             animals do not do this, so there is no reason   associated trace fossils and particular features
             to assume that extinct ones did. Crouched       of the body fossils themselves. These can be
             poses are ruled out too because the knee        grouped as circumstantial evidence.
             moment arm would have been too long and
             the knee muscle moment too high:  T. rex        1  Fossils are generally preserved in sedimen-
             would have had to have muscles relatively          tary rocks, and these record all kinds of
             much larger than those of a chicken to cope.       features about the conditions of deposi-
             So the real T. rex probably stood and moved        tion. Fossil plants may be found at certain
             somewhere between these columnar and               levels in a cyclical succession that tells a
             crouched extremes (Fig. 6.13g), which still        story of the repeated buildup of an ancient

             leaves a large area of possibilities that cannot   delta as it fingers into the sea, the develop-
             be excluded.                                       ment of soils and forests on top, and its

                                                                eventual flooding by a particularly high
                                                                sea level. Marine invertebrates may be
             Circumstantial evidence
                                                                found in rocks that indicate deposition in
             Paleontologists are inquisitive by nature and      a shallow lagoon, offshore from a reef, on
             they gather evidence of all kinds to test their    the deep abyssal plain or many other







                      Box 6.5  Finite element analysis of the skull of Tyrannosaurus rex


               Emily Rayfield of the University of Bristol (England) had a dream PhD project, to work out how

               the skulls of the theropod dinosaurs worked, using finite element analysis (FEA). In FEA, the struc-
               ture is modeled in the computer and its strength characteristics entered. Then the whole three-
               dimensional shape, however complex, is converted into a network of small triangular or cuboid cells,
               or elements. When forces are applied (a side wind on a skyscraper, a bite force on a skull or jaw
               bone) the elements respond and the effect can be seen. In Rayfield’s FEA model of a dinosaur skull,

               as the bite force increases, the zone of element distortion increases and it becomes clear why the
               skull is shaped the way it is.
                  In one of her studies, Rayfi eld (2004) attacked the skull of T. rex (Fig. 6.12a). She tried to resolve
               a paradox that had been noted before: while T. rex is assumed to have been capable of producing

               extremely powerful bite forces, the skull bones are quite loosely articulated. Rayfield applied FEA
               to assess whether the T. rex skull is optimized for the resistance of large biting forces, and how the
               mobile joints between the skull bones functioned. She studied all the available skulls and constructed
               a mesh of triangular elements (Fig. 6.12b). Bite forces of 31,000 to 78,060 newtons were applied
               to individual teeth, and the distortion of the element mesh observed (Fig. 6.12c). The bite forces had
               been taken from calculations by other paleobiologists, and from observations of tooth puncture
               marks (a piece of bone bitten by T. rex showed the tooth had penetrated the bone to a depth of
               11.5 mm, equivalent to a force of 13,400 newtons or about 1.5 tons).

                  Rayfield’s results show that the skull is equally adapted to resist biting or tearing forces and therefore
               the classic “puncture–pull” feeding hypothesis, in which T. rex bites into fl esh and tears back, is well
               supported. Major stresses of biting acted through the pillar-like parts of the skull and the nasal bones
               on top of the snout, and the loose connections between the bones in the cheek region allowed small
               movements during the bite, acting as “shock absorbers” to protect other skull structures.

                  Read about dinosaur feeding behavior in Barrett and Rayfield (2006) and about fi nite element
               analysis in Rayfield (2007) and at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/paleobiology/.

                                                                                                 Continued
   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173