Evolution of bite performance in turtles

By Anthony Herrel, J. C. O’Reilly, A. Richmond. 2002

204 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Among vertebrates, there is often a tight correlation between variation in cranial morphology and diet. Yet, the relationships between morphological characteristics and feeding performance are usually only inferred from biomechanical models. Here, we empirically test whether differences in body dimensions are correlated with bite performance and trophic ecology for a large number of turtle species. A comparative phylogenetic analysis indicates that turtles with carnivorous and durophagous diets are capable of biting harder than species with other diets. This pattern is consistent with the hypothesis that an evolutionary increase in bite performance has allowed certain turtles to consume harder or larger prey. Changes in carapace length tend to be associated with proportional changes in linear head dimensions (no shape change). However, maximum bite force tends to change in proportion to length cubed, rather than length squared, implying that changes in body size are associated with changes in the design of the jaw apparatus. After the effect of body size is accounted for in the analysis, only changes in head height are significantly correlated with changes in bite force. Additionally, our data suggest that the ability to bite hard might trade off with the ability to feed on fast agile prey. Rather than being the direct result of conflicting biomechanical or physiological demands for force and speed, this trade‐off may be mediated through the constraints imposed by the need to retract the head into the shell for defensive purposes.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/792539434529330ff6c1ec542c90d5d9dc084259

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Beaks, Adaptation, and Vocal Evolution in Darwin's Finches (2004, background): “In vertebrate motor systems, evolutionary increases in force can be accomplished through modification of either biomechanical structure or muscle architecture (Herrel et al. 2002).”
Phylogenetic approaches in comparative physiology (2005, background): “…with body size (e.g. Garland, 1994; Reynolds and Lee, 1996; Williams, 1996; Clobert et al., 1998; Garland and Ives, 2000; Nunn and Barton, 2000; Herrel et al., 2002; Perry and Garland, 2002; Rezende et al., 2002, 2004; Schleucher and Withers, 2002; McGuire, 2003; Al-kahtani et al., 2004;…”
DIETARY HARDNESS, LOADING BEHAVIOR, AND THE EVOLUTION OF SKULL FORM IN BATS (2012, background): “Functional characterizations of ecological differences have proven useful in understanding the link between ecology and morphology (Losos 1992; Herrel et al. 2002; Huber et al. 2005; Herrel and Holanova 2008).”
Bird Song: The Interface of Evolution and Mechanism (2004, unknown): “A stronger argument for evolutionary constraints on behavior can be made through functional analysis of proximate mechanisms such as neural organization and biomechanical performance (e.g., Garland & Losos 1994, Herrel et al. 2002).”
Force–velocity trade‐off in Darwin's finch jaw function: a biomechanical basis for ecological speciation? (2009, background): “Our study focuses on another potential biomechanical tradeoff in musculo-skeletal systems – that is between force and velocity (e.g. Westneat 1994; Paul & Gronenberg 1999; Herrel et al. 2002, Levinton & Allen 2005).”
Bite force in vertebrates: opportunities and caveats for use of a nonpareil whole-animal performance measure (2008, background): “Differences among species of bats and birds in the size and hardness of prey (i.e. prey types) eaten, directly correlated with differences in bite forces (Aguirre et al., 2002, 2003; Herrel et al., 2002, 2004; Van der Meij, Griekspoor & Bout, 2004b).”