Elbow‐joint morphology as a guide to forearm function and foraging behaviour in mammalian carnivores

126 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

The shape of the mandibular corpus in large fissiped carnivores: allometry, function and phylogeny (2008, methodology): “Within the order Carnivora, many of these techniques have been successfully applied to clarify the co-evolution of morphological (Garland et al., 1992, 1993; Ortolani & Caro, 1996; Polly, 1998, 2001, 2002; MacLeod, 2001; Andersson, 2004; Christiansen & Wroe, 2007), physiological (McKitrick, 1993; Gi”
Craniodental indicators of prey size preference in the Felidae (2009, background): “Although there has been some work on the relationship between habitat and limb morphology in felids (Gonyea & Ashworth, 1975; Gonyea, 1978; Van Valkenburgh, 1987; Russell & Bryant, 2001; Andersson & Werdelin, 2003; Andersson, 2004), less attention has been paid to diet and craniodental morphology.”
Déjà vu: the evolution of feeding morphologies in the Carnivora (2007, background): “Unlike felids or nimravids, whose forelimbs grasp and hold prey, canids and hyaenids must kill with jaws and teeth alone as they have lost the ability to supinate their paws (Ewer 1973; Andersson and Werdelin 2003; Andersson 2004).”