0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Rhythmic chew cycles with distinct fast and slow phases are ancestral to gnathostomes

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Intra-oral food processing, including chewing, is important for safe swallowing and efficient nutrient assimilation across tetrapods. Gape cycles in tetrapod chewing consist of four phases (fast open and -close, and slow open and -close), with processing mainly occurring during slow close. Basal aquatic-feeding vertebrates also process food intraorally, but whether their chew cycles are partitioned into distinct phases, and how rhythmic their chewing is, remains unknown. Here, we show that chew cycles from sharks to salamanders are as rhythmic as those of mammals, and consist of at least three, and often four phases, with phase distinction occasionally lacking during jaw opening. In fishes and aquatic-feeding salamanders, fast open has the most variable duration, more closely resembling mammals than basal amniotes (lepidosaurs). Across ontogenetically or behaviourally mediated terrestrialization, salamanders show a distinct pattern of the second closing phase (near-contact) being faster than the first, with no clear pattern in partitioning of variability across phases. Our results suggest that distinct fast and slow chew cycle phases are ancestral for jawed vertebrates, followed by a complicated evolutionary history of cycle phase durations and jaw velocities across fishes, basal tetrapods and mammals. These results raise new questions about the mechanical and sensorimotor underpinnings of vertebrate food processing.

          This article is part of the theme issue ‘Food processing and nutritional assimilation in animals’.

          Related collections

          Most cited references78

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          On the means whereby mammals achieve increased functional durability of their dentitions, with special reference to limiting factors.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validation of XMALab software for marker-based XROMM.

            Marker-based XROMM requires software tools for: (1) correcting fluoroscope distortion; (2) calibrating X-ray cameras; (3) tracking radio-opaque markers; and (4) calculating rigid body motion. In this paper we describe and validate XMALab, a new open-source software package for marker-based XROMM (C++ source and compiled versions on Bitbucket). Most marker-based XROMM studies to date have used XrayProject in MATLAB. XrayProject can produce results with excellent accuracy and precision, but it is somewhat cumbersome to use and requires a MATLAB license. We have designed XMALab to accelerate the XROMM process and to make it more accessible to new users. Features include the four XROMM steps (listed above) in one cohesive user interface, real-time plot windows for detecting errors, and integration with an online data management system, XMAPortal. Accuracy and precision of XMALab when tracking markers in a machined object are ±0.010 and ±0.043 mm, respectively. Mean precision for nine users tracking markers in a tutorial dataset of minipig feeding was ±0.062 mm in XMALab and ±0.14 mm in XrayProject. Reproducibility of 3D point locations across nine users was 10-fold greater in XMALab than in XrayProject, and six degree-of-freedom bone motions calculated with a joint coordinate system were 3- to 6-fold more reproducible in XMALab. XMALab is also suitable for tracking white or black markers in standard light videos with optional checkerboard calibration. We expect XMALab to increase both the quality and quantity of animal motion data available for comparative biomechanics research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dental enamel as a dietary indicator in mammals.

              The considerable variation in shape, size, structure and properties of the enamel cap covering mammalian teeth is a topic of great evolutionary interest. No existing theories explain how such variations might be fit for the purpose of breaking food particles down. Borrowing from engineering materials science, we use principles of fracture and deformation of solids to provide a quantitative account of how mammalian enamel may be adapted to diet. Particular attention is paid to mammals that feed on 'hard objects' such as seeds and dry fruits, the outer casings of which appear to have evolved structures with properties similar to those of enamel. These foods are important in the diets of some primates, and have been heavily implicated as a key factor in the evolutionary history of the hominin clade. As a tissue with intrinsic weakness yet exceptional durability, enamel could be especially useful as a dietary indicator for extinct taxa.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
                Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B
                The Royal Society
                0962-8436
                1471-2970
                December 04 2023
                October 16 2023
                December 04 2023
                : 378
                : 1891
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biological Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Lowell, MA 01954, USA
                [2 ]Department of Paleontology, State Museum of Natural History, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
                [3 ]Institute of Zoology and Evolutionary Research, Friedrich Schiller University, 07743 Jena, Germany
                [4 ]Biology Department, Westfield State University, Westfield, MA 01086, USA
                [5 ]Department of Organismic Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
                Article
                10.1098/rstb.2022.0539
                a9f14af8-d361-4eb8-81be-010428949472
                © 2023

                https://royalsociety.org/journals/ethics-policies/data-sharing-mining/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article