Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T06:47:37.151Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feeding the Mechanical Mosasaur: what did Carinodens eat?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

A.S. Schulp
A.S. Schulp*
Affiliation:
Natuurhistorisch Museum Maastricht, De Bosquetplein 6, NL-6211 KJ Maastricht, the Netherlands. Email: anne.schulp@maastricht.nl Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Carinodens is among the smallest known mosasaurs, and one of the most elusive at that. This enigmatic taxon is known from only two dentary fragments and just over a dozen of isolated teeth. Based on this material, an attempt is made to improve our understanding of the dietary habits of this mosasaur, by comparing tooth and jaw morphology to extant analogues, and by testing a biomechanical model with ‘feeding’ experiments using an artificial mosasaur jaw equipped with a force gauge. Carinodens appears to have been a durophagous mosasaur, capable of crushing small molluscs and arthropods, although its dietary habits may not necessarily have been limited to hard-shelled food.

Keywords

biomechanicsCarinodensCretaceousdietmosasaurs
Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 84 , Special Issue 3: Proceedings of the First Mosasaur Meeting , September 2005 , pp. 345 - 357
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2005

References

Abler, W.L., 1992. The serrated teeth of tyrannosaurid dinosaurs, and biting structures in other animals. Paleobiology 18: 161–183.Google Scholar
Antunes, M.T., 1964. 0 Neocretácico e o Cenozóico do Litoral de Angola. Junta de Investigates do Ultramar (Lisbon): 255 pp.Google Scholar
Arambourg, C., 1952. Les vertébrés fossiles des gisements de phosphates (MarocAlgérie-Tunisie). Notes et Mémoires du Service géologique du Maroc 92:1–372.Google Scholar
Avnimelech, M., 1949. On Vertebrate Remains in Senonian Phosphate Beds in Transjordan. Eclogae geologicae Helvetiae 42: 486–490.Google Scholar
Bell, G.L. Jr., 1997. Mosasauridae. Introduction. In: Callaway, J.M. & Nicholls, E.L. (eds): Ancient Marine Reptiles. Academic Press (New York/London): 281–292.Google Scholar
Bell, G.L. Jr. & Martin, J.E., 1995. Direct evidence of aggressive intraspecific competition in Mosasaurus conodon (Mosasauridae: Squamata). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 15 (suppl. to 3): 18A.Google Scholar
Bjork, P.R., 1981. Food habits of mosasaurs from the Pierre Shale of South Dakota. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program 13: 191 (Rocky Mountains Section, Rapid City, SD).Google Scholar
Caldwell, M.W., 1999. Squamate phylogeny and the relationships of snakes and mosasauroids. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 125: 115–147.Google Scholar
Davidson, A., 1972. Mediterranean Seafood. Penguin (London): 425 pp.Google Scholar
Davidson, A., 1979. North Atlantic Seafood. Macmillan (London): 512 pp.Google Scholar
Dollo, L., 1913. Globidens Fraasi, mosasaurien mylodonte nouveau du Maestrichtien (Crétacé supérieur) du Limbourg, et l’Ethologie de la Nutrition chez les Mosasauriens. Archives de Biologie 28: 609–626.Google Scholar
Dollo, L., 1924. Globidens alabamaensis, Mosasaurien mylodonte américain retrouvé dans le Craie d’Obourg (Sénonien supérieur) du Hainaut, et les Mosasauriens de la Belgique, en général. Archives de Biologie 34: 167–213.Google Scholar
Dortangs, R.W., Schulp, A.S., Mulder, E.W.A., Jagt, J.W.M., Peeters, H.H.G. & de Graaf, D.Th., 2002. A large new mosasaur from the Upper Cretaceous of the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 81: 1–8.Google Scholar
Dumont, E.R. & Herrel, A., 2003. The effect of gape angle and bite point on bite force in bats. The Journal of Experimental Biology 206: 2117–2123.Google Scholar
Erickson, G.M., 2001. The bite of Allosaurus. Nature 409: 987–988.Google Scholar
Erickson, G.M., Van Kirk, S.D., Su, J., Levenston, M.E., Caler, W.E. & Carter, D.R., 1996. Bite-force estimation for Tyrannosaurus rex from tooth-marked bones. Nature 382: 706–708.Google Scholar
Felder, W.M., Felder, P.J., Kuyl, O.S., VanAmerom, H.W.J., Bosch, P.W. & Meessen, J.P.M.T., 1978. Paläontologische Gesellschaft-Palaeontological Association, Joint Annual Meeting, Maastricht 25.10.1978, Excursion, G.Lithology and stratigraphy of the Maastrichtian and Dano/Montian chalk in the type area on both sides of the River Maas, pp. 65–94. Maastricht.Google Scholar
Frazzetta, T.H., 1962. A functional consideration of cranial kinesis in lizards. Journal of Morphology 111: 287–319.Google Scholar
Gilmore, C.W., 1912. A new Mosasauroid reptile from the Cretaceous of Alabama. Proceedings of the Unites States National Museum 41: 479–484.Google Scholar
Herrel, A., Aerts, P., & De Vree, F., 1998a. Ecomorphology of the lizard feeding apparatus: a modelling approach. Netherlands Journal of Zoology 48: 1–25.Google Scholar
Herrel, A., Aerts, P., & De Vree, F., 1998b. Static biting in lizards: functional morphology of the temporal ligaments. Journal of the Zoological Society of London 244: 135–143.Google Scholar
Jagt, J.W.M., Dortangs, R.W. & Mulder, E.W.A., 2000. First appearance of the mosasaur Carinodens belgicus (Woodward, 1891) in the type Maastrichtian. Fifth European Workshop on Vertebrate Paleontology, Karlsruhe (Abstracts): 37.Google Scholar
Kauffman, E.G., 2004. Mosasaur Prédation on Upper Cretaceous Nautiloids and Ammonites from the United States Pacific Coast. Palaios 19: 96–100.Google Scholar
Kowalewski, M. & Nebelsick, J.H., 2003. Predation on Recent and Fossil Echinoids. In: Kelley, P.H., Kowalewski, M. & Hansen, T.A. (eds): PredatorPrey Interactions in the Fossil record (Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York): 279–302.Google Scholar
Kuypers, M.M.M., Jagt, J.W.M., Peeters, H.H.G. & de Graaf, D.Th., 1998. Laatkretaceische mosasauriers uit Luik-Limburg: nieuwe vondsten leiden tot nieuwe inzichten. Publicaties van het Natuurhistorisch Genootschap in Limburg 41: 5–48.Google Scholar
Lingham-Soliar, T., 1995. Anatomy and functional morphology of the largest marine reptile known, Mosasaurus hoffmanni (Mosasauridae, Reptilia) from the Upper Cretaceous, Upper Maastrichtian of the Netherlands. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B347: 155–180.Google Scholar
Lingham-Soliar, T., 1999. The Durophagous Mosasaurs (Lepidosauromorpha, Squamata) Globidens and Carinodens from the Upper Cretaceous of Belgium and the Netherlands. Paleontological Journal 33: 638–647.Google Scholar
Lingham-Soliar, T. & Nolf, D., 1990. The mosasaur Prognathodon (Reptilia: Mosasauridae) from the Upper Cretaceous of Belgium. Bulletin de l’Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Sciences de la Terre 59 (1989): 137–190.Google Scholar
Martin, J.E., 1994. Gastric residues in marine reptiles from the Late Cretaceous Pierre Shale in South Dakota: their bearing on extinction. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 14(suppl. to 3): 36A.Google Scholar
Martin, J.E. & Bjork, P.R., 1987. Gastric residues associated with a mosasaur from the Late Cretaceous (Campanian) Pierre Shale in South Dakota. In: Martin, J.E., Ostrander, G.E. (eds): Papers in Vertebrate Paleontology in honor of Morton Green. Dakoterra 3: 68–72.Google Scholar
Martin, J.M. & Fox, J.E., 2004. Molluscs in the stomach contents of Globidens, a shell crushing mosasaur, from the Late Cretaceous Pierre Shale, Big Bend area of the Missouri River, central South Dakota. Geological Society of America, 2004 Rocky Mountain and Cordilleran Regions Joint Meeting, Abstracts with Programs, 36(4): 80.Google Scholar
Massare, J.A., 1987. Tooth morphology and prey preference of Mesozoic marine reptiles. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 7: 121–137.Google Scholar
Massare, J.A., 1997. Faunas, behaviour, and evolution. Introduction. In: Callaway, J.M. & Nicholls, E.L. (eds): Ancient Marine Reptiles. Academic Press (San Diego): 401–421.Google Scholar
Meijer, A.W.F., 1982. Over de wenselijkheid om Carinodens belgicus (Woodward, 1892) (Reptilia, Mosasauridae) van de faunalijst van de Limburgse Krijtafzettingen af te voeren. Natuurhistorisch Maandblad 71: 215–216.Google Scholar
Metzger, K., 2002. Cranial Kinesis in Lepidosaurs: Skulls in Motion. In: Aerts, P., D’Août, K., Herrel, A. & Van Damme, R. (eds): Topics in Functional and Ecological Vertebrate Morphology. Shaker Publishing (Maastricht): 15–46.Google Scholar
Mulder, E.W.A., 2003. Comparative osteology, palaeoecology and systematics of the Late Cretaceous turtle Allopleuron hofmanni (Gray 1831) from the Maastrichtian type area. In: Mulder, E.W.A., 2003: On latest Cretaceous tetrapods from the Maastrichtian type area. Publicaties van het Natuurhistorisch Genootschap in Limburg 46(1): 23–92.Google Scholar
Peyer, B., 1929. Das Gebiss von Varanus niloticus L. und von Dracaena guianensis Daud. Revue Suisse de Zoologie 36: 71–102.Google Scholar
Price, L.I., 1957. A presença de Globidens no Cretàcico superior do Brasil. Boletim da Divisão de Geologia e Mineralogia 169: 1–24.Google Scholar
Rayfleld, E.J., Horman, D.B., Homer, C.C., Homer, J.R., Smith, P.M., Thomason, J.J. & Upchurch, P., 2001. Cranial design and function in a large theropod dinosaur. Nature 409: 1033–1037.Google Scholar
Russell, D.A., 1964. Intracranial mobility in mosasaurs. Postilla 86: 1–19.Google Scholar
Russell, D.A., 1967. Systematics and Morphology of American Mosasaurs. Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University 23: 241 pp.Google Scholar
Russell, D.A., 1975. A New Species of Globidens from South Dakota, and a Review of Globidentine Mosasaurs. Fieldiana 33: 235–256.Google Scholar
Schulp, A.S., Jagt, J.W.M. & Fonken, F., 2004. New material of the mosasaur Carinodens belgicus from the Upper Cretaceous of The Netherlands. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 24: 744–747.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A.G. & Alexander, R.McN., 1987. Estimates of forces exerted by the jaw muscles of some reptiles. Journal of Zoology 213: 107–115.Google Scholar
Therrien, F., Henderson, D.M. & Ruff, C.B., 2003. Biomechanical models of theropod mandibles and implications for feeding behavior. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 23 (suppl. to 3): 103.Google Scholar
Therrien, F., Henderson, D.M. & Ruff, C.B., in press. Bite me: Biomechanical models of theropod mandibles and implications for feeding behavior. In: Carpenter, K. (ed.): The Carnivorous Dinosaurs. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Tzankov, V., 1939. Note sur la présence des reptiles fossiles du Crétacé supérieur de la Bulgarie du Nord. Geologica Balkanica 3: 13–20.Google Scholar
Vonhof, H.B. & Smit, J., 1996. Strontium-isotope stratigraphy of the type Maastrichtian and the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary in the Maastricht area (SE Netherlands). In: Brinkhuis, H. & Smit, J. (eds): The Geulhemmerberg Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary section (Maastrichtian type area, SE Netherlands). Geologie en Mijnbouw 75: 275–282.Google Scholar
Williston, S.W., 1898. Mosasaurs. The University Geological Survey of Kansas 4: 83–221.Google Scholar
Williston, S.W., 1914. Water reptiles of the past and present. Chicago University Press (Chicago): 251 pp.Google Scholar