Fossil footprints appear in a variety of preservational states, each revealing a different morphology that can give rise to misidentification and misinterpretations. Comparative ichnological work was conducted using living emus (Dromaius novaehollandiae). It was clearly demonstrated that the morphological variation that occurred in footprints of the same animal, walking in the same manner, was caused by variation in substrate consistency. Dry sand substrates are unlikely to preserve any anatomical details of the foot, whereas damp sand or mud of firm consistency preserves a high level of anatomical detail. The finest anatomical details, such as skin impressions, are only preserved in firm mud or clay. In semi-fluid to fluid mud the track walls collapse, destroying the shape of the footprint. Increased speed of progression affects the shape of the footprint dramatically as the distal ends of the digits become more deeply impressed in the substrate during acceleration. Plantigrade stance adopted by the emu while feeding produces highly elongated footprints. Applying these observations to the study of fossil footprints demonstrates that great care should be paid to the original sedimentary conditions at the time of track making, as well as to the stance and gait of the trackmaker.

No abstract

The collection and dissemination of vertebrate ichnological data is struggling to keep up with techniques that are becoming commonplace in the wider palaeontological field. A standard protocol is required to ensure that data is recorded, presented and archived in a manner that will be useful both to contemporary researchers, and to future generations. Primarily, our aim is to make the 3D capture of ichnological data standard practice, and to provide guidance on how such 3D data can be communicated effectively (both via the literature and other means) and archived openly and in perpetuity. We recommend capture of 3D data, and the presentation of said data in the form of photographs, false‐colour images, and interpretive drawings. Raw data (3D models of traces) should always be provided in a form usable by other researchers (i.e. in an open format). If adopted by the field as a whole, the result will be a more robust and uniform literature, supplemented by unparalleled availability of datasets for future workers.