Bite marks provide direct evidence for trophic interactions and competition in the fossil record. However, variations in paleoecological dynamics, such as trophic relationships, feeding behavior, and food availability, govern the frequency of these traces. Theropod bite marks are particularly rare, suggesting that members of this clade might not often focus on bone as a resource, instead preferentially targeting softer tissues. Here, we present an unusually large sample of theropod bite marks from the Upper Jurassic Mygatt-Moore Quarry (MMQ). We surveyed 2,368 vertebrate fossils from MMQ in this analysis, with 684 specimens (28.885% of the sample) preserving at least one theropod bite mark. This is substantially higher than in other dinosaur-dominated assemblages, including contemporaneous localities from the Morrison Formation. Observed bite marks include punctures, scores, furrows, pits, and striations. Striated marks are particularly useful, diagnostic traces generated by the denticles of ziphodont teeth, because the spacing of these features can be used to provide minimum estimates of trace maker size. In the MMQ assemblage, most of the striations are consistent with denticles of the two largest predators known from the site: Allosaurus and Ceratosaurus. One of the bite marks suggests that a substantially larger theropod was possibly present at the site and are consistent with large theropods known from other Morrison Formation assemblages (either an unusually large Allosaurus or a separate, large-bodied taxon such as Saurophaganax or Torvosaurus). The distribution of the bite marks on skeletal elements, particularly those found on other theropods, suggest that they potentially preserve evidence of scavenging, rather than active predation. Given the relative abundances of the MMQ carnivores, partnered with the size-estimates based on the striated bite marks, the feeding trace assemblage likely preserves the first evidence of cannibalism in Allosaurus.

A survey of 2,368 vertebrate fossils from the Upper Jurassic Mygatt-Moore Quarry (MMQ) (Morrison Formation, Brushy Basin Member) in western Colorado revealed 2,161 bone surface modifications on 884 specimens. This is the largest, site-wide bone surface modification survey of any Jurassic locality. Traces made by invertebrate actors were common in the assemblage, second in observed frequency after vertebrate bite marks. Invertebrate traces are found on 16.174% of the total surveyed material and comprise 20.148% of all identified traces. Six distinct invertebrate trace types were identified, including pits and furrows, rosettes, two types of bioglyph scrapes, bore holes and chambers. A minimum of four trace makers are indicated by the types, sizes and morphologies of the traces. Potential trace makers are inferred to be dermestid or clerid beetles, gastropods, an unknown necrophagous insect, and an unknown osteophagus insect. Of these, only gastropods are preserved at the site as body fossils. The remaining potential trace makers are part of the hidden paleodiversity from the North American Late Jurassic Period, revealed only through this ichnologic and taphonomic analysis. Site taphonomy suggests variable, but generally slow burial rates that range from months up to 6 years, while invertebrate traces on exposed elements indicate a minimum residence time of five months for carcasses with even few preserved invertebrate traces. These traces provide insight into the paleoecology, paleoclimate, and site formation of the MMQ, especially with regards to residence times of the skeletal remains on the paleolandscape. Comprehensive taphonomic studies, like this survey, are useful in exploring patterns of paleoecology and site formation, but they are also rare in Mesozoic assemblages. Additional work is required to determine if 16.174% is typical of bulk-collected fossils from Jurassic ecosystems in North America, or if the MMQ represents an unusual locality.

Field work protocols in the recovery of vertebrate fossils can vary between sites, and also within sites, due to differing researcher goals. Disparate researcher priorities can affect the resulting collections in terms of species richness, size distribution, specimen completeness, taphonomic condition, and aesthetic value. We examined paleoecological data, in the form of bone surface modifications (e.g., abrasion, feeding traces, etc.), from a single site worked by multiple collectors to determine the sensitivity of this type of data to collector bias. We examined 2,368 fossils from the Mygatt-Moore Quarry and divided them into two cohorts: 2016–2019 (bulk collection under a single collector) and pre-2016 (mixed collectors and priorities). Frequencies of modified bone surfaces were then calculated in each cohort among the recovered specimens. However, the specimens within the cohorts were of unequal size, completeness, and amount of preserved surface area, making inferences of modified bone surface frequencies difficult. To correct for unequal morphologies and preservation, we estimated the percentage of altered surface area among specimens by overlaying photos with a 4.0 cm2 digital grid to create a digital set of equal sized fragments. With such a large dataset, we took a random 10% subsample of specimens from each cohort for the grid study. We estimated the sample size needed to accurately reflect the frequency of bone surface modifications by specimen and surface area for each cohort. Results show the recovery of modified bone surfaces between the two cohorts was highly disparate, and potentially sensitive to the effects of collector bias when using specimen-level data. However, frequencies based on estimates of surface area were much more consistent and appeared to equalize data between cohorts and showed little influence of collector bias on data recovery. Thus, the traditional method of calculating frequencies using specimen-level data may create an illusion of bias that is removed when frequencies are calculated from estimated bone surface area. We posit that the digital fragmentation method is more informative when comparing paleoecological traces between datasets and should be applied to fossil assemblages going forward, especially when collection protocols between assemblages are significantly different or unknown.