Comparison between in vivo and theoretical bite performance: Using multi-body modelling to predict muscle and bite forces in a reptile skull

Curtis, Neil; Jones, Marc E. H.; Lappin, A. Kristopher; O’Higgins, Paul; Evans, SE; Fagan, Michael J.

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.05.037

Cited by 40 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is consistent with other static bite-force models that assume simultaneous and maximum contraction of the adductor musculature during biting (e.g. Wainwright, 1987;Hernández and Motta, 1997;Van Daele et al, 2009;Curtis et al, 2010). We understand that this does not account for the full range of functional variation in muscle recruitment (De Vree and Gans, 1984;Gans et al, 1985;Cleuren et al, 1995).…”

Section: Static Bite-force Modelsupporting

confidence: 89%

Ontogenetic changes in jaw-muscle architecture facilitate durophagy in the turtleSternotherus minor

Pfaller

Gignac

Erickson

2011

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Static Bite-force Modelsupporting

confidence: 89%

Ontogenetic changes in jaw-muscle architecture facilitate durophagy in the turtleSternotherus minor

Pfaller

Gignac

Erickson

2011

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Uncoupled analysis of MDA and FEA have been used before to estimate forces acting on a skull and then applied to a Finite Element Model of this same skull to obtain patterns of strain and stress across it (Moazen et al, 2008a(Moazen et al, , 2008b(Moazen et al, , 2009a(Moazen et al, , 2009bCurtis et al 2008Curtis et al , 2010aCurtis et al , 2010bCurtis et al , 2011. Those results have been combined with knowledge of evolutionary paths to develop hypotheses regarding the genetic and epigenetic factors that shape the skeleton or the feeding mechanism in vertebrate structures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The technique has been applied to studies of craniofacial form to simulate musculoskeletal function and facilitates in-depth exploration of the relationships between musculoskeletal geometry, muscle parameters, forces and motion in vertebrate structures (Curtis et al, 2009;Bates and Falkingham, 2012;Gröning et al, 2013;Snively et al, 2013). In spite of it, the research utilizing both the musculoskeletal modeling and deformable body modeling together has rarely been seen in publications (Moazen et al, 2008a(Moazen et al, , 2008bCurtis, 2011;Curtis et al, 2010aCurtis et al, , 2010bCurtis et al, , 2011. The current research utilizes the flexible multibody dynamics, which is mostly employed in the field of machine dynamics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coupling finite element analysis and multibody system dynamics for biological research

Marcé‐Nogué¹,

Kłodowski²,

Romero³

et al. 2015

Palaeontologia Electronica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flexible Multibody System Dynamics (FMSD) is a simulation technique that can be used to study the behavior of the mechanical systems that consists of one or more deformable bodies. A deformable body can be modeled using a number of approaches while the floating frame of reference formulation is a widely used approach. In that approach, flexibility within Multibody System Dynamics (MSD) is described by employing the Finite Element Analysis (FEA) with a modal reduction approach. The applicability of an FMSD in the feeding mechanism of vertebrate structures is tested in order to utilize the potential of the method in biological research. Flexible Multibody System Dynamics is explored studying the feeding mechanism in a skull of Edingerella madagascariensis. Firstly, a static structural analysis is done using FEA and secondly, dynamic solutions based on FMSD are obtained by varying the number of deformation modes used in the modal reduction analysis. The conclusion is that use of this approach is feasible and efficient for the study of feeding mechanisms in vertebrate structures when a dynamic response should be evaluated.

show abstract

“…Finally, bite force is becoming increasingly important for 'validating' computer-based biomechanical models that are used to predict strain distribution, assess skull strength and evaluate form and function (e.g. Curtis et al, 2010a;Gröning et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have focused on ontogenetic scaling (Erickson et al, 2003), sexual dimorphism (Herrel et al, 1999;Lappin et al, 2006b), display and signaling (Lappin et al, 2006a), reproductive output and fitness (Lappin and Husak, 2005;Husak et al, 2009), skull biomechanics and model testing (Curtis et al, 2010a;Becerra et al, 2013) and feeding behavior and diet (Binder and Van Valkenburgh, 2000;Measey et al, 2011) within a single species. In several studies multiple species have been compared, including some analyses of over 15 species Aguirre et al, 2002;van der Meij and Bout, 2004;Santana and Dumont, 2009;Vanhooydonck et al, 2010;Santana et al, 2010;Freeman and Lemen, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliable quantification of bite-force performance requires use of appropriate biting substrate and standardization of bite out-lever

Lappin

Jones

2014

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bite-force performance is an ecologically important measure of whole-organism performance that shapes dietary breadth and feeding strategies and, in some taxa, determines reproductive success. It also is a metric that is crucial to testing and evaluating biomechanical models. We reviewed nearly 100 published studies of a range of taxa that incorporate direct in vivo measurements of bite force. Problematically, methods of data collection and processing vary considerably among studies. In particular, there is little consensus on the appropriate substrate to use on the biting surface of force transducers. In addition, the bite out-lever, defined as the distance from the fulcrum (i.e. jaw joint) to the position along the jawline at which the jaws engage the transducer, is rarely taken into account. We examined the effect of bite substrate and bite out-lever on biteforce estimates in a diverse sample of lizards. Results indicate that both variables have a significant impact on the accuracy of measurements. Maximum bite force is significantly greater using leather as the biting substrate compared with a metal substrate. Lessforceful bites on metal are likely due to inhibitory feedback from mechanoreceptors that prevent damage to the feeding apparatus. Standardization of bite out-lever affected which trial produced maximum performance for a given individual. Indeed, maximum bite force is usually underestimated without standardization because it is expected to be greatest at the minimum out-lever (i.e. back of the jaws), which in studies is rarely targeted with success. We assert that future studies should use a pliable substrate, such as leather, and use appropriate standardization for bite out-lever.

show abstract

Comparison between in vivo and theoretical bite performance: Using multi-body modelling to predict muscle and bite forces in a reptile skull

Cited by 40 publications

References 33 publications

Ontogenetic changes in jaw-muscle architecture facilitate durophagy in the turtleSternotherus minor

Ontogenetic changes in jaw-muscle architecture facilitate durophagy in the turtleSternotherus minor

Coupling finite element analysis and multibody system dynamics for biological research

Reliable quantification of bite-force performance requires use of appropriate biting substrate and standardization of bite out-lever

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About