2014
DOI: 10.1002/jmor.20351
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differentiation and growth of bone ornamentation in vertebrates: A comparative histological study among the Crocodylomorpha

Abstract: Bone ornamentation, that is, hollow (pits and grooves) or protruding (ridges) repetitive reliefs on the surface of dermal bones, is a frequent, though poorly studied and understood, feature in vertebrates. One of the most typical examples of this characteristic is given by the Crurotarsi, a taxon formed by the crocodilians and their closest allies, which generally display deep ornamentation on skull roof and osteoderms. However, the ontogenetic process responsible for the differentiation and development of thi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

5
55
1
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
5
55
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The larger specimens have more pronounced tuberosities, whereas the smaller individuals have minor tuberosities or lack them entirely. It is because of the consistency of the relationship between size and robustness of ornamentation that we believe that this correlation is unlikely to be caused by sexual dimorphism, but rather, it is an ontogenetic characteristic developed over time [15]. This ontogenetic pattern is not unique to Delorhynchus , as shown by the cranial ontogeny of Deltavjatia rossicus and Elginia mirabilis [16], Late Permian pareiasaurian parareptiles.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The larger specimens have more pronounced tuberosities, whereas the smaller individuals have minor tuberosities or lack them entirely. It is because of the consistency of the relationship between size and robustness of ornamentation that we believe that this correlation is unlikely to be caused by sexual dimorphism, but rather, it is an ontogenetic characteristic developed over time [15]. This ontogenetic pattern is not unique to Delorhynchus , as shown by the cranial ontogeny of Deltavjatia rossicus and Elginia mirabilis [16], Late Permian pareiasaurian parareptiles.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Juveniles of these taxa have less complex ornamentation than the adults, and the level of ornamentation and the rugosity of the sculpturing is correlated with size [16]. This phenomenon has been thoroughly studied in the extant members of crocodylomorpha where the ornamentation develops through reabsorption [15,17]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this situation, pits are a passive consequence of ridge elevation. Conversely, in crocodiles, ornamentation is mainly due to the excavation of pits through local resorption of bone cortices; ridges are then a consequence of pit differentiation and their upward growth plays but a limited role, if any, in the constitution of ornamentation reliefs (Buffrénil et al, ). In addition, bone ornamentation in crocodylians is permanently remodeled and transformed through intense resorption and reconstruction of cortical surface.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was conducted at two complementary levels: i) the level of the total ornamented face of bones (or CT). This level is designated by the suffix “tot” in measurements or indices; ii) the level of the pits themselves (the essential element of bone ornamentation in crocodylians) designated by the suffix “pit.” Crocodylian ornamentation is mainly due to pit excavation (by resorption), the ridges being just a remnant of the original surface of the bones (Buffrénil, ; Buffrénil et al, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The bone microstructure of archosaurs and their extinct relatives has been a ripe area of study for paleohistologists in general (e.g., Botha-Brink and Smith, 2011;Enlow, 1969;Enlow and Brown, 1957;Gross, 1934;Horner et al, 2001;Peabody, 1961;Seitz, 1907) and French paleohistologists in particular (e.g., Cubo et al, 2012;de Buffrénil et al, 2015;de Ricqlès, 1976;de Ricqlès et al, 2003de Ricqlès et al, , 2008. Much recent work in this field has focused on the origin and evolution of avian growth rates and thermophysiology.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%