Palaeoecology ofKolpochoerus heseloni (= K. limnetes): a multiproxy approach

Habitat preference of extant African bovids based on astragalus morphology: operationalizing ecomorphology for palaeoenvironmental reconstruction

“…Bovids preferring habitats intermediate in structural complexity between forest and open country exhibit intermediate femoral morphologies. Whereas the morphological, functional, and ecological correlates among predator avoidance strategy, preferred habitat vegetative complexity, and postcranial morphology have been demonstrated best with the femur, our results on bovid humeri, radioulnae, tibiae, metapodials, calcanei, astragali, and phalanges are consistent with this framework (this study; Bishop et al, 2003Bishop et al, , 2006Plummer and Bishop, 1994;Plummer et al, 1999). Other researchers Vrba, 2003, 2005;Kovarovic and Andrews, 2007) have also noted a relationship between morphology and habitat preference in a variety of antelope postcranial elements.…”

“…These underused specimens can be invaluable for palaeoecological analysis and can play a role in conceptualising past ecosystems. We have produced DFA models using the four habitat scheme provided here for complete and partial bovid humeri, radii, ulnae, tibiae, calcanei, astragali, and phalanges (Bishop et al, 2006;Plummer et al, 1999), as well as updated (with improved accuracy and using the four habitat scheme) metapodial models first described in Plummer and Bishop (1994). In combination with bovid femoral DFA models devised by Kappelman (e.g., Kappelman, 1988;Kappelman et al, 1997), suid postcranial DFA models developed by Bishop (Bishop, 1994;Bishop et al, 1999), bovid cranial and mandibular models for reconstructing dietary preferences (Spencer, 1997;Sponheimer et al, 1999), DFA models for bovid astragali and phalanges generated by Vrba (2003, 2005), and DFA models for a large number of postcranial elements by Kovarovic and Andrews (2007), information on habitat structure as well as diet can likely be drawn from any reasonably large and well preserved fossil assemblage in the future.…”

Three-dimensional dental microwear texture analysis and diet in extant Suidae (Mammalia: Cetartiodactyla)

“…Although a few previous studies approached the issue of reconstructing diets of fossil suids using dental microwear ( Hunter and Fortelius 1994, Nelson 2003, Bishop et al 2006, Townsend et al 2007, they were usually limited to a few taxa and a low number of extant specimens. These studies also differed from each other in having different procedures.…”

The case of the grass‐eating suids in the Plio‐Pleistocene Turkana Basin: 3D dental topography in relation to diet in extant and fossil pigs

“…A common approach for interpreting paleodiets and paleoenvironments is to extract information from hard tissues of present‐day species for which diets and behavior are known, and apply the same reasoning about diets to patterns extracted from preserved tissues of fossil species (Cerling, Harris, Ambrose, Leakey, & Solounias, ; Fortelius et al, ; Hoppe, Amundson, Vavra, McClaran, & Anderson, ; Merceron et al, ; Saarinen et al, ; Teaford & Walker, ; Ungar, Merceron, & Scott, ). Isotope (Cerling et al, ; Harris & Cerling, ) and microwear (Bishop, King, Hill, & Wood, , Ungar et al, , Lazagabaster ) analyses from suid teeth and morphological analyses from limb bones (Bishop, ; Bishop et al, ) have used this way to study the paleoecology of Plio‐Pleistocene African suids. Most of these existing dietary studies of African fossil suids are based on the methodologies developed for analyzing the grazing‐browsing spectrum of herbivory.…”