Using sensitivity analysis to validate the predictions of a biomechanical model of bite forces

Sellers, William I.; Crompton, Robin H.

doi:10.1016/s0940-9602(04)80132-8

Cited by 59 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our human bite forces (700-1020 N) overlap experimental values of 730-749 N [5,6] and lie within estimates in earlier modelling studies of 678-1080 N [7,8], with variability across studies attributed to significant variation in muscle size between individuals and the level of muscle activation associated with different biting activities [5][6][7][8]. Erickson et al [13] (b) Bite performance in Tyrannosaurus rex We are aware of two previous quantitative estimates of bite force in T. rex.…”

Section: Discussion (A) Validationsupporting

confidence: 80%

Estimating maximum bite performance in Tyrannosaurus rex using multi-body dynamics

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bite mechanics and feeding behaviour in Tyrannosaurus rex are controversial. Some contend that a modest bite mechanically limited T. rex to scavenging, while others argue that high bite forces facilitated a predatory mode of life. We use dynamic musculoskeletal models to simulate maximal biting in T. rex . Models predict that adult T. rex generated sustained bite forces of 35 000–57 000 N at a single posterior tooth, by far the highest bite forces estimated for any terrestrial animal. Scaling analyses suggest that adult T. rex had a strong bite for its body size, and that bite performance increased allometrically during ontogeny. Positive allometry in bite performance during growth may have facilitated an ontogenetic change in feeding behaviour in T. rex , associated with an expansion of prey range in adults to include the largest contemporaneous animals.

show abstract

Section: Discussion (A) Validationsupporting

confidence: 80%

Estimating maximum bite performance in Tyrannosaurus rex using multi-body dynamics

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is clear from reported bite force data that these factors along with assumed PCSA values affect the calculated bite forces, with authors reporting values ranging from 678N to 1,080N in humans (Koolstra et al, 1988;Demes and Creel, 1988;Sellers and Crompton, 2004). Assuming the PCSA values of the human masticatory muscles are approximately 5 times larger than those of a macaque Ross et al, 2005;van Eijden et al, 1997), then by scaling, macaque bite forces might be expected to be 136 N to 216 N. The MDA model in this current study predicted bite forces of 104N to 134N between a gape of 58 and 308 (multiple muscle strand model at the second molar position), and from 95N to 126N between the first premolar and second molar position (multiple muscle strand model at a 158 gape).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The only moving part in this simulation was the mandible, whose mass was calculated from its volume and estimated density. The volume was calculated directly from the AMIRA segmentation software (1.79 3 10 25 m 3 ), which with an assumed tissue density of 1,050 kg/m 3 (Sellers and Crompton, 2004) gave a mandibular mass of 0.019 kg. The cranium was fixed and the mandible rotated within the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), which was modeled as a bicompartmental joint that could translate in the sagittal plane and rotate about the coronal axis.…”

Section: Mdamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These technologies, and in particular the former, have been used for decades in the automotive and aerospace industries to reliably predict structural performance of mechanical systems. Applying FEA and MDA to biological systems seems a logical progression, and indeed mechanical modeling in relation to the masticatory apparatus of humans and other nonhuman primates has previously been conducted (Koolstra and van Eijden, 1995;Daegling and Hylander, 2000;Koolstra, 2003;Sellers and Crompton, 2004;Ross et al, 2005;Strait et al, 2005;Ichim et al, 2006;Kupczik et al, 2007). A common way of estimating loading conditions is to compute physiological crosssectional areas (PCSA) to approximate the peak forces that can be generated by muscles and, where available to further refine loadings using data from experimental analyses of muscle activation (e.g., Ross et al, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting Skull Loading: Applying Multibody Dynamics Analysis to a Macaque Skull

Curtis

Kupczik

O’Higgins

et al. 2008

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating stress and strain fields in anatomical structures is a way to test hypotheses that relate specific features of facial and skeletal morphology to mechanical loading. Engineering techniques such as finite element analysis are now commonly used to calculate stress and strain fields, but if we are to fully accept these methods we must be confident that the applied loading regimens are reasonable. Multibody dynamics analysis (MDA) is a relatively new three dimensional computer modeling technique that can be used to apply varying muscle forces to predict joint and bite forces during static and dynamic motions. The method ensures that equilibrium of the structure is maintained at all times, even for complex statically indeterminate problems, eliminating nonphysiological constraint conditions often seen with other approaches. This study describes the novel use of MDA to investigate the influence of different muscle representations on a macaque skull model (Macaca fascicularis), where muscle groups were represented by either a single, multiple, or wrapped muscle fibers. The impact of varying muscle representation on stress fields was assessed through additional finite element simulations. The MDA models highlighted that muscle forces varied with gape and that forces within individual muscle groups also varied; for example, the anterior strands of the superficial masseter were loaded to a greater extent than the posterior strands. The direction of the muscle force was altered when temporalis muscle wrapping was modeled, and was coupled with compressive contact forces applied to the frontal, parietal and temporal bones of the cranium during biting.

show abstract

“…The application of 2 powerful computational toolsmultibody dynamic analysis (MDA) and finite element analysis (FEA)-is becoming widespread in the field of functional morphology to answer questions surrounding the biomechanical significance of cranial design (21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33). We implemented both of these techniques on Uromastyx hardwickii, a streptostylic but otherwise akinetic herbivorous lizard.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical assessment of evolutionary changes in the lepidosaurian skull

Moazen

Curtis

O’Higgins

et al. 2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lepidosaurian skull has long been of interest to functional morphologists and evolutionary biologists. Patterns of bone loss and gain, particularly in relation to bars and fenestrae, have led to a variety of hypotheses concerning skull use and kinesis. Of these, one of the most enduring relates to the absence of the lower temporal bar in squamates and the acquisition of streptostyly. We performed a series of computer modeling studies on the skull of Uromastyx hardwickii, an akinetic herbivorous lizard. Multibody dynamic analysis (MDA) was conducted to predict the forces acting on the skull, and the results were transferred to a finite element analysis (FEA) to estimate the pattern of stress distribution. In the FEA, we applied the MDA result to a series of models based on the Uromastyx skull to represent different skull configurations within past and present members of the Lepidosauria. In this comparative study, we found that streptostyly can reduce the joint forces acting on the skull, but loss of the bony attachment between the quadrate and pterygoid decreases skull robusticity. Development of a lower temporal bar apparently provided additional support for an immobile quadrate that could become highly stressed during forceful biting.biomechanics ͉ Lepidosauria ͉ lower temporal bar ͉ streptostyly L epidosauria is composed of 2 subgroups: Rhynchocephalia (Sphenodon and its extinct relatives) and Squamata (lizards, snakes, and amphisbaenians). Several stem taxa (as part of the more inclusive Lepidosauromorpha) are known from fossil deposits of Permian to Jurassic age (Ϸ250 million to 164 million years ago; ref. 1). In relation to lepidosaurian evolution, paleontologists, comparative anatomists, and functional morphologists have focused particularly on changes in cranial morphology, most notably with respect to the evolution of streptostyly (anteroposterior quadrate movement) and cranial kinesis. A longstanding hypothesis held that the ancestral lepidosaur possessed a fully diapsid skull (upper and lower temporal openings) with a complete lower temporal bar (2-6). Loss of that bar supposedly ''freed'' the quadrate, resulting in streptostyly. Elements of this hypothesis persist in the literature, even though it has been demonstrated unequivocally (1, 7-9) that the ancestral lepidosauromorph, the ancestral lepidosaur, and the ancestral rhynchocephalian (7, 8) all had a fixed quadrate (strong quadratepterygoid and squamosal-quadrate joints) but no lower temporal bar (Fig. 1). Indeed, the same seems to have been true for the last common ancestor of lepidosaurs and archosaurs ( Fig. 1) (9). A complete lower temporal bar was developed de novo one or more times within Rhynchocephalia (7,8). The ancestral squamate, on the other hand, inherited a skull without a lower temporal bar but underwent a reduction of the palatoquadrate and its derivatives, as well as a reduction of the connections between those derivatives (quadrate and epipterygoid) and the rest of the skull (quadrate-pterygoid, quadrate-squamosal, and epip...

show abstract

Using sensitivity analysis to validate the predictions of a biomechanical model of bite forces

Cited by 59 publications

References 15 publications

Estimating maximum bite performance in Tyrannosaurus rex using multi-body dynamics

Estimating maximum bite performance in Tyrannosaurus rex using multi-body dynamics

Predicting Skull Loading: Applying Multibody Dynamics Analysis to a Macaque Skull

Biomechanical assessment of evolutionary changes in the lepidosaurian skull

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About