Body mass estimation in armoured mammals: Cautions and encouragements for the use of parameters from the appendicular skeleton

Journal of Zoology

Volumn 248, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 179-187

  Biknevicius, A R ^a  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Allometry; Body mass; Caviomorpha; Dasypodidae; Manidae; Palaeontology

Indexed keywords

BODY MASS; MAMMAL; MEASUREMENT METHOD;

EID: 0032996977     PISSN: 09528369     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0952836999006056     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Alexander, R. McN. (1985). The maximum force exerted by animals. J. exp. Biol. 115: 231-238.
2. Anyonge, W. (1993). Body mass in large extant and extinct carnivores. J. Zool. (Lond.) 231: 339-350.
3. Biewener, A. A. (1990). Biomechanics of mammalian terrestrial locomotion. Science 250: 1097-1103.
4. Biewener, A. A. & Taylor, C. R. (1986). Bone strain: a determinant of gait and speed? J. exp. Biol. 123: 383-400.
5. Biknevicius, A. R. (1993). Biomechanical scaling of limb bones and differential limb use in caviomorph rodents. J. Mammal. 74: 95-107.
6. Biknevicius, A. R., McFarlane, D. A. & MacPhee, R. D. E. (1993). Body size in Amblyrhiza inundata (Rodentia: Caviomorpha), an extinct megafaunal rodent from the Anguilla Bank, West Indies: estimates and implications. Am. Mus. Novit. 3079: 1-25.
7. Biknevicius, A. R. & Ruff, C. B. (1992). Use of biplanar radiographs for estimating cross-sectional geometric properties of mandibles. Anat. Rec. 232: 157-163.
8. Dagg, A. I. (1973). Gaits in mammals. Mammal Rev. 3: 135-154.
9. Damuth, J. (1990). Problems in estimating body masses of archaic ungulates using dental measurements. In Body size in mammalian paleobiology: 229-253. Damuth, J. & MacFadden, B. J. (Eds). New York: Cambridge University Press.
10. Damuth, J. & MacFadden, B. J. (Eds). (1990a). Body size in mammalian paleobiology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Damuth, J. & MacFadden, B. J. (1990b). Introduction: body size and its estimation. In Body size in mammalian paleobiology: 1-10. Damuth, J. & MacFadden, B. J. (Eds). New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Demes, B., Larson, S. G., Stern, J. T. Jr., Jungers, W. L., Biknevicius, A. R. & Schmitt, D. (1994). The kinetics of primate quadrupedalism: 'hindlimb drive' reconsidered. J. Hum. Evol. 26: 353-374.
13. Gambaryan, P. P. (1974). How mammals run. Anatomical adaptations. New York: John Wiley.
14. Garland, T., Jr. & Janis, C. M. (1992). Does metatarsal/femur ratio predict maximal running speed in cursorial mammals? J. Zool. (Lond.), 229: 133-152.
15. Gingerich, P. D. (1990). Prediction of body mass in mammalian species from long bone lengths and diameters. Contrib. Mus. Paleonotol. Univ. Mich. 28: 79-92.
16. Grand, T. I. (1977). Body weight: its relation to tissue composition, segment distribution and motor function. I. Interspecific comparison. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 47: 211-240.
17. Grand, T. I. (1978). Adaptations of tissue and limb segments to facilitate moving and feeding in arboreal folivores. In Ecology of arboreal folivores: 231-241. Montgomery, G. G. (Ed.). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
18. Heath, M. E. (1992). Manis pentadactyla. Mamm. Species 414: 1-6.
19. Hildebrand, M. (1976). Analysis of tetrapod gaits: general considerations and symmetrical gaits. In Neural control of locomotion: 203-236. Herman, R. M., Grillnar, S., Stein, P. S. G. & Stuart, D. G. (Eds). New York: Plenum Press.
20. Hildebrand, M. (1985). Digging in quadrupeds. In Functional vertebrate morphology: 89-109. Hildebrand, M., Bramble, D. M. Liem, K. F. & Wake, D. B. (Eds). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21. Hildebrand, M. & Hurley, J. P. (1985). Energy of the oscillating legs of a fast-moving cheetah, pronghorn, jackrabbit and elephant. J. Morphol. 185: 23-31.
22. Kingdon, J. (1974). East African mammals I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23. Jungers, W. L. (1978). The functional significance of skeletal allometry in Megaladapis in comparison to living prosimians. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 49: 303-314.
24. LaBarbera, M. (1989). Analyzing body size as a factor in ecology and evolution. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20: 97-117.
25. MacPhee, R. D. E. (1994). Morphology, adaptations, and relationships of Plesiorycteropus, and a diagnosis of a new order of eutherian mammals. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 220: 1-214.
26. McBee, K. & Baker, R. J. (1982). Dasypus novemcinctus. Mamm. Species 162: 1-9.
27. Novacek, M. J., Wyss, A. R. & McKenna, M. C. (1988). The major groups of eutherian mammals. In The phylogeny and classification of the tetrapods 2: mammals: 31-71. Benton, M. J. (Ed.). Oxford: Clarendon press.
28. Peters, R. H. (1983). The ecological implications of body size. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29. Redford, K. H. & Wetzel, R. M. (1985). Euphractus sexcinctus. Mamm. Species 252: 1-4.
30. Rose, K. D. & Emry, R. J. (1993). Relationships of Xenarthra, Philodota, and fossil 'Edentates': the morphological evidence. In Mammal phylogeny, placentals: 81-102. Szalay, F. S., Novacek, M. J. & McKenna, M. C. (Eds). New York: Springer-Verlag.
31. Roze, U. (191989). The North American porcupine. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
32. Ruff, C. B. (1987). Structural allometry of the femur and tibia in Hominoidea and Macaca. Folia Primatol. 48: 9-49.
33. Runestad, J., Ruff, C. B., Nieh, J., Thorington, R. W. Jr. & Teaford, M. (1993). Radiographic estimation of long bone cross-sectional geometric properties. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 90: 207-213.
34. Schmidt-Nielsen, K. (1984). Scaling. Why is animal size so important? New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Shaw, S. R., Vailas, A. C., Grindeland, R. E. & Zernicke, R. F. (1988). Effects of a 1-wk spaceflight on morphological and mechanical properties of growing bone. Am. J. Physiol. 254: R78-R83.
36. Smith, R. J. (1980). Rethinking allometry. J. theor. Biol. 87: 97-111.
37. Smith, R. J. (1984). Allometric scaling in comparative biology: problems of concept and methods. Am. J. Physiol. 256: R152-R160.
38. Smith, R. J. (1993). Logarithmic transformation bias in allometry. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 90: 215-228.