MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408725133 · doi:10.1111/joa.14242

Skull morphology and histology indicate the presence of an unexpected buccal soft tissue structure in dinosaurs

2025· article· en· W4408725133 on OpenAlexafffund
Henry S. Sharpe, Wang Yan-yin, Thomas W. Dudgeon, Mark J. Powers, S. Amber Whitebone, Colton C. Coppock, Aaron D. Dyer, Corwin Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anatomy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnatomySkullMandible (arthropod mouthpart)BiologyEnthesisOsteologyAdductor musclesLigamentExtant taxonTendonEvolutionary biologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike mammals, reptiles typically lack large muscles and ligaments that connect the zygoma to the mandible. Dinosaur craniomandibular soft tissue reconstructions, often based on the rationale of extant phylogenetic bracketing, follow this general rule. However, descending flanges from the zygomata of hadrosaurs, heterodontosaurids, and psittacosaurids have been used to argue for a masseter-like muscle in these dinosaur taxa. We examined dinosauriform skulls for osteological indicators of connective tissue entheses on the zygoma and mandible, and subsequently sectioned 10 specimens for histological evidence. Osteological indicators were found on the zygoma in most sampled dinosauriforms, which range from rugosities to large descending processes, and morphologically resemble known muscular and ligamentous entheses. Similarly, rugose features oriented towards the zygoma were found on the mandible in sampled dinosauriforms, many having previously been interpreted as entheses for the adductor mandibulae muscle group. Serial histological sectioning of ceratopsid, hadrosaurid, and tyrannosaurid jugal and surangular rugosities reveals an external cortex rich in collagen fibres, strongly resembling entheseal fibres. Jugal entheseal fibres are usually oriented ventrally towards the surangular, and in hadrosaurids and tyrannosaurids these are parallel to macroscopic striations on the surfaces of the jugal flange. Histological sections of extant chicken buccal regions show similar entheseal fibres in the attachments of the jugomandibular ligament on the jugal and of the adductor musculature on the mandible. We hypothesise a strong connective tissue structure bridging the zygoma and mandible in dinosaurs, termed the 'exoparia'. This structure's size and proximity to the craniomandibular joint would be advantageous in stabilising the mandible relative to the cranium during jaw movement, particularly in dinosaurs thought to process their masticate. A ligamentous or muscular identity for the exoparia cannot be determined with the available data, but the size and shape of the zygomatic entheses in many dinosaurs are more consistent with a muscular attachment. Possible antecedents in non-dinosauriform archosaurs and derivations in modern birds may exist, but the homology of the exoparia is currently unknown. These results highlight the complex soft tissue evolution of dinosaurs and caution against simplified phylogenetic model-based approaches to tissue reconstruction that ignore contrasting osteological signals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AnatomySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207