Fullux Posted November 3, 2023 Share Posted November 3, 2023 Howdy all. I've discussed the relationships between Nanotyrannus and Appalachiosaurus to albertosaurines and to eachother before, and today I'm wondering if relationships could be determined by the shape of their teeth. Comparing the teeth of nanotyrannus and appalachiosaurus, they are very similar to eachother, almost identical. They are also relatively similar to the teeth of gorgosaurus, though not as much. I believe it's already been established that these animals are relatively closely related, but I think this to be extra evidence to the case. (These fossils are not mine) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas.Dodson Posted November 3, 2023 Share Posted November 3, 2023 Teeth are very poor characters for phylogenetic reconstruction. Tooth morphology reflects convergence based on similar diets and has been demonstrated to evolve similarly in various lineages. There has been some work done on this before. This figure is from one of Hallie Street's papers. Basically, it is demonstrating that even extreme characters will show up repeatedly in various lineages independent of ancestry. I've done a little work on this subject as well doing phylogenetic reconstruction with and without dental characters. TLDR, the answer to your question is no, you shouldn't infer relations based on teeth. Dental characters might represent synapomorphies in some cases but it is too linked to diet and is prone to convergence so other characters are more useful. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts