Aase Jacobsen

Currie and Jacobsen 923 Fig. 1. Distal end of RTMP 92.83.2 showing the location of the three tooth marks (a, b, c) and the tooth (d). Arrows show direction of jaw action as determined by redirected bone fibres. Scale bar = 1cm. Fig. 2. Close-up drawing of tooth mark b (Fig. 1) showing ...

Aase Roland JACOBSEN, Hen rik LAURIDSEN, Bente FIIRGAARD, Lene Warner Thorup BOEL & Kasper HANSEN 1 The Steno Mu seum, Aarhus Uni ver sity, C.F. Moellers Alle 2, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Den mark; e-mail: aase.jacobsen@si.au.dk 2 Com par a tive Med i cine Lab, Aarhus Uni ver sity, Palle Juul-Jensens Bou le vard 99, DK-8200, Aarhus N, Den mark; e-mails: K. Hansen: kasperhansen@clin.au.dk and H. Lauridsen: hen rik@clin.au.dk 3 De part ment of Ra di ol ogy, Aarhus Uni ver sity Hos pi tal, Palle Juul-Jensens Bou le vard 99, DK-8200, Aarhus N, Den mark; e-mail: bentfiir@rm.dk 4 De part ment of Fo ren sic Med i cine, Aarhus Uni ver sity, Palle Juul-Jensens Bou le vard 99, DK-8200, Aarhus N, Den mark; e-mail: lwb@forens.au.dk

Traces produced by teeth on bones provide a source of information on the feeding behaviour, predator-prey relationships, and tooth morphology of the tracemaking carnivores and scavengers involved. Studies on mammals, both fossil and recent, have used tooth-scratched bones as clues to the feeding behaviour of carnivorous, scavenging, mineral-seeking and tooth-sharpening mammals in various ecosystems. Similarly, theropod tooth traces have the potential of being important for studying the ecology and ethology of both carnivorous and herbivorous dinosaurs. This paper augments the ichnological nomenclature for traces made by teeth on bones. Two new ichnogenera and ichnospecies, Linichnus serratus and Knethichnus parallelum, are introduced on the basis of the morphology of theropod biting damage, to focus on the resulting trace fossils as an ichnological feature and to encourage further observation and studies of distribution. Using similar ichnological terminology for both theropod and m...

Ecological and behavioral aspects of dinosaur research are receiving increasing attention. Tooth‐marked bones have been studied for many years, and have provided important information on the feeding behaviour of mammalian carnivores. Similarly, theropod tooth marks on dinosaur bones can provide clues to feeding behaviour and predator/prey interaction in ancient ecosystems. A study of 1000 dinosaur bones from the Dinosaur Park Formation (Judith River Group, Upper Cretaceous) in Alberta, Canada showed a relatively high percentage of tooth‐marked hadrosaurid bones (14%), whereas only 5% of the ceratopsid bones showed tooth marks, and 2% of the tyrannosaurid bones.

The frequency of tooth-marked bone in the Mesozoic is decidedly lower than the frequency found in the Cenozoic, although most of the previous work has focused on Creta-ceous dinosaur faunas. This report describes two new examples of tooth-marked bone from the Jurassic Morrison Formation of western North America. The pubic foot of a specimen of Allosaurus from the Morrison Formation is missing a large section of its right side as the re-sult of a single bite of a large theropod. Based on the size of the bite and known tooth size in large Morrison theropods, either Ceratosaurus or Torvosaurus can be responsible for the bite. Because of the large size of the Allosaurus and the location of the bite, it is suggested that the bite occurred during scavenging rather than during an attack by a predator. The pat-tern of tooth marks on this specimen are supportive of the hypothesis that predatory dino-saurs did not routinely chew the bones of their prey. Similarly, the tooth marks on a Camaras...

Currie and Jacobsen 923 Fig. 1. Distal end of RTMP 92.83.2 showing the location of the three tooth marks (a, b, c) and the tooth (d). Arrows show direction of jaw action as determined by redirected bone fibres. Scale bar = 1cm. Fig. 2. Close-up drawing of tooth mark b (Fig. 1) showing ...