We used this volume and its relationship with the density of pelagic sharks relative to seawater ( 32) to calculate a body mass of 61,560 kg ( Table 1). Then, it was imported into MeshLab ( 31), where a volume of 58.1 m 3 was computed. 1) was first measured directly in Blender, rendering a TL of 15.9 m ( Table 1). megalodon in Blender 2.80 ( We adjusted the initial model based on a previous 2D reconstruction ( 15) to account for phylogenetic uncertainties and the intraspecific variation among lamniforms (see Materials and Methods). We used a hoop-based approach to build a 3D model of the full body of O. ( P) Visualization of open gape at 75° angle at oblique view and ( Q) 35° gape angle at lateral view. megalodon used for analyses at lateral view and ( O) dorsal view. ![]() ( M) Base skeletal model with octagonal hoops that mark flesh boundaries. carcharias specimen used for flesh reconstruction with elliptical hooping methodology indicated for the ( H) dorsal fin, ( I) pectoral fins, ( J) abdomen, ( K) pelvic fins, and ( L) caudal fin. carcharias chondrocranium with UF 311000 dentition and IRSNB P 9893 column attached and hoops outlining the model’s head. ( E) 3D scan of Carcharodon carcharias chondrocranium used to model O. ( D) 3D scan and reconstruction of the UF 311000 dentition (labial view) with the corresponding labels from (C). megalodon teeth from the UF 311000 dentition (lingual view) with their respective positions (uppercase denotes upper teeth lowercase refers to lower teeth “A” denotes anterior teeth, and “L” lateral). megalodon vertebral column, with centra from (A) linked to their corresponding position. ( B) 3D scan and reconstruction of the O. ( A) Sample of 11 of the 141 vertebral centra in the Otodus megalodon column (IRSNB P 9893). megalodon played in the global oceans, advancing our knowledge of the impacts of megafaunal species on marine ecosystems in deep time and the potential ecological consequences of their extinctions. Our results reveal the potentially distinctive ecological role that O. Last, we estimated the model’s swimming speed, stomach volume, daily energetic demands, and prey encounter rates based on their mathematical relationships with mass in extant sharks. Volume was then used to calculate body mass. We quantified TL, volume, and gape size from the complete 3D model. megalodon that accounts for other analogs. 1) and adjusted it based on a 2D reconstruction of O. We completed the model by adding “flesh” around the skeleton using a full-body scan of C. We first reconstructed the axial skeleton using 3D scans of the exceptional vertebral column IRSNB P 9893 from Belgium, an associated dentition from the United States, and a C. megalodon and use it to infer its movement and feeding ecology. ![]() Here, we create the first three-dimensional (3D) model of the body of O. megalodon has been supported by multiple lines of evidence, including comparative analyses, stable isotopes, and species distribution models ( 9, 26, 29). The purported mesothermic physiology of O. ![]() megalodon could reach cruising speeds of 1.3 to 1.4 m/s ( 26, 27) and burst speeds of 10.3 m/s ( 26), and that such an ability was enhanced by mesothermy ( 26), a thermoregulatory adaptation that elevates the temperature of locomotory muscles ( 28). Last, it has been proposed that an adult O. carcharias ( 22), which typically consumes comparatively small prey in their entirety, and travels great distances across oceans ( 25). megalodon occupied a higher trophic level than did C. Evidence from calcium isotopes has further suggested that O. Larger prey includes taxa related to the modern humpback ( Megaptera novaeangliae) or blue whales. megalodon preferentially preyed on small- to medium-size cetaceans such as the extinct Piscobalaena nana ( 19) and Xiphiacetus bossi ( 20). For instance, it has been hypothesized that O. Fossil evidence of bite marks on bones has shed some light on the autoecology of O.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |