Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17911253›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2007

Supermodeled sabercat, predatory behavior in Smilodon fatalis revealed by high-resolution 3D computer simulation.

Colin R McHenry, Stephen Wroe, Philip D Clausen, Karen Moreno, Eleanor Cunningham

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed
18.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

89 citing papers in PubMed, 186 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Sharpening our understanding of saber-tooth biomechanics.Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Evolutionary biomechanics: hard tissues and soft evidence?Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Colin R McHenrySchool of Engineering, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia. colin.mchenry@newcastle.edu.au
Stephen Wroe
Philip D Clausen
Karen Moreno
Eleanor Cunningham
Environmental Earth Sciences · AUMater Misericordiae Hospital · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The American sabercat Smilodon fatalis is among the most charismatic of fossil carnivores. Despite broad agreement that its extraordinary anatomy reflects unique hunting techniques, after >150 years of study, many questions remain concerning its predatory behavior. Were the "sabers" used to take down large prey? Were prey killed with an eviscerating bite to the abdomen? Was its bite powerful or weak compared with that of modern big cats? Here we quantitatively assess the sabercat's biomechanical performance using the most detailed computer reconstructions yet developed for the vertebrate skull. Our results demonstrate that bite force driven by jaw muscles was relatively weak in S. fatalis, one-third that of a lion (Panthera leo) of comparable size, and its skull was poorly optimized to resist the extrinsic loadings generated by struggling prey. Its skull is better optimized for bites on restrained prey where the bite is augmented by force from the cervical musculature. We conclude that prey were brought to ground and restrained before a killing bite, driven in large part by powerful cervical musculature. Because large prey is easier to restrain if its head is secured, the killing bite was most likely directed to the neck. We suggest that the more powerful jaw muscles of P. leo may be required for extended, asphyxiating bites and that the relatively low bite forces in S. fatalis might reflect its ability to kill large prey more quickly, avoiding the need for prolonged bites.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaFelidaeFossilsImaging, Three-DimensionalJawLionsModels, BiologicalPredatory BehaviorSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID17911253
PMCPMC2042153
OpenAlexW2126025420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.