Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34761178›Full record

ArticleiScience2021

Modeling tooth enamel in FEA comparisons of skulls: Comparing common simplifications with biologically realistic models.

Eva C Herbst, Stephan Lautenschlager, Dylan Bastiaans, Feiko Miedema, Torsten M Scheyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
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.

Eva C HerbstPalaeontological Institute and Museum, University of Zurich, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
Stephan LautenschlagerSchool of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, B15 2TT Birmingham, UK.
Dylan BastiaansPalaeontological Institute and Museum, University of Zurich, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
Feiko MiedemaStaatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany.
Torsten M ScheyerPalaeontological Institute and Museum, University of Zurich, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Palaeontologists often use finite element analyses, in which forces propagate through objects with specific material properties, to investigate feeding biomechanics. Teeth are usually modeled with uniform properties (all bone or all enamel). In reality, most teeth are composed of pulp, dentine, and enamel. We tested how simplified teeth compare to more realistic models using mandible models of three reptiles. For each, we created models representing enamel thicknesses found in extant taxa, as well as simplified models (bone, dentine or enamel). Our results suggest that general comparisons of stress distribution among distantly related taxa do not require representation of dental tissues, as there was no noticeable effect on heatmap representations of stress. However, we find that representation of dental tissues impacts bite force estimates, although magnitude of these effects may differ depending on constraints. Thus, as others have shown, the detail necessary in a biomechanical model relates to the questions being examined.

Indexed as

biomaterialsbiomechanicsbiophysicspaleontology

Identifiers

PMID34761178
PMCPMC8567004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.