Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40401574›Full record

ArticleAnatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007)2025

Commentary: The missing sabertooth baculum-At what point might the absence of evidence reasonably be considered evidence of absence?

Adam Hartstone-Rose

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Commentary: What's so interesting about sabertooths?Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2025
    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

1 author.

Adam Hartstone-RoseDepartment of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5307-5573

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most carnivorans and all modern felids have ossified bacula; however, no machairodont baculum has ever been identified. This is true despite the many fairly complete skeletons found around the world of several sabertooth taxa. Although the bacula of modern felids are much smaller than those of canoids (even the least weasel's baculum is longer than the tiger's barely 1 cm baculum!), among the 166,000 bones found at the Rancho La Brea Tar Pits (RLB) of perhaps 3000 Smilodon fatalis individuals there are other small and delicate bones-including clavicles, hyoids, and tiny ossicles-from that taxon. Furthermore, the matrix from that site found around the large fossils is painstakingly sorted under microscopes, resulting in the identification of thousands of microfossils. Despite these concerted efforts, including the posting of images of modern felid bacula near the RLB fossil lab to help form potential search parameters for those sorting the matrix, the search continues for this elusive bone. It is possible that RLB's unique "pit wear"-abrasion related to the notable seismic activity in Southern California-has pulverized this bone that may have been less dense than the other small bones that are found at the site. Parsimoniously, machairodonts should have bacula, but our failure to identify a sabertooth baculum in the richest fossil carnivoran locality in the world naggingly forces us to consider whether, at some point, we have to accept this stubborn absence of evidence as legitimate evidence of absence.

Indexed as

FelidaeFossilsAnimals

Identifiers

PMID40401574
PMCPMC12506853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.