Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40873055›Full record

ArticleJournal of anatomy2026

The histology of rhynchosaur (Diapsida, Archosauromorpha) ankylothecodonty.

Gabriel Mestriner, Gregory F Funston, Sterling J Nesbitt, Júlio C A Marsola, David C Evans, Christian A Sidor, Max C Langer, Aaron R H LeBlanc

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anatomy, 2026. 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. Review
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

8 authors.

Gabriel MestrinerDepartamento de Biologia, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5542-1772
Gregory F FunstonDepartment of Natural History, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3430-4398
Sterling J NesbittDepartment of Geosciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7017-1652
Júlio C A MarsolaUniversidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, Paraná, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5290-7884
David C EvansDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9608-6635
Christian A SidorDepartment of Biology and Burke Museum, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0742-4829
Max C LangerDepartamento de Biologia, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1009-4605
Aaron R H LeBlancFaculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2497-1296

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2020/07997-4Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2022/00171-9Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2022/12395-9National Geographic Society Research & Exploration - 9606-14National Science Foundation Division of Earth Sciences - 1337291National Science Foundation Division of Earth Sciences -1337569Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVanier-Banting Commission
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study of the connection between the teeth and the jaw is important for understanding the palaeobiology of vertebrates, but inconsistent terminology and incomplete sampling have made it difficult to assess the evolutionary significance of some of the related characters. Among archosauromorphs, tooth attachment in dinosaurs and crocodylians is nearly identical to that of mammals in featuring a ligamentous connection (gomphosis), whereas closely related forms appear to have teeth fused to the jaws (ankylosis), as in most other amniotes. Hence, studying tooth attachment of stem-archosaurs is pivotal to characterize the main shifts in tooth attachment seen in the lineage. Here, we analyze the tooth attachment of rhynchosaurs - a group of quadrupedal herbivorous archosauromorphs that played a key role as primary consumers in many Triassic communities. Their dentition consists of multiple rows of marginal teeth with posterolingual addition of teeth during growth, but their tooth attachment has not been documented in a modern context. Histological data from three rhynchosaur specimens from the Middle Triassic Manda Beds of Tanzania show that, although ankylosed, rhynchosaur teeth are surrounded by an extensive network of Sharpey's fibers, layers of cementum, and well-defined zones of alveolar bone. What has been previously described as "spongy bone of attachment" in fact encompasses the same attachment tissues present in mammals, dinosaurs, and crocodylians, albeit completely mineralized in mature teeth. Analysis of different stages of tooth development shows that ankylosis occurs by the growth of alveolar bone towards the cellular cementum, which eventually mineralizes the soft ligament. This suggests that the tissues conflated as "bone of attachment"-alveolar bone, periodontal ligament, and cellular cementum-are homologous across Archosauromorpha. Our data add to a growing body of evidence that heterochronic changes to the timing and extents of mineralization, not convergent evolution to mammal-like attachment tissues, led to the independent evolution of gomphosis across many amniote lineages, including archosauromorphs.

Indexed as

DinosaursFossilsJawReptilesToothAnimalsBiological Evolutionalveolar boneankylosisAnkylothecodontdental histologyheterochronytooth attachment

Identifiers

PMID40873055
PMCPMC12881868

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.