Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)

A profound understanding of the influence of trackmaker anatomy, foot movements and substrate properties is crucial for any interpretation of fossil tracks. In this case study we analyze variability of footprint shape within one large theropod (T3), one medium-sized theropod (T2) and one ornithopod...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jens N. Lallensack, Anneke H. van Heteren, Oliver Wings
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PeerJ Inc. 2016-06-01
Series:PeerJ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://peerj.com/articles/2059.pdf
_version_ 1797419647135383552
author Jens N. Lallensack
Anneke H. van Heteren
Oliver Wings
author_facet Jens N. Lallensack
Anneke H. van Heteren
Oliver Wings
author_sort Jens N. Lallensack
collection DOAJ
description A profound understanding of the influence of trackmaker anatomy, foot movements and substrate properties is crucial for any interpretation of fossil tracks. In this case study we analyze variability of footprint shape within one large theropod (T3), one medium-sized theropod (T2) and one ornithopod (I1) trackway from the Lower Cretaceous of Münchehagen (Lower Saxony, Germany) in order to determine the informativeness of individual features and measurements for ichnotaxonomy, trackmaker identification, and the discrimination between left and right footprints. Landmark analysis is employed based on interpretative outline drawings derived from photogrammetric data, allowing for the location of variability within the footprint and the assessment of covariation of separate footprint parts. Objective methods to define the margins of a footprint are tested and shown to be sufficiently accurate to reproduce the most important results. The lateral hypex and the heel are the most variable regions in the two theropod trackways. As indicated by principal component analysis, a posterior shift of the lateral hypex is correlated with an anterior shift of the margin of the heel. This pattern is less pronounced in the ornithopod trackway, indicating that variation patterns can differ in separate trackways. In all trackways, hypices vary independently from each other, suggesting that their relative position a questionable feature for ichnotaxonomic purposes. Most criteria commonly employed to differentiate between left and right footprints assigned to theropods are found to be reasonably reliable. The described ornithopod footprints are asymmetrical, again allowing for a left–right differentiation. Strikingly, 12 out of 19 measured footprints of the T2 trackway are stepped over the trackway midline, rendering the trackway pattern a misleading left–right criterion for this trackway. Traditional measurements were unable to differentiate between the theropod and the ornithopod trackways. Geometric morphometric analysis reveals potential for improvement of existing discriminant methods.
first_indexed 2024-03-09T06:51:17Z
format Article
id doaj.art-86246f76b2dd4d04aa35ecdcb9ab347f
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2167-8359
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-09T06:51:17Z
publishDate 2016-06-01
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format Article
series PeerJ
spelling doaj.art-86246f76b2dd4d04aa35ecdcb9ab347f2023-12-03T10:27:02ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592016-06-014e205910.7717/peerj.2059Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)Jens N. Lallensack0Anneke H. van Heteren1Oliver Wings2Division of Paleontology, Steinmann Institute, University of Bonn, Bonn, GermanyDivision of Paleontology, Steinmann Institute, University of Bonn, Bonn, GermanyNiedersächsisches Landesmuseum, Hannover, GermanyA profound understanding of the influence of trackmaker anatomy, foot movements and substrate properties is crucial for any interpretation of fossil tracks. In this case study we analyze variability of footprint shape within one large theropod (T3), one medium-sized theropod (T2) and one ornithopod (I1) trackway from the Lower Cretaceous of Münchehagen (Lower Saxony, Germany) in order to determine the informativeness of individual features and measurements for ichnotaxonomy, trackmaker identification, and the discrimination between left and right footprints. Landmark analysis is employed based on interpretative outline drawings derived from photogrammetric data, allowing for the location of variability within the footprint and the assessment of covariation of separate footprint parts. Objective methods to define the margins of a footprint are tested and shown to be sufficiently accurate to reproduce the most important results. The lateral hypex and the heel are the most variable regions in the two theropod trackways. As indicated by principal component analysis, a posterior shift of the lateral hypex is correlated with an anterior shift of the margin of the heel. This pattern is less pronounced in the ornithopod trackway, indicating that variation patterns can differ in separate trackways. In all trackways, hypices vary independently from each other, suggesting that their relative position a questionable feature for ichnotaxonomic purposes. Most criteria commonly employed to differentiate between left and right footprints assigned to theropods are found to be reasonably reliable. The described ornithopod footprints are asymmetrical, again allowing for a left–right differentiation. Strikingly, 12 out of 19 measured footprints of the T2 trackway are stepped over the trackway midline, rendering the trackway pattern a misleading left–right criterion for this trackway. Traditional measurements were unable to differentiate between the theropod and the ornithopod trackways. Geometric morphometric analysis reveals potential for improvement of existing discriminant methods.https://peerj.com/articles/2059.pdfLower CretaceousTrackwaysGermanyDinosaur tracksGeometric morphometricsTheropods
spellingShingle Jens N. Lallensack
Anneke H. van Heteren
Oliver Wings
Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)
PeerJ
Lower Cretaceous
Trackways
Germany
Dinosaur tracks
Geometric morphometrics
Theropods
title Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)
title_full Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)
title_fullStr Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)
title_full_unstemmed Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)
title_short Geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability: a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from Münchehagen (Lower Cretaceous, Germany)
title_sort geometric morphometric analysis of intratrackway variability a case study on theropod and ornithopod dinosaur trackways from munchehagen lower cretaceous germany
topic Lower Cretaceous
Trackways
Germany
Dinosaur tracks
Geometric morphometrics
Theropods
url https://peerj.com/articles/2059.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT jensnlallensack geometricmorphometricanalysisofintratrackwayvariabilityacasestudyontheropodandornithopoddinosaurtrackwaysfrommunchehagenlowercretaceousgermany
AT annekehvanheteren geometricmorphometricanalysisofintratrackwayvariabilityacasestudyontheropodandornithopoddinosaurtrackwaysfrommunchehagenlowercretaceousgermany
AT oliverwings geometricmorphometricanalysisofintratrackwayvariabilityacasestudyontheropodandornithopoddinosaurtrackwaysfrommunchehagenlowercretaceousgermany