19.07.2019 Views

A field guide to mesozoic birds and other winged dinosaurs

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Hesperornis, the premaxillary nail <strong>and</strong> m<strong>and</strong>ibular (lower jaw) nail were<br />

the most heavily keratinized parts of the beak. These “nails,” which often<br />

formed small hooks at the beak tips, are where the beaks would have been<br />

most solid, like typical modern bird bills. The same authors note that the<br />

simple presence of teeth in the maxilla <strong>and</strong> dentary of these species probably<br />

means that they entirely lacked the latericorn <strong>and</strong> ramicorn beak plates<br />

which normally cover the ‘lips’ of the jaws, <strong>and</strong> that the presence of hardened<br />

rhamphotheca on the edges of the<br />

jaws may be unique <strong>to</strong> modern <strong>birds</strong>.<br />

However, as noted above, the tip of the<br />

upper jaw (premaxilla) in Hesperornis<br />

is also <strong>to</strong>othless <strong>and</strong> provides space for<br />

an overhanging edge (<strong>to</strong>mia) of some<br />

kind <strong>to</strong> be present. This would have<br />

been somewhat softer tissue, like the<br />

more pliable bills of ducks <strong>and</strong> geese.<br />

Further support for the presence of a<br />

beak on the premaxilla comes from<br />

the presence of a “rhamphothecal<br />

groove” on the upper part in front of<br />

the naris (nasal opening in the skull),<br />

which likely served as an anchor point<br />

for the keratin on the skull.<br />

So how far did the beak extend?<br />

Heironymus & Witmer found<br />

that the latericorn almost always extends<br />

<strong>to</strong> the back of the subnarial bar<br />

in <strong>birds</strong>. This is a process of the premaxilla<br />

that extends back <strong>to</strong> separate<br />

the naris from the maxilla. This means<br />

that beaks will very rarely, if ever, extend<br />

on<strong>to</strong> the maxilla itself. The maxilla<br />

in Hesperornis even compensates<br />

for this limitation by extending a bit<br />

forward underneath the subnarial bar <strong>to</strong> extend the <strong>to</strong>oth row past the full<br />

extent of the beak.<br />

Based on the evidence above, in Hesperornis, the <strong>to</strong>othless, pointed<br />

beak tips would have been made of solid, normal keratin, while the rest of<br />

the beak would have been more like stiffened skin grading in<strong>to</strong> normal skin<br />

<strong>and</strong> feathers <strong>to</strong>ward the back of the skull. At no point would the teeth have<br />

occupied the same physical space as the rhamphotheca, though they may<br />

40<br />

Above: Evolution of the avian beak <strong>and</strong><br />

loss of teeth. From <strong>to</strong>p <strong>to</strong> bot<strong>to</strong>m: Archaeopteryx<br />

lithgraphica, Yixianornis<br />

grabaui, Hesperornis regalis, Polarornis<br />

gregorii. Not <strong>to</strong> scale.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!