PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 21, 2026Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences0 citationsOpen Access

Drivers and mechanisms of convergent forelimb reduction in non-avian theropod dinosaurs

View Full Paper
CSCharlie Roger SchererThe London CollegeESElizabeth SteellUniversity of CambridgePUPaul UpchurchThe London College

Key Points

  • This research aims to explore the evolution of forelimb reduction in non-avian theropods and its relationship with cranial robusticity and body size.
  • Implemented a cranial robusticity scoring system
  • Used bivariate and comparative phylogenetic analyses to analyze the dataset
  • Quantified forelimb reduction across theropoda
  • Forelimb reduction is strongly correlated with cranial robusticity and gigantism.
  • Reduced forelimbs evolved in at least five theropod lineages alongside increased cranial robusticity.
  • Abelisaurids, carcharodontosaurids, and tyrannosaurids exhibit the most significant forelimb reduction relative to their skull size.

Abstract

Abstract Forelimb reduction has been observed in numerous and disparate non-avian theropod dinosaurs, resulting in the hypothesis that reduced forelimbs evolved convergently. Clades with reduced forelimbs also possess high degrees of cranial robusticity and gigantic body sizes. Here, we provide a novel quantification of forelimb reduction across Theropoda, and create and implement a cranial robusticity scoring system, and analyse this dataset using bivariate and comparative phylogenetic analyses. Results indicate that forelimb reduction is strongly correlated with cranial robusticity and gigantism. Reduced/vestigial forelimbs evolved in at least five theropod lineages in concert with increased cranial robusticity and gigantism. Abelisaurids, carcharodontosaurids and tyrannosaurids show the greatest forelimb reduction relative to the skull. Repeated forelimb reduction across theropods was facilitated by increased cranial robusticity and greater body size that was potentially influenced by an upward trend in prey body size. These events resulted in a shift from subduing prey using grasping forelimbs to using powerful bites and robust skulls.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Scherer et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0ea188be05d6e3efb603d8https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2026.0528
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1paleotree: an R package for paleontological and phylogenetic analyses of evolution2012 · 582 citations
  2. 2Carnotaurus sastrei Bonaparte, the horned, lightly built carnosaur from the Middle Cretaceous of Patagonia1990 · 291 citations
  3. 3Rphylopars: fast multivariate phylogenetic comparative methods for missing data and within‐species variation2016 · 314 citations
  4. 4Tyrant Dinosaur Evolution Tracks the Rise and Fall of Late Cretaceous Oceans2013 · 171 citations
  5. 5The evolution of cranial design and performance in squamates: Consequences of skull-bone reduction on feeding behavior2007 · 118 citations