Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:15:56.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanical couplings in the shell closing mechanism of articulate brachiopods: implications for the evolution of skeleto-muscular architecture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Spafford C. Ackerly
Spafford C. Ackerly*
Affiliation:
Ackerly Department of Geological Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Rapid shell closure in articulate brachiopods occurs by a twitch contraction of the “quick” adductor muscles. Rapid accelerations and decelerations of the valves induce large accelerations of the surrounding fluid, placing constraints on the speeds of closure; inertial forces govern the mechanics of the closing mechanism. The position, size, and physiological properties of the muscles, and the size and shape of the shell, govern the properties of the shell closing system. A numerical model predicts that, for given muscle and shell characteristics, there is a location of the adductor muscle which maximizes the shell's closing velocity, and that this position shifts allometrically with size. Positive allometry in the muscle's moment arm length is observed in both living and fossil brachiopods, although the observed coefficients are less than those predicted by the model.

The brachiopod closing mechanism provides a model for understanding the biomechanical interrelationships between components of dynamic skeletal systems. Dynamic systems, where the muscles induce resisting inertial reactions, are characterized by mechanical feedback loops, or couplings. Mechanical couplings may represent an important class of constraints on the evolution of skeleto-muscular architecture.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , Fall 1993 , pp. 420 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Ackerly, S. C. 1985. Hinge mechanism in the Orthida and Strophomenida (Brachiopoda): a quantitative assessment [abstract]. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs 17(1):1.Google Scholar
Ackerly, S. C. 1989. Shell closure in articulate brachiopods: hydrodynamics, mechanics & evolution. Ph.D. dissertation. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar
Ackerly, S. C. 1991a. Hydrodynamics of rapid shell closure in articulate brachiopods. Journal of Experimental Biology 156:287–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerly, S. C. 1991b. Rapid shell closure in Recent Terebratulida and Paleozoic Orthida. Pp. 177–182In MacKinnon, D. I., Lee, D. E., and Campbell, J. D., eds. Brachiopods through time. Proceedings of the 2d International Brachiopod Congress, Dunedin. Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Ackerly, S. C. 1992. Rapid shell closure in the brachiopods Terebratulina retusa and Terebratalia transversa. Journal of Marine Biological Association, U.K. 72:579–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calow, L. J., and Alexander, R. M. 1973. A mechanical analysis of a hind leg of a frog. Zoology, London 171:293–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, S. J. 1989. The articulate brachiopod hinge mechanism: morphological and functional variation. Paleobiology 15:364–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curry, G. B. 1982. Ecology and population structure of the Recent brachiopod Terebratulina from Scotland. Paleontology 25:227–246.Google Scholar
Curry, G.B., and Ansell, A. D. 1986. Tissue mass in living brachiopods. Pp. 231–241In Racheboeuf, P. R. and Emig, C. C., eds. Les Brachiopodes fossiles et actuels. Actes du 1er Congrès international sur les Brachiopodes, Brest. Biostratigraphie du Paléozoïque, 4.Google Scholar
Daniel, T. L., and Meyhöfer, E. 1989. Size limits in escape locomotion of carridean shrimp. Journal of Experimental Biology 143:245–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldspink, G. 1977. Design of muscles in relation to locomotion. Pp. 1–22In Alexander, R. M. and Goldspink, G., eds. Mechanics and energetics of animal locomotion. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1971. Muscular mechanics and the ontogeny of swimming in scallops. Paleontology 14:61–94.Google Scholar
Gutmann, W. F., Vogel, K., and Zorn, H. 1978. Brachiopods: biomechanical interdependencies governing their origin and phylogeny. Science 199:890–893.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayami, I., and Matsukuma, A. 1970. Variation of bivariate characters from the standpoint of allometry. Paleontology 13:588–605.Google Scholar
Helmcke, . Date unknown. Die muskeln der brachiopoden.Google Scholar
Hill, A. V. 1950. The dimensions of animals and their muscular dynamics. Science Progress 38:209–230.Google Scholar
Imbrie, J. 1956. Biometrical methods in the study of invertebrate fossils. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 108:215–252.Google Scholar
Jaanusson, V. J. 1971. Evolution of the brachiopod hinge. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology 3:33–46.Google Scholar
Jaanusson, V. J. 1981. Functional thresholds in evolutionary progress. Lethaia 14:251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaBarbera, M. 1981. Water flow patterns in and around three species of articulate brachiopod. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 55:185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaBarbera, M. 1986. Brachiopod lophophores: functional diversity and scaling. Pp. 313–321In Racheboeuf, P. R. and Emig, C. C., eds. les Brachiopodes fossiles et actuels. Actes du 1er Congrès international sur les Brachiopodes, Brest. Biostratigraphie du Paléozoïque, 4.Google Scholar
McGhee, G. R. Jr. 1980. Shell form in the biconvex articulate Brachiopoda: a geometric analysis. Paleobiology 6:57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMahon, T. A. 1984. Muscles, reflexes, and locomotion. Princeton University Press; Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morton, B. 1980. Swimming in Amusium pleuronectes (Bivalvia: Pectinidae). Journal of Zoology, London 190:375–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peck, S. L., and Holmes, L. J. 1989. Scaling patterns in the Antarctic brachiopod Liothyrella uva (Broderip, 1833). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 133:141–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1961. “Quick” and “catch” adductor muscles in brachiopods. Nature 191:1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1962. Filter-feeding mechanisms in some brachiopods from New Zealand. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Zoology 44:592–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1970. Living and fossil brachiopods. Hutchinson University Library, London.Google Scholar
Shumway, S. E. 1982. Oxygen consumption in brachiopods and the possible role of punctae. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 58:207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thayer, C. W. 1972. Adaptive features of swimming monomyarian bivalves (Mollusca). Forma et Functio 5:1–32.Google Scholar
Thayer, C. W. 1981. Are brachiopods better than bivalves? Mechanisms of turbidity tolerance and their interaction with feeding in articulates. Paleobiology 12:161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1974. Adaptation, versatility, and evolution. Systematic Zoology 22:466–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, K. 1986. Origin and diversification of brachiopod shells: viewpoints of constructional morphology. Pp. 399–408In Racheboeuf, P. R. and Emig, C. C., eds. Les Brachiopodes fossiles et actuels. Actes du ler Congrès international sur les Brachiopodes, Brest. Biostratigraphie du Paléozoique, 4.Google Scholar
Wilkens, J. L. 1978. Adductor muscles of brachiopods: activation and contraction. Canadian Journal of Zoology 56:315–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkie, D. R. 1950. The relation between force and velocity in human muscle. Journal of Physiology 110:249–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar