Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T07:19:43.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hydrodynamic properties of cephalopod shell ornament

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

John A. Chamberlain Jr.  and
Gerd E. G. Westermann
John A. Chamberlain Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Brooklyn College of the City University of New York; Brooklyn, New York 11210
Gerd E. G. Westermann
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, McMaster University; Hamilton, Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We investigated the hydrodynamic properties of cephalopod shell sculpture in two ways: 1) flow visualization experiments with sculptured shells; and 2) application of drag coefficient data for simple geometric bodies to cephalopod shells. Results of this work suggest:

1) the hydrodynamic effect of shell sculpture depends primarily on the size of the sculptural elements relative to the size of the shell and on the positions of sculpture elements on the shell and relative to each other.

2) sculpture is detrimental to swimming (reduces hydrodynamic efficiency) if it exceeds the height of the lower part of the shell's boundary layer.

3) sculpture is advantageous to swimming (increases efficiency) if it remains immersed in the boundary layer and induces premature conversion to turbulent boundary layer flow. To be hydrodynamically optimal, small shells (diam ≈ 10 cm) must have rough (sculptured) surfaces, whereas large shells (diam ≈ 100 cm) require smooth surfaces. Thus, in order to maintain maximum efficiency throughout life, the ontogeny of small individuals, or species, should be characterized by progressive roughening of the shell, while large forms should become increasingly smooth. Such allometries are observed among many ammonoids.

4) sculpture always has an effect on the flow around a cephalopod shell. In some species this effect was probably negligible, while in others, those with compressed shells especially, it was probably of major importance. In these species, sculpture appears to have functioned primarily to increase swimming ability.

Type
Research Article
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , Fall 1976 , pp. 316 - 331
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

Alexander, R. McN. 1968. Animal Mechanics. 422 pp. Univ. of Washington Press; Seattle, Washington.Google Scholar
Bainbridge, R. 1958. The speed of swimming of fish as related to size and to the frequency and amplitude of the tail beat. J. Exp. Biol. 35:109–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bainbridge, R. 1960. Speed and stamina in three fish. J. Exp. Biol. 37:129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caddy, J. F. 1968. Underwater observations on scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) behaviour and drag efficiency. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 25:2123–2141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1971. Shell morphology and the dynamics of streamlining in ectocochliate cephalopods (abstr.). Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. with Prog. 3:523–524.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1973. Phyletic improvements in hydromechanical design and swimming ability in fossil nautiloids (abstr.). Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. with Prog. 5:571–572.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1976. Flow patterns and drag coefficients of cephalopod shells. Palaeontology. 19:539–563.Google Scholar
Cole, K. S. and Gilbert, D. L. 1970. Jet propulsion in squid. Biol. Bull. 138:245–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowen, R., Gertman, R., and Wiggett, G. 1973. Camouflage patterns in Nautilus, and their implications for cephalopod paleobiology. Lethaia. 6:201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gero, D. R. 1952. Power and efficiency of large salt water fish. Aeronaut. Eng. Rev., Jan. 1952. pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
Gray, J. 1957. How fishes swim. Sci. Am. 197:48–53. [Reprinted in Readings From Scientific American: Oceanography. Moore, J. R., ed., 1971. pp. 228–234. W. H. Freeman; San Francisco, Calif.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertel, H. 1966. Structure, Form, and Movement. 251 pp. Reinhold; New York.Google Scholar
Hoerner, S. F. 1965. Fluid Dynamic Drag. 432 pp. Publ. by author; Midland Park, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Johannessen, C. L. and Harder, J. A. 1960. Sustained swimming speeds of dolphins. Science. 132:1550–1551.Google Scholar
Jordan, R. 1968. Zur Anatomie mesozoischer Ammoniten nach den Strukturelementen der Gehause-Innenwand. Beih. Geol. Jahrb. 77:1–64.Google Scholar
Kummel, B. and Lloyd, R. M. 1955. Experiments on relative streamlining of coiled cephalopod shells. J. Paleontol. 29:159–170.Google Scholar
Lang, T. G. and Norris, K. S. 1966. Swimming speed of a Pacific bottlenose porpoise. Science. 151:558–590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehmann, U. 1971. New aspects in ammonite biology. Proc. North Am. Paleontol. Conv. Part I. pp. 1251–1269.Google Scholar
Lehmann, U. 1972. Aptychen als Kieferelemente der Ammoniten. Paläontol. Z. 46:34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnan, A. 1930. Les characteristiques geometriques et physiques des poissons. Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. Ser. 10. 13:355–489.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H. 1957. On the relations of the principle muscles to the shell in Nautilus and some fossil nautiloids. Ark. Miner. Geol. 2:219–254.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H. 1964. Remarks on the anatomy of recent and fossil cephalopoda. Stockholm Contrib. Geol. 11:79–102.Google Scholar
Packard, A. 1969. Jet propulsion and the giant fibre response of Loligo. Nature. 221:875–877.Google Scholar
Prandtl, L. and Tietjens, O. J. 1934. Applied Hydro- and Aeromechanics. Dover, ed. 311 pp. Dover, New York.Google Scholar
Spath, L. F. 1919. Notes on ammonites. Geol. Mag. 56:27–35, 65–74, 115–122, 170–177, 220–225.Google Scholar
Stringham, E. 1924. Maximum speed of freshwater fishes. Am. Nat. 58:156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teichert, C. 1967. Major features of cephalopod evolution. pp. 162–210. In: Teichert, C. and Yochelson, E., eds. Essays in Paleontology and Stratigraphy. Univ. of Kansas Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Tucker, V. A. 1975. The energetic cost of moving about. Am. Sci. 63:413–419.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1966. Covariation and taxonomy of the Jurassic Ammonite Sonninia Adrica (Waagen). Neues Jahrb. Geol. Paläontol., Abh. 124:289–312.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1971. Form, structure and function of shell and siphuncle in coiled Mesozoic ammonoids. Life Sci. Contrib., R. Ontario Mus. No. 78, 39 pp.Google Scholar