ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023
Getting to the Meat of It: The Effects of a Captive Diet upon the Skull Morphology of the Lion and Tiger.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Craniological differentiation amongst Southeast Asian small cats.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Long-term impacts of captivity on skull morphology and endocranial volume in a marsupial carnivore.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- An osteobiography of a celebrity chimpanzee reflects the changing roles of modern zoos.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Adaptation in the Alleyways: Candidate Genes Under Potential Selection in Urban Coyotes.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Morphological change in an isolated population of red squirrels (Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Skull morphology analysis suggests the extinct Cape lion, Panthera leo melanochaita (Smith, 1842), is not distinctive.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Maxillary morphology of chimpanzees: Captive versus wild environments.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Zoo animals are crucial for conserving and potentially re-introducing species to the wild, yet it is known that the morphology of captive animals differs from that of wild animals. It is important to know how and why zoo and wild animal morphology differs to better care for captive animals and enhance their survival in reintroductions, and to understand how plasticity may influence morphology, which is supposedly indicative of evolutionary relationships. Using museum collections, we took 56 morphological measurements of skulls and mandibles from 617 captive and wild lions and tigers, reflecting each species' recent historical range. Linear morphometrics were used to identify differences in size and shape. Skull size does not differ between captive and wild lions and tigers, but skull and mandible shape does. Differences occur in regions associated with biting, indicating that diet has influenced forces acting upon the skull and mandible. The diets of captive big cats used in this study predominantly consisted of whole or partial carcasses, which closely resemble the mechanical properties of wild diets. Thus, we speculate that the additional impacts of killing, manipulating and consuming large prey in the wild have driven differentiation between captive and wild big cats.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.