Editing Carcharodontosaurus (section)

==Paleobiology==
=== Lifting capabilities ===
A biomechanical analysis of ''Carcharodontosaurus''<nowiki/>' lifting capabilities was conducted by paleontologist [[Donald Henderson (paleontologist)|Donald Henderson]] and paleoartist [[Robert Nicholls (artist)|Robert Nicholls]] in 2015. The authors used 3D models of the animal as well as a subadult [[Sauropoda|sauropod]] ''[[Limaysaurus]]'', which although not found alongside ''Carcharodontosaurus'', is similar to the [[Rebbachisauridae|rebbachisaurids]] of the Kem Kem Beds. The models included the size of the [[lung]]s and other pneumatic structures of the two, fostering an accurate weight simulation of the scenario. Henderson & Nicholls' study found that an adult ''C. saharicus'' could hold a maximum of {{cvt|424|kg}}, half the weight of an adult ''Limaysaurus''. However, two ''C. saharicus'' adults could together lift as much as {{Convert|850|kg|lb}}.<ref name="Henderson&Nicholls2015" />

=== Feeding and diet ===
[[File:Carcharodontosaurus teeth.jpg|thumb|292x292px|Teeth referred to ''Carcharodontosaurus'']]
The dentition of allosauroids is distinct, with carcharodontosaurid teeth bearing distinctly thin and blade-like teeth. However, these teeth are thin and likely could not sustain impact against hard surfaces like bone without potentially bending and snapping. This danger is exacerbated by the straight edges, slightly recurved tips, and [[sinusoidal]] shapes observed in their dentition. Despite these traits, the teeth are still much more robust than those of smaller theropods and due to their overall size could take more pressure. ''Carcharodontosaurus'' also had a high tooth replacement rate meaning that damaged teeth could be replaced easily in contrast to extant bone-crushing mammals who spend much of their energy maintaining their teeth.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Van Valkenburgh |first=Blaire |date=1988 |title=Incidence of Tooth Breakage Among Large, Predatory Mammals |journal=The American Naturalist |volume=131 |issue=2 |pages=291–302 |doi=10.1086/284790 |s2cid=222330098 |jstor=2461849|bibcode=1988ANat..131..291V }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Van Valkenburgh |first=Blaire |year=2008 |title=Costs of carnivory: tooth fracture in Pleistocene and Recent carnivorans |journal=Biological Journal of the Linnean Society |volume=96 |issue=1 |pages=68–81 |doi=10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.01108.x |s2cid=85623961 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Evidence of bone-crunching bites is observed in ''Allosaurus'', which would engage in ritual face-biting with other individuals and bite into the pelves of ''Stegosaurus'' as shown by bite marks.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hone |first1=David W. E. |last2=Rauhut |first2=Oliver W. M. |date=2010 |title=Feeding behaviour and bone utilization by theropod dinosaurs |journal=Lethaia |volume=43 |issue=2 |pages=232–244 |doi=10.1111/j.1502-3931.2009.00187.x |bibcode=2010Letha..43..232H |s2cid=86037076}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Tanke |first1=Darren H.|last2=Currie |first2=Phillip J. |date=1998 |title=Head-biting behavior in theropod dinosaurs: Paleopathological evidence |journal=Gaia|issue=15|pages=167–184|doi=10.7939/R34T6FJ1P |s2cid=90552600 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Drumheller |first1=Stephanie K. |last2=McHugh |first2=Julia B. |last3=Kane |first3=Miriam |last4=Riedel |first4=Anja |last5=D’Amore |first5=Domenic C. |date=May 27, 2020 |title=High frequencies of theropod bite marks provide evidence for feeding, scavenging, and possible cannibalism in a stressed Late Jurassic ecosystem |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=15 |issue=5 |pages=e0233115 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0233115 |pmid=32459808 |pmc=7252595 |bibcode=2020PLoSO..1533115D |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Bite forces of ''Carcharodontosaurus'' as well as other giant theropods including ''Acrocanthosaurus'' and ''Tyrannosaurus'' have been analyzed. Studies reported that carcharodontosaurids had much lower bite forces than ''Tyrannosaurus'' despite being in the same size class. The anterior bite force of ''C. saharicus'' was estimated in a 2022 paper to be 11,312 newtons while the posterior bite force was 25,449 newtons. This is much lower than that of ''Tyrannosaurus,'' implying that it did not eat bones.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sakamoto |first=Manabu |date=July 12, 2022 |title=Estimating bite force in extinct dinosaurs using phylogenetically predicted physiological cross-sectional areas of jaw adductor muscles |journal=PeerJ |volume=10 |pages=e13731 |doi=10.7717/peerj.13731 |pmc=9285543 |pmid=35846881 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Gignac |first1=Paul M. |last2=Erickson |first2=Gregory M. |date=May 17, 2017 |title=The Biomechanics Behind Extreme Osteophagy in ''Tyrannosaurus rex'' |journal=Scientific Reports |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=2012 |doi=10.1038/s41598-017-02161-w |pmc=5435714 |pmid=28515439|bibcode=2017NatSR...7.2012G |doi-access=free }}</ref> Finite element accounts of the skulls of theropods have also been taken, which further supported the idea that ''Carcharodontosaurus'' ate softer food than tyrannosaurids. Great amounts of stress were recovered in the posterior part of the cranium near the quadrate in ''Carcharodontosaurus, Spinosaurus,'' and ''Acrocanthosaurus''. The skulls of these theropods had higher relative stress quantities in opposition to that of smaller genera. This indicates that the crania of giant taxa (ex. ''Carcharodontosaurus'') were unstable due to having large pneumatic structures to save weight instead of creating a firm build. However, ''Spinosaurus'' and ''[[Suchomimus]]'' experienced even greater values of stress meaning that they could only consume light, small prey instead of larger items, which the stronger skull of ''Carcharodontosaurus'' could bite while sustaining the stress.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rayfield |first1=Emily J. |title=STUDIES ON FOSSIL TETRAPODS |date=2011 |publisher=Palaeontological Association |pages=241–253 |chapter=Structural performance of tetanuran theropod skulls, with emphasis on the Megalosauridae, Spinosauridae and Carcharodontosauridae |hdl=1983/aaaea1c8-8c3a-4f99-abd6-982b47664aac |isbn=978-1-4443-6189-6 }}</ref>

Isotopic analyses of the teeth of ''C. saharicus'' have found δ18O values that are higher than that of the contemporary ''Spinosaurus'', suggesting the latter pursued semi-aquatic habits whereas ''Carcharodontosaurus'' was more terrestrial.<ref name=":13">{{Cite journal |last1=Goedert |first1=J. |last2=Amiot |first2=R. |last3=Boudad |first3=L. |last4=Buffetaut |first4=E. |author-link4=Éric Buffetaut |last5=Fourel |first5=F. |last6=Godefroit |first6=P. |last7=Kusuhashi |first7=N. |last8=Suteethorn |first8=V. |last9=Tong |first9=H. |last10=Watabe |first10=M. |last11=Lecuyer |first11=C. |date=2016 |title=Preliminary investigation of seasonal patterns recorded in the oxygen isotope compositions of theropod dinosaur tooth enamel. |journal=PALAIOS |volume=31 |issue=1 |pages=10–19|doi=10.2110/palo.2015.018 |bibcode=2016Palai..31...10G |s2cid=130878403 }}</ref> This is further supported by the taphonomy of ''C. saharicus'' teeth, which are more often found in land terrains than aquatic ones.<ref name=":12" /> ''Carcharodontosaurus'' was also a [[Homeothermy|homeotherm]] with an [[endotherm]]-like [[Thermoregulation|thermophysiology]] as inferred by these isotopes meaning that most of its oxygen was accumulated by drinking water rather than being in it.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Amiot |first1=Romain |last2=Wang |first2=Xu |last3=Lécuyer |first3=Christophe |last4=Buffetaut |first4=Eric |last5=Boudad |first5=Larbi |last6=Cavin |first6=Lionel |last7=Ding |first7=Zhongli |last8=Fluteau |first8=Frédéric |last9=Kellner |first9=Alexander W.A. |last10=Tong |first10=Haiyan |last11=Zhang |first11=Fusong |date=2010 |title=Oxygen and carbon isotope compositions of middle Cretaceous vertebrates from North Africa and Brazil: Ecological and environmental significance |journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology |volume=297 |issue=2 |pages=439–451 |doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2010.08.027 |bibcode=2010PPP...297..439A |s2cid=131607253 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Amiot |first1=Romain |last2=Lécuyer |first2=Christophe |last3=Buffetaut |first3=Eric |last4=Escarguel |first4=Gilles |last5=Fluteau |first5=Frédéric |last6=Martineau |first6=François |date=June 15, 2006 |title=Oxygen isotopes from biogenic apatites suggest widespread endothermy in Cretaceous dinosaurs |journal=Earth and Planetary Science Letters |volume=246 |issue=1 |pages=41–54 |doi=10.1016/j.epsl.2006.04.018 |bibcode=2006E&PSL.246...41A |s2cid=55100956 |jstor=41125672 }}</ref>

=== Crest function ===
Theropods such as ''Carcharodontosaurus, Allosaurus,'' and ''Acrocanthosaurus'' have enlarged lacrimal crests, whose purpose is unknown. Paleontologist Daniel Chure hypothesized that these crests were used for "head-butting" between individuals, but how durable they are has not been studied.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Chure |first=Daniel |date=2000 |title=On the orbit of theropod dinosaurs. |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228550944 |journal=Gaia |volume=15 |pages=233–240}}</ref>

=== Vision ===
{{multiple image
| align             = right
| direction         = horizontal
| total_width       = 280
| image1            = Carcharodontosaurus saharicus theropod dinosaur (Kem Kem beds, Upper Cretaceous; Gara es Sbaa, Kem Kem region, southeastern Morocco) 3 (15375691822).jpg
| alt1              = Skull of C. saharicus
| image2            = Carcharodontosaurus saharicus theropod dinosaur (Kem Kem beds, Upper Cretaceous; Gara es Sbaa, Kem Kem region, southeastern Morocco) 2 (15352983706).jpg
| alt2              = 
| footer            = Skull of ''C. saharicus'' showing its elongated, thin rostrum and limited degree of binocular vision
}}

A 2006 study by biologist [[Kent Stevens]] analyzed the [[binocular vision]] capabilities of the allosauroids ''Carcharodontosaurus'' and ''Allosaurus'' as well as several [[Coelurosauria|coelurosaurs]] including ''Tyrannosaurus'' and ''[[Stenonychosaurus]]''. By applying [[Visual field test|modified perimetry]] to models of these dinosaurs' heads, Stevens deduced that the binocular vision of ''Carcharodontosaurus'' was limited, a side effect of its large, elongated rostrum. Its greatest degree of binocular vision was at higher elevations, suggesting that ''Carcharodontosaurus'' may have habitually held its head at a downward 40° angle with its eyes facing up accordingly to achieve maximum binocular vision. The range of vision seen in these allosauroids is comparable to that of crocodiles, suggesting that they were [[ambush predator]]s. They likely sensed prey via [[Parallax|motion parallax]] between prey and background, with a narrow binocular field of vision helping predators judge prey distances and time attacks.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Stevens |first=Kent A. |date=June 12, 2006 |title=Binocular vision in theropod dinosaurs |journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=321–330 |doi=10.1671/0272-4634(2006)26[321:BVITD]2.0.CO;2 |s2cid=85694979 |jstor=4524572 }}</ref>

===Pathology===
{{Main|Theropod paleopathology}}
The neotype skull of ''C. saharicus'' is one of many allosauroid individuals to preserve [[Pathology|pathologies]], with signs of biting, infection, and breaks observed in ''Allosaurus'' and ''Acrocanthosaurus'' among others.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Chinsamy |first1=Anusuya |last2=Tumarkin-Deratzian |first2=Allison |date=2009 |title=Pathologic Bone Tissues in a Turkey Vulture and a Nonavian Dinosaur: Implications for Interpreting Endosteal Bone and Radial Fibrolamellar Bone in Fossil Dinosaurs |journal=The Anatomical Record: Advances in Integrative Anatomy and Evolutionary Biology |volume=292 |issue=9 |pages=1478–1484 |doi=10.1002/ar.20991 |pmid=19711479 |s2cid=41596233 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Molnar2001">{{cite book |last1=Molnar |first1=R. E.|editor1-last=Carpenter |editor1-first=Kenneth |editor2-last=Skrepnick |editor2-first=Michael William |editor3-last=Tanke |editor3-first=Darren H. |title=Mesozoic Vertebrate Life |date=2001 |publisher=Indiana Univ. Press |isbn=978-0-253-33907-2 |pages=337–363 |chapter=Theropod Paleopathology: A Literature Survey |oclc=248649755 }}</ref> This skull bears a circular puncture wound in the nasal and "an abnormal projection of bone on the antorbital rim".<ref name="Molnar2001"/> A later study theorized that this was the result of craniofacial bites.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rothschild |first1=Bruce |title=The Carnivorous Dinosaurs |last2=Tanke |first2=Darren |publisher=Indiana University Press |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-253-34539-4 |edition=1st |location=Indianapolis |page=351 |chapter=Theropod paleopathology: state-of-the-art review }}</ref>