Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The teeth of Livyatan were among the biggest of any animal at over 31 cm (12 in) in length. [1] Unlike the modern sperm whale, Livyatan had functional teeth in both jaws. The wearing on the teeth indicates that the teeth sheared past each other while biting down, meaning it could bite off large portions of flesh from its prey.
In contrast, the modern sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) lacks enamel, teeth in the upper jaw, and the ability to use its teeth to catch prey. [13] However, Livyatan belongs to a different lineage than the other macroraptorials, and the development of large size and the spermaceti organ , an organ that is characteristic of sperm whales, are ...
Zygophyseter had 28 teeth in the lower jaws and 26 in the upper jaws. [5] The curvature of the teeth increased medially, that is, the teeth in the front of the mouth were straighter than the teeth in the back of the mouth. The back teeth featured more wear than the front teeth.
Fortunately, the "Roadshow" appraiser was able to confirm the tooth is close to 200 years old, and it's been in the owner's possession since the 1920s, so the piece is good for business!
Unlike the modern sperm whale which only has teeth on the bottom jaw, Scaldicetus had teeth in both jaws. The lectotype for S. caretti had at least 45 teeth in total in its mouth in life. Like other macroraptorial sperm whales but unlike the modern sperm whale, the teeth were covered in a thick enamel coating, about 1.2–1.3 mm (0.047–0.051 ...
A suspect is in custody after a knife attack at Grand Central 42 Street subway station in New York injured two with neck and wrist slashes.
Price on eBay: $8,500 Porcelain dolls don’t have to be more than 2 feet tall to be worth a lot of money. This little lady stands only 15 1/2 inches tall, but her ornate details and impressive ...
Brygmophyseter, known as the biting sperm whale, is an extinct genus of toothed whale in the sperm whale family with one species, B. shigensis. When it was first described in 1994, the species was placed in the genus Scaldicetus based on tooth morphology , but this was later revised in 1995.