Effect of durophagy on drilling predation: a case study of Cenozoic molluscs from North America
Abstract
Drilling predation represents one of the most widely studied biotic interactions preserved in the fossil record, and complete and incomplete drill holes have been commonly used to explore spatial and temporal patterns of this phenomenon. While such patterns are generally viewed solely in terms of the interactions between predator and prey, they might also be affected by extrinsic ecological factors. Recent experiments have demonstrated that in the presence of a secondary predator (crab), the incomplete drilling frequency increases indicating increasing abandonment of the prey, and drilling frequency decreases implying a decrease in successful attacks. Here, we tested whether the effect of secondary predators on drilling frequencies can be detected in the fossil record. Using fossil molluscs from six Plio-Pleistocene localities, we found that repair scar frequencies, a proxy for activity of durophagous predators, correlate directly with incomplete drill hole frequencies and inversely with complete drill hole frequencies. These results suggest that the activity and success of drilling predators is influenced not just by the prey, but also by secondary predators.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Records of changes in shell morphology and injury patterns in biomineralized taxa are ideal for demonstrating adaptive responses to predation.
“Records of changes in shell morphology and injury patterns in biomineralized taxa are ideal for demonstrating such adaptive responses.”
From Adaptive responses in Cambrian predator and prey highlight the arms race during the rise of animals (2025) · cites this paper as [9]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Adaptive responses in Cambrian predator and prey highlight the arms race during the rise of animals
Bicknell, R. D. C., Campione, N. E., Brock, G. A., & Paterson, J. R. (2025) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2024.12.007 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chattopadhyay, D., & Baumiller, T. K.
- Affiliations
- University of West Georgia (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chattopadhyay, Devapriya
- Venue
- Historical Biology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-07-05
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 367-379
- ISSN
- 0891-2963 (ISSN-L)
- 1029-2381
- OpenAlex
- W1971811537
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Historical Biology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Geological Society of America
- Conchologists of America
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology
- Keywords
- drilling predation, durophagy, drill holes, predator-prey interactions, fossil molluscs, crab predation, Cenozoic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review