|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 1, 2013 23:10:51 GMT 5
I've tried to install OpenOffice for .ods files but this does not work for some reason.
Can't you simply post it ?
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 1, 2013 23:26:43 GMT 5
Even Word should be able to do it (of course "should be able to" and "able to" isn't always the same when talking about Microsoft Office).
Of course I can also post the results, I just tought a file would be helpful in saving the efford of typing in all those formulas whenever one wants to derive a weight figure.
lenght(m)---weight(t)
14---29.9
15---37.1
16---45.4
17---55
18---65.8
19---77.9
20---91.6
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 1, 2013 23:38:11 GMT 5
Theropod, isn't the tooth-free space actually the spacing between teeth ? Where have you seen that it is in the back of the mouth ?
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Nov 2, 2013 0:02:39 GMT 5
Did you download it? It appears to be protected from edits if you just click "open" in the browser popup, you first have to save the file on your computer. I downloaded the file, but I can not open it. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 2, 2013 2:46:38 GMT 5
Sorry, I've got not idea why that's happening. Shall I send it to you via e mail? Grey: No, Kent writes the following: "Using tooth spacing comparable to those of extant lamnids, the upper jaw tooth rows measured a total of 131 cm. Measurements on an extant C.carcharias jaw indicate that the tooth-free space increases the total jaw perimeter by about 17%. For the P. benedeni dentition, this yields an upper jaw perimiter of 153 cm and an estimated body lenght of about 7.6m" Later he also refers to "estimated tooth-free gape". Its quite clear he is referring to two completely different things, namely the interdental spacing and the edentulous posterior part of the jaws. The edentulous part in the back of the jaw rami has to be added to the total lenght of the toothrows, including the spacing between the teeth to obtain the measurement needed for the perimeter-method he is using. I've got another question, what exactly is the formula for calculating Tl from upper jaw perimeter? In the material you've shown me he is talking about a regression, and he shows a plot and function in the paper on Parotodus, but there is no corresponding formula anywhere. Is there a data supplement available? |
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 2, 2013 2:54:09 GMT 5
I don't know the exact formula, he only advised to use the regression from Mollet 1996.
I wouldn't be surprised that the tooth-free gape and and the spacing between teeth are not the exact same thing, because excluding the spacing, I've got "only" 16 m for the owner of the 15.24 cm wide tooth (the big Hubbell's tooth).
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 2, 2013 3:11:09 GMT 5
What is the width of the largest Parotodus tooth ?
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Nov 2, 2013 3:22:15 GMT 5
Sorry, I've got not idea why that's happening. Shall I send it to you via e mail? I doubt this will change a lot, I already saved the file on my computer. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 2, 2013 3:26:55 GMT 5
Grey: Mollet (1996) unfortunately doesn't seem to be available on the internet anywhere. Tooth-free gape is the part of the jaws (in both mandibulae and palatoquadrata of course) that bears no teeth, located posterior in the jaws, near the articulation, in all gnathostomes that bear teeth. Interdental spacing is the spacing within the toothrow, between the individual teeth. These two are completely different things and we have to know both before we start doing calculations. We know the tooth free gape, observed by Kent as approximately 17% the toothrow lenght (ie jaw perimeter =1.17*toothrow lenght) in a specimen of C. carcharias. A greater sample would be better, but we can do with this as he also did. Perhaps you could ask him on occasion what the formula from that regression was and what interdental spacing as a percentage of combined tooth-width he used? btw, have I understood it right that there is no real way to calculate the average funtion of two functions of the form f(x)=a*x^b? creature386: Have you used LibreOffice or OpenOffice?
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 2, 2013 3:34:11 GMT 5
I'm discussing with him about that. He responds without any problem but given his daily work, gives two or three responses the day.
I'd advise you to not hesitate eventually contact and ask to Mike Siversson about the calculation since he refers to it in his research and seems to have used it for Carcharocles.
I guess to have too much contacted him and he gives irregular responses. Another different contact however could get a response from him I guess.
Normally, jaws perimeter should give something around 20 m TL with a large tooth.
For your question, if there's something where I'm a dick, that's maths !
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 2, 2013 3:42:22 GMT 5
I was rather having coherentsheaf in mind with that question (even tough it might look like an insult to his expertise going by what I know about mathematicians). I had tried with the set of functions from the file I attached, and it didn't work the way I wanted it to (to spit out the mean values of the results). On searching the web I only found two pages on Springer, which I didn't understand anyway, but it looks as if it didn't work the usual way with non-linear functions. |
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 3, 2013 9:02:54 GMT 5
 I cannot found the original source at the moment, but it is from the megateeth website. It was described as being a very large posterior. I have measured the CH to be 5.68 cm high, the original size described was 3.6 " long, 3.2" wide. Let's assume cautiously 5.6 cm. I presume this a UL6. Your opinions ? |
|
|
|
Post by coherentsheaf on Nov 4, 2013 3:33:53 GMT 5
btw, have I understood it right that there is no real way to calculate the average funtion of two functions of the form f(x)=a*x^b? Hm why not just take the arithmetical average of the two functions? |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 4, 2013 22:27:22 GMT 5
You mean taking the average of the results?
I'd like to have a function whose results are the mean of the results of a number of others. I tried to calculate that (in this case for the functions for lamniform lenght-weight relationships) by simply taking averages, but I just didn't get it to work, the results I got were far off the average of the results.
Should ((a*x^b)+(an*x^bn))/n work? If so, I'm just making some calculation error.
|
|
|
|
Post by coherentsheaf on Nov 5, 2013 0:27:02 GMT 5
You mean taking the average of the results? I'd like to have a function whose results are the mean of the results of a number of others. I tried to calculate that (in this case for the functions for lamniform lenght-weight relationships) by simply taking averages, but I just didn't get it to work, the results I got were far off the average of the results. Should ((a*x^b)(a n*x^b n))/n work? If so, I'm just making some calculation error. If you include + it should  |
|
