Enantiornithines were the dominant birds of the Mesozoic, but understanding of their diet is still tenuous. We introduce new data on the enantiornithine family Bohaiornithidae, famous for their large size and powerfully built teeth and claws. In tandem with previously published data, we comment on the breadth of enantiornithine ecology and potential patterns in which it evolved. Body mass, jaw mechanical advantage, finite element analysis of the jaw, and traditional morphometrics of the claws and skull are compared between bohaiornithids and living birds. We find bohaiornithids to be more ecologically diverse than any other enantiornithine family: Bohaiornis and Parabohaiornis are similar to living plant-eating birds; Longusunguis resembles raptorial carnivores; Zhouornis is similar to both fruit-eating birds and generalist feeders; and Shenqiornis and Sulcavis plausibly ate fish, plants, or a mix of both. We predict the ancestral enantiornithine bird to have been a generalist which ate a wide variety of foods. However, more quantitative data from across the enantiornithine tree is needed to refine this prediction. By the Early Cretaceous, enantiornithine birds had diversified into a variety of ecological niches like crown birds after the K-Pg extinction, adding to the evidence that traits unique to crown birds cannot completely explain their ecological success.
Keywords: avialae; birds; diet; evolutionary biology; finite element analysis; mechanical advantage; morphometrics.
The birds living in the world today are only a small part of the larger bird family tree. Around 120 to 65 million years ago, when dinosaurs and other large reptiles roamed the world, the ancestors of modern-day birds were actually rather rare. Instead, another now extinct group of birds called the Enantiornithes (meaning “opposite birds”) were the most common birds. Many researchers believe that Enantiornithes may have filled similar roles in ancient ecosystems as living birds do today. For example, some may have hunted other birds or animals, while some may have eaten only plants. Some may have specialized at eating a few specific foods while others may have been ‘generalists’ that ate many different foods. However, some of the physical features of Enantiornithes set them apart from modern-day birds. For example, unlike living birds, Enantiornithes had teeth and their wings were also constructed very differently. Previous studies suggest that one group of these extinct birds most likely ate insects and another group most likely ate fish, but it remains unclear what variety of foods opposite birds as a whole may have consumed. Miller et al. compared the jaws, claws and various other physical features of fossils from six additional species of opposite birds with the skeletons of modern birds to infer what the diets of these opposite birds may have been. This approach revealed that Enantiornithes may have had a wide variety of different diets. The researchers found that two species probably ate plants, another species most likely ate meat, and another one likely ate a mixture of both. With a large sample across Enantiornithes, Miller et al. were able to predict the diet of their common ancestor. They found the common ancestor to most likely be a ‘generalist’ eating variety of foods and that some species subsequently evolved to have more specialist diets. Opposite birds probably played many different roles in ecosystems, like living birds do today. Therefore, a better understanding how Enantiornithes evolved may shed light on the factors that have influenced the evolution of modern-day birds. This may aid future conservation efforts to target birds whose descendants may be able to take up the ecological roles of other species that go extinct.
© 2023, Miller et al.