Data from: Macroevolutionary trends in theropod dinosaur feeding mechanics

<p>Figure S1. Comparison of von Mises stress plots of non-avialan theropod mandibles under a posterior-bite scenario. Left: original mandible; Right: simulated deformed mandible, showing the deformation (displacement) of the original mandible under loading and the biomechanical performance of this simulated form (see methods). Silhouettes modified from PhyloPic.</p> <p>Figure S2. Ancestral state reconstruction of (A) average mandibular stress and (B) bite efficiency of the non-avialan theropods studied under an anterior-bite scenario using linear parsimony.</p> <p>Figure S3. Ancestral state reconstruction of (A) average mandibular stress and (B) bite efficiency of theropods under posterior-bite scenario using linear parsimony.</p> <p>Figure S4. Workflow of the analyses conducted in this study, using the oviraptorosaurian <em>Gigantoraptor erlianensis</em> as an example.</p> <p>Figure S5. Biomechanical performance of the original and simulated deformed mandibles of non-avialan theropods under an anterior-bite scenario. Average mandibular stress of (A) major clades; (B) dietary groups; (C) theropod taxa. Bite efficiency of (D) major clades; (E) dietary groups; (F) theropod taxa. See Figure S5B for legend. Silhouettes modified from PhyloPic.</p> <p>Figure S6. Biomechanical performance of the original and simulated deformed mandibles of non-avialan theropods under a posterior-bite scenario. Average mandibular stress of (A) major clades; (B) dietary groups; (C) theropod taxa. Bite efficiency of (D) major clades; (E) dietary groups; (F) theropod taxa. See Figure S6B for legend. Silhouettes modified from PhyloPic.</p> <p>Figure S7. Ancestral state reconstruction of average mandibular stress of theropods under anterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S8. Ancestral state reconstruction of average mandibular stress of theropods under posterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S9. Ancestral state reconstruction of bite efficiency of theropods under anterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S10. Ancestral state reconstruction of bite efficiency of theropods under posterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S11. Comparison of maximum principal strain plots of non-avialan theropod mandibles under an anterior-bite scenario. Left: original mandible; Right: simulated deformed mandible, showing the deformation (displacement) of the original mandible under loading and the biomechanical performance of this simulated form (see methods). Silhouettes modified from PhyloPic.</p> <p>Figure S12. Comparison of maximum principal strain plots of non-avialan theropod mandibles under a posterior-bite scenario. Left: original mandible; Right: simulated deformed mandible, showing the deformation (displacement) of the original mandible under loading and the biomechanical performance of this simulated form (see methods). Silhouettes modified from PhyloPic.</p> <p>Figure S13. Comparison of maximum principal strain plot of the tyrannosauroids <em>Tyrannosaurus</em> and <em>Tarbosaurus</em> through ontogeny.</p> <p>Figure S14. Ancestral state reconstruction of the phylogenetic generalized least square regression residuals of (A) relative average mandibular stress and (B) relative bite efficiency of the non-avialan theropods studied under an anterior-bite scenario using linear parsimony.</p> <p>Figure S15. Ancestral state reconstruction of the phylogenetic generalized least square regression residuals of (A) relative average mandibular stress and (B) relative bite efficiency of the non-avialan theropods studied under a posterior-bite scenario using linear parsimony.</p> <p>Figure S16. Ancestral state reconstruction of the phylogenetic generalized least square regression residuals of average mandibular stress of theropods under anterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S17. Ancestral state reconstruction of the phylogenetic generalized least square regression residuals of average mandibular stress of theropods under posterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S18. Ancestral state reconstruction of the phylogenetic generalized least square regression residuals of bite efficiency of theropods under anterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S19. Ancestral state reconstruction of the phylogenetic generalized least square regression residuals of bite efficiency of theropods under posterior-bite scenario using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Figure S20. Time-scaled composite phylogeny used in this study. Outgroup taxa relationships follow Novas, et al. ¹. Coelurosaurian phylogenetic relationships follow Pei, et al. ². The placement of <em>Raptorex</em> in Tyrannosauroidea follows Brusatte and Carr ³. The placement of <em>Deinocheirus</em> in Ornithomimosauria follows Lee, et al. ⁴. The placement of <em>Jianchangosaurus</em> in Therizinosauria follows Yao, et al. ⁵. The detailed phylogeny of Oviraptorosauria follows Qiu, et al. ⁶ (for early-diverging taxa) and Funston ⁷ (for Caenagnathidae and Oviraptoridae).</p> <p>Figure S21. Phylogeny used in this study with node numbers labelled. See Data S1F-G&nbsp;for reconstructed ancestral states of biomechanical characters using maximum likelihood.</p> <p>Supplementary references</p>