Prehistoric Whodunit: New Technique Identifies What Killed Ancient Animals  

Characteristic etchings on ancient prey bones reveal the animal that digested them

Thomas Fuchs

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Nowadays detectives can use DNA analysis to help catch a killer. But what happens when a crime scene has been exposed to the elements for thousands of years? DNA does not always stay intact that long—so for a paleontologist trying to figure out what kind of predator killed a long-dead fossil animal, the case often goes cold.

But a new method promises to help researchers identify these ancient killers. It relies on the fact that when a predator gulps down the bones of its prey—say, when a swooping owl snatches and eats a small rodent in the night—the diner's stomach juices leave behind microscopic etchings on the surface of the victim's bones.

These etchings occur in patterns that are unique to the type of predator that did the deed, making them a bit like fingerprints that scientists can use to crack unsolved cases, explains Rebecca Terry, a paleontologist at Oregon State University, who led the team that studied the etchings. This technique, she adds, will help researchers paint pictures of what kinds of predators were active in long-vanished ecosystems, particularly in areas where fossils are scarce. “It's really powerful,” she says.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Terry and her team used a scanning electron microscope to examine the leftover bones that modern predatory birds regurgitate as pellets after a meal. They also looked at the feces of carnivorous mammals. “A bone that passes into and out of a nocturnal owl is clearly distinguishable from bones that have been eaten by diurnal raptors” or mammals, Terry says. Patterns etched on bones inside an owl's stomach tend to be relatively short and close together; those from the stomach of a hawk or mammal tend to be longer and more widely spaced, according to the study, which was published last November in PALAIOS. And the patterns left by the modern-day owls and mammals, Terry adds, were “indistinguishable” from those found on fossil bones digested by similar predators long ago.

These findings will help answer one of paleontologists' most basic questions about the fossils of animals they suspect were killed and eaten: “Whodunit?” As Joshua Miller, a paleobiologist at the University of Cincinnati, who was not involved in the new research, says, “You can actually look at an individual bone and get some perspective on why that bone is where you found it. And that's really neat.”

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe