Organisms that are durophagous, hard prey consumers, have a diversity of tooth forms. To determine why we see this variation, we tested whether some tooth forms break shells better than others. We measured the force needed with three series of aluminium tooth models, which varied in concavity and the morphology of a stress concentrating cusp, to break a shell. We created functionally identical copies of two intertidal snail shells: the thicker shelled Nucella ostrina and the more ornamented Nucella lamellosa using a three-dimensional printer. In this way, we reduced variation in material properties between test shells, allowing us to test only the interaction of the experimental teeth with the two shell morphologies. We found that for all tooth shapes, thicker shells are harder to break than the thinner shells and that increased ornamentation has no discernible effect. Our results show that for both shell morphologies, domed and flat teeth break shells better than cupped teeth, and teeth with tall or skinny cusps break shells best. While our results indicate that there is an ideal tooth form for shell breaking, we do not see this shape in nature. This suggests a probable trade-off between tooth function and the structural integrity of the tooth.

How to smash a snailExcel file containing force of initial failure data for three tooth model series (convex-concave, cusp - height, and cusp - width) for two snail shell morphologies (N ostrina and N lamellosa)