Codex @codex  0

A therapsid belonging to the group containing mammaliaforms and close extinct relatives. Enlargement of the dentary, differentiation of teeth and changes in the palate record a mosaic of feeding transformations.

A paleontologist who studied a Cretaceous bird fossil that informs the inferred palate of the crown group ancestor of living birds.^[ref]

The maxilla is a major upper-jaw bone contributing to the upper dental arch, hard palate, nasal region and orbit. Its several processes connect these regions structurally. The term refers to the bone, rather than all soft tissues of the upper jaw.

The mouth is the entrance to the digestive tract and a movable part of the vocal tract. Its cavity is bounded by the lips, cheeks, palate and floor of the mouth, with the tongue occupying much of the space. The teeth break food into smaller pieces while the tongue and cheeks position it for chewing and swallowing.^[ref]

Mechanical processing and chemical processing cooperate: mixing food with saliva makes a movable bolus and exposes it to salivary components. The same cavity also changes shape during speech. Opening the jaw or repositioning the tongue changes the passage through which air and sound travel, so digestive anatomy is also an articulatory instrument.

The crown-bird lineage containing Galloanserae and other living birds outside Palaeognathae. Taxonomic membership and possession of a particular mobile palate are different claims.

A bone contributing to the palate.

The terms describe contrasting palatal architectures; their literal “old” and “new” implications do not establish which architecture was ancestral. A palaeognathous palate has extensive bracing of the palatal apparatus against the skull base, involving the vomer, pterygoid bone, palatine bone and prominent basipterygoid processes. In a neognathous palate, reduced bracing and a more mobile pterygoid–palatine connection permit greater relative movement. These are arrangements of joints and contacts, not simply differences in lower-jaw shape. The distinction concerns the structural basis of cranial kinesis, movement within the skull beyond ordinary opening of the lower jaw.^[ref]

Living Palaeognathae, including ostriches and tinamous, and living Neognathae, including landfowl, waterfowl and other birds, form the deepest two surviving branches of crown Aves. Historically, the heavily braced condition was commonly interpreted as retention of a primitive nonavian configuration, followed by evolution of a more mobile palate in Neognathae. That interpretation combined resemblance to outgroups with the misleading intuition that a lineage branching early must preserve the ancestral anatomy. A sister lineage has had just as much time to change; its living members are not ancestors of the other branch.

The difficulty is establishing character polarity when delicate palatal elements are absent, crushed or wrongly identified in fossils near the crown divergence. Comparisons of the vomer across living and extinct birds documented meaningful differences in contact geometry but also substantial variation and repeated reduction. The 2019 analysis by Han Hu and colleagues emphasized how incomplete contacts restrict inferences about extinct cranial kinesis. A single robust-looking element cannot establish an immobile skull, and one potentially mobile joint cannot establish the full range of movement. Constraints elsewhere in the kinetic chain remain relevant.^[ref]

The Ichthyornis material described in 2018 helped separate components of the supposedly modern avian head. Three-dimensionally preserved skull elements combined a small beak at the jaw tips and retained teeth with a reconstructed kinetic apparatus, while other cranial regions remained markedly dinosaurian. Thus tooth loss, beak expansion and acquisition of a mobile feeding apparatus did not form one indivisible evolutionary event. This example of mosaic evolution also weakens the argument that a toothed stem bird must have a fully rigid, palaeognath-like palate. Its importance is the combination of characters, rather than an inference that every modern kinetic mechanism was already identical.^[ref]

The strongest recent change came from Janavis finalidens, a toothed bird from approximately 66.7 million years ago, described in 2022. micro-computed tomography exposed a well-preserved pterygoid bone within the specimen. Its articular construction and comparative shape resemble those of Galloanserae, supporting a mobile pterygoid–palatine connection. The animal was recovered outside the living-bird crown group, close to Ichthyornis, rather than inside Neognathae. Consequently, anatomy previously treated as a neognath innovation occurred on an earlier branch. On that reconstruction, mobility evolved before crown Aves, and the tightly integrated palaeognathous palate is a subsequent specialization of the palaeognath lineage.^[ref]

The inference is best understood by separating observation, placement and reconstruction. The observation is the morphology of a fossil pterygoid bone. Its placement outside crown Aves comes from a wider analysis of phylogenetic characters using phylogenetics. The inference that the crown ancestor had a relatively mobile palate combines those findings with distributions of phylogenetic characters in living groups. None alone proves the entire history. Convergence in the fossil lineage remains a logical alternative; it would require a different pattern of character acquisition from ancestral mobility followed by increased bracing. Distinguishing these alternatives requires additional palatal characters and fossil sampling, not the age of the specimen alone. A 66.7-million-year-old stem bird need not predate the crown ancestor chronologically: stem and crown lineages can coexist.

Functional and developmental caution also matters. fossils generally lack ligaments, muscles and direct measurements of movement. Comparative joint geometry can support potential mobility, but cannot yield exact excursions or feeding performance without further assumptions. The palaeognathous palate should not be reduced to total skull immobility, nor every neognathous palate to one uniform kinetic mechanism. The defensible revision is that important neognath-like palatal features originated before the living-bird crown split, making palaeognath specializations a plausible derived condition. The two living clades remain valid; what changes is the inferred history of the anatomical states used to describe them.

A palatal bone participating in the connection between the palate and posterior skull apparatus.

The tensor veli palatini muscle contributes to tension of the soft palate and opening of the auditory tube. Its tendon changes direction around a bony pulley region. Its trigeminal motor supply distinguishes it from several neighboring muscles of the palate and pharynx.

The vocal tract is the air passage above the sound-producing region of the larynx, including the pharyngeal, oral and, when acoustically coupled, nasal cavities. Movements of the tongue, lips, jaw and soft palate change its shape. These changes help turn a laryngeal sound source or a turbulent air stream into distinguishable speech sounds.^[ref]

A simple acoustic model treats an unbranched tract of length $L$ as a uniform tube closed at one end and open at the other. A pressure maximum at the closed end and pressure minimum at the open end allow odd quarter wavelengths, givingWith $L=0.17$ m and sound speed $c=340$ m/s, these resonances are $500$, $1500$ and $2500$ Hz. A real vocal tract is neither uniform nor permanently closed at the glottis; its varying cross-section and branching shift the resonances. These spectral resonances, associated with formants, differ from the repetition frequency of vocal-fold vibration. This is why changing articulation can change a vowel without requiring the same change in voice pitch.