Table 1. Schematic overview of previous studies.
| Study | Birds (number of species) | Elements | Measurement | Dodo mass (n) | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Campbell & Marcus (1992) | All birds (387) | F | Circumference | 13.2–16.4 (3) | |
| Livezey (1993) | Columbidae (187) | F | Length | Male: 10.6 (7) | “Flighted” model |
| Female: 8.6 (8) | |||||
| Male: 15.9 (7) | 50% addition to correct for flightlessness or fat condition | ||||
| Female: 12.9 (8) | |||||
| Male: 21.2 (7) | 100% addition to correct for flightlessness and fat condition | ||||
| Female: 17.2 (8) | |||||
| Kitchener (1993) | Columbidae (32) | F, TT, TMT | Length, diameter | 10.6–17.5 (29 F, 32 TT, 26 TMT) | |
| Angst, Buffetaut & Abourachid (2011a) | All birds (323) | F, TT, TMT | Length | 10.5 (25 F, 27 TT, 30 TMT) | Based on the regression of Zeffer, Johansson & Marmbebro (2003) |
| Louchart & Mourer-Chauviré (2011) | All birds (387) | F | Circumference | 11.7–15.4 (3) | Based on the regressions of Campbell & Marcus (1992) |
| Heavy terrestrial birds | F | Circumference | 9.5–12.3 (3) |
Notes:
Schematic overview of previous studies aiming to estimate the weight of the dodo using the regression method. F, femur; TT, tibiotarsus; TMT, tarsometatarsus; n, number of dodo bones used in the study.