This PDF file includes:

• Fig. S1. Relationship between body size reconstructions performed by Benson et al. (15, 23) and Lee et al. (22).
• Fig. S2. Comparison between the topologies of the theropod phylogeny reconstructed by Lee et al. (22) and Benson et al. (15, 23).
• Fig. S3. Replicate of Fig. 2, except that, in this case, analyses were replicated using the dataset and phylogeny by Lee et al. (22).
• Fig. S4. Replicate of Fig. 4, except that, in this case, analyses were replicated using the dataset and phylogeny by Lee et al. (22).
• Fig. S5. Comparison between reconstructed metabolic levels along the bird stem lineage using the dataset by Benson et al. (15) and Lee et al. (22), plotted against the 1:1 line.
• Fig. S6. Phenotypic variance simulated with the difference parameters fitted by Benson et al. (15) for the theropod phylogeny (parameters available in their appendix S5).
• Fig. S7. Simulated OU model overlapped against the empirical data from Benson et al. (15) (their appendix S5), which shows that this model can replicate the distribution of phenotypic data observed along the theropod phylogeny and provide a valid “null model” in the absence of directionality (see below).
• Fig. S8. Results from the null model in the main text compared against expectations for a more conservative model assuming Brownian motion.

Download PDF