Flying predators threatened even T-Rex babies,article link

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

seeker - 28 May 2008 15:20 GMT

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080528/sc_livescience/hugeflyingreptilesat
edinosaurs;_ylt=At_vwnmujG.SqM5wxhLOzxsPLBIF

Reply to this Message

John Harshman - 28 May 2008 19:20 GMT

> http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080528/sc_livescience/hugeflyingreptilesat
edinosaurs;_ylt=At_vwnmujG.SqM5wxhLOzxsPLBIF

Please include at least a little text when you do this. Here:

> With a name like T. rex, you'd expect to be safe from even the
> fiercest paleo-bullies. Turns out, ancient, flying reptiles could
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Age of Dinosaurs some 230 million to 65 million years ago did not
> catch prey in flight, but rather stalked them on land.

It's always hard to tell how much of this nonsense is due to the science
writer, how much to the university press release writer, and how much
can actually be blamed on the scientist. Where was this "new study"
published? Ah, here it is:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002271

And it turns out that none of the nonsense was the product of the actual
scientists.

> Until now, paleontologists pictured the so-called "winged lizards" or
> pterosaurs as skim-feeders. In this vision, the creatures would have
> flown over lakes and oceans grabbing fish from the water's surface,
> much as gulls do today.

Nonsense. Paleontologists have pictured pterosaurs as ecologically
diverse. Now it may be that Walt Disney movies have pictured Pteranodon
as a skim-feeder, but I don't know of any scientific publications to
that effect. (The referenced paper does mention it, but gives a list of
17 references for pterosaur ecology, without specifying which of them
make the claim.)

Gulls, by the way, are not skim feeders. The writers are perhaps
thinking of the aptly named skimmers, which are at least in the same
order as gulls. (The referenced paper talks explicitly about skimmers,
and points out that they are the only living skim feeders.)

> The new findings, detailed this week online in the journal PLoS ONE,
> don't ground the animals totally.
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> head and neck underneath the body and into the water, thus requiring
> a hugely flexible neck," Witton said.

That's a fairly nice description of how a Black Skimmer operates. Gulls
don't do this.

> This is the case with gulls and pelicans (which are considered plunge
> divers), but azhdarchid's neck, despite potentially reaching nearly
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> and you weigh a quarter of a ton, and you've got these dinky little
> feet, you're going to just sink in."

A 500-pound flyer? Wouldn't that seem unlikely?

> The reptile's head also was pretty lengthy, up to 10 feet (3 meters).
> So Witton said an azhdarchid would only have to dip its head part way
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> dinosaurs, these pterosaurs could lunch on animals ranging from small
> bird-like Velicoraptors to T. rex babies to amphibians.

Reply to this Message

Natural Science Forum / Biology / Paleontology / May 2008

Flying predators threatened even T-Rex babies,article link