 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Biology / Paleontology / August 2005One more Dunkleosteus question
That raises the interesting question of why we don't have any Dunkleosteus fossils except for the skulls and the surrounding armor. Is it just because the armor was so heavy that it separated from the rest, leaving the smaller bones scattered and unidentifable? Or was ALL the rest of the skeleton cartilage? Or do we know for sure? OK, two questions: did arthrodires have swim bladders? Thanks, Matt >That raises the interesting question of why we don't have any >Dunkleosteus fossils except for the skulls and the surrounding armor. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Matt I think that it might not be quite that bad. A large number (thousands) of Upper Devonian fish fossils have been recovered from the various Upper Devonian "Ohio Shales". At least some of these represent mass fatalities hypothetically caused by stirring up H2S laden muds. Some of this material was collected as salvage paleo material and has apparently never been cataloged or formally described. It wouldn't be suprising that there there are some arthrodires and possibly even some Dunkleosteus in the mix. I think at least one relatively complete arthrodire has been recovered from the New Albany shale in Kentucky, but I don't know the genus or where, when, or by who the description (if any) was published. > That raises the interesting question of why we don't have any > Dunkleosteus fossils except for the skulls and the surrounding armor. > Is it just because the armor was so heavy that it separated from the > rest, leaving the smaller bones scattered and unidentifable? Or was > ALL the rest of the skeleton cartilage? Or do we know for sure? Since there are many known arthrodire fossils, and none of them (to my knowledge) includes any postcranial skeleton, it seems very unlikely that the postcranial skeleton could have been heavily ossified and still be so completely unknown. My vote is for cartilage only. > OK, two questions: did arthrodires have swim bladders? This too is unknown. However there is some other placoderm fossil, I forget which group (antiarch?), that appears to have lungs. tteesstt ignore ... Thanks to all for help on the Dunks. Matt Bille |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.