[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Meat eating sauropods
>As I remember the original post correctly (I may not, which is >why I posted
asking about it in the first place), Bakker discovered >bite marks on
theropod vertebrae that matched sauropod >tooth/jaw morphology. He concluded
that the sauropods could >toss theropods around like rag dolls.
>>I thought of that, too; also that sauropods did not generally >>have
large enough mouths or teeth to grab and shake a big >>predator. More
likely, I think, a sauropod might have jabbed at >>an attacker, using
his/her head to deliver nasty butts (and using >>the butt, i.e. the tail,
to whack the attacker, too, if possible.) >>But head-butts would have
been a defense of last resort, since >>sauropod heads were not reinforced
with extra bone, or spiked. >>The defense of first resort would have been
>>stomping. --Merritt Clifton, editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE.
What if the sauropod was an adult (or near full-size) and bit a juvenile
therapod? It would be easier to grip at a smaller size. (I picture some
Jurassic Stupid Macho Game, like Dwarf-Throwing) Do we know how old the
original marks were? Were they long-healed? Were they shallow, long-running
scratches (as if the teeth were dragged over the bone, or, conversly, the
body dragged itself out of the teeth)? Were they puncture wound-type marks
(as if the sauropod took hold and hung on)? We need to know more before we
decide whatto actually infer from the evidence.