[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
bulk--and maybe
>>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.

Betty Cunningham(Flyinggoat@aol.com)