[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: fruit versus leaves



> From: Stephen Okay <sokay@buccaneer.com>
>  > > Cindy Johnson" <johns608@maroon.tc.umn.edu> wrote:
>  > 
>  > > PS Have you ever noticed that in books plant eating dinos eat leaves and 
> none 
>  > > are mentioned eating fruit??? 
I replied:
>  > This also supposes some sort of pollenization scheme which requires bees
>  > and/or other insects to carry out a large portion of the pollenization.
> 
> Actully, there is no necessary connection between propagule form and
> mode of pollenation.  Fruits are adaptations to animal distribution
> of the *seeds*.

Okay...point taken, its not absolutely necessary, but it certainly helps.

>  > ...:How long have we had fruit trees?
> 
> This depends on what you mean by "fruit".  There are reasons to believe
> that some bennettites and some cycads had edible seed-bearing parts.

Well, keeping in line with the original statement/query by Cindy Johnson,
I was assuming "fruit" to mean large fleshy produce from angiosperms,
something big enough to keep a pachycephalosaur fed without requiring
too many dents in the braincase.

Which isn't to say that I agree with her supposition. My original
thoughts were that it was a bit early for modern fruits and it appears
that this has been borne out at least in part. It sounds like we're
still talking about diets consisting largely of foliage and tough 
pod-like structures along with small berries or proto-berries 
at this point. A bit early for Pachys to be able to sustain themselves
by whacking apple trees or the like.

---Steve