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

Re: Dinosaur "baculae"



> 
>> I should be extremely surprised to learn that any dinosaur had a baculum, as
>> this is a feature of the mammalian penis which (by virtue of its being
>> divorced from the digestive system except in Monotremata which I think lack
>> baculae) is not exactly homologous to the intromittent organ of any
>> non-mammalian vertebrate.
>
>     If it  made things  more convenient, why  couldn't  dinosaurus  
>have  developed  a  baculae  (or something similar) analogously?   They  
>did  a lot of  things  structurally  not  found in contemporaray reptiles.  
>
Well, if so it wouldn't be a baculum (plural bacula, as George Olshevsky has
reminded me, not baculae), any more than the hemipenes of lizards are a
penis.  Picky, but there it is.  And, as we humans demonstrate quite
effectively  (or try to, with varying degrees of success) you don't really
need one.
--
Ronald I. Orenstein                           Phone: (905) 820-7886 (home)
International Wildlife Coalition              Fax/Modem: (905) 569-0116 (home)
Home: 1825 Shady Creek Court                  Messages: (416) 368-4661
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 3W2          Internet: ornstn@inforamp.net
Office: 130 Adelaide Street W., Suite 1940    
Toronto, Ontario Canada M5H 3P5