[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
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: firstname.lastname@example.org
Office: 130 Adelaide Street W., Suite 1940
Toronto, Ontario Canada M5H 3P5