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

Re: Featherless _Mononykus_?



>On Wed, 24 Apr 1996 Stang1996@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Whatever for?  Is there some reason not to put feathers on _Mononykus_?
>>
>Yes! The best reason there is - good science. No feathers have been
>discovered with this fossil.  :-)
>
>Byron

Not really.  After all the vast majority of undisputed fossil birds also
lack feather imprints, and yet I would argue that it would be unscientific
to portray them WITHOUT feathers as they clearly are members of a clade
whose earliest known forms were feathered and for which no definitely
unfeathered members are known.  If Mononykus is viewed as being a member of
this clade it should be portrayed with feathers, as that would be a
parsimonious prediction given its cladistic placement.  If it is NOT placed
within the clade that is another matter, and I would certainly agree with
your statement as it applies to forms like (say) ornithomimids or
oviraptorids (though I am partial to Greg Paul's feathered restoratons of
these critters - and who knows, maybe they had'em after all!)
--
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