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

Re: Featherless _Mononykus_?

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Byron Butler (GD 1995) wrote:

> 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.  :-)

Excuse me.  Please refrain from equating (over-)conservatism with "good
science."  AFAIK, _Mononykus_ (terrible name; why couldn't they just go
with _Mononyx_?) was discovered in an environment which most likely would
not preserve feathers.  There was *no* integument found with this
dinosaur (bird or no, it's still a dinosaur).  Hence integument is open to
interpretation, and, given this animal's phylogenetic position, feathers
are at least as likely as scales.

> Byron

Nick Pharris
Pacific Lutheran University
Tacoma, WA 98447