[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Holes in Frills
At 01:01 PM 12/6/96 -0500, Nick Longrich wrote:
> A while back I took a look at an AMNH Centrosaurus skull. I am
>not an expert but I came away completely convinced that the
>muscle-attachment hypothesis was wrong. The reason is that the spikes
>looked just like the hornlets around the frill, and this would be very
>puzzling if they supported muscle instead of horn.
Note that the muscle attachment idea does not normally state that the
epioccipitals (the tiny hornlets) were the attachment points for the
muscles, since these are missing (or apparently missing) on so many of the
neoceratopsians. The general version of the muscle attachment hypothesis
has the muscles coming up out of the supratemporal fenestra to attach
somewhere on the frill, but perhaps not all the way up.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist Webpage: http://www.geol.umd.edu
Dept. of Geology Email:firstname.lastname@example.org
University of Maryland Phone:301-405-4084
College Park, MD 20742 Fax: 301-314-9661
"To trace that life in its manifold changes through past ages to the present
is a ... difficult task, but one from which modern science does not shrink.
In this wide field, every earnest effort will meet with some degree of
success; every year will add new and important facts; and every generation
will bring to light some law, in accordance with which ancient life has been
changed into life as we see it around us to-day."
--O.C. Marsh, Vice Presidential Address, AAAS, August 30, 1877