[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ceratopian jaws
Robert J Meyerson (Rob Meyerson) wrote:
> I don't see the problem in this. I envision the jaw muscle being similar
> to the strap on my backpack: Long but thin, with the long muscle fibers
> oriented with the long axis of the muscle.
I am probably suffering from acute lack of information (it happens
with depressing frequency when dinosaurs are the topic <g>), but I
don't understand why anyone would think that the ceratopsid frill
served to anchor jaw muscles at all. I recently read Peter Dodson's
book THE HORNED DINOSAURS, in which he makes a convincing (to me, at
least) case that the frill's primary function was display, possibly
with a secondary protective function. Put together, these two reasons
seem to more than adequately explain the frill. I don't see any need
for the "jaw muscles" idea, and I don't see any good reason to accept
it. I do see a lot of questions that it raises, though. For example:
* No other type of dinosaur had enormous jaw muscles, not even
the ceratopsids' own ancestors.
* Different ceratopsid genera had different frill sizes and
shapes, and also different sizes, shapes, and placements of the
frill openings. Why such a variety of forms to answer a single
common requirement (jaw muscle anchorage)?
Can anyone help straighten me out on this matter? What evidence is
there that the frill had anything to do with jaw-muscle anchorage?