[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Airbagged(was Dive!Dive!Dive!)
From: Nick Longrich <longrich@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
> As for living in forests, this generalization may not
> be accurate. Different animals can live in many different environments-
> someone mentioned to me once (was it here?) that the East Coast forests
> used to have BISON in them.
Your general point is well taken, and is often especially true of top
catnivores, which tend to cross major environment boundaries easily.
Your example, however, is not the best. The eastern forest zone had,
at least is the time period in question, numerous small prairie opening
and meadows, and the "forest" bison actually inhabitated these openings,
not the forest itself. (At least by and large - they would of course
walk through the forest from one meadow to the next).
But there are many good examples of carnivores that largely ignore habitat:
wolves, lions, some bears and so on.
> I would be surprised to learn that T. rex was
> not a widely ranging animal, and it may be that these environments were
> forested to varying degrees.
In fact there are bones "refered" to T. rex from the SW sates, where the
habitat was apparently more of a savanna (as suggested by the presence of
thr sauropod Alamosaurus, and by the more arid sorts of riparian sediments
the fossils are found in and by the presence of alkali lake sediments).
The peace of God be with you.