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

Re: Bipedal sauropods?



On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Tracy Ford wrote:

> This beggers the question, why are there so many pes prints of 
> sauropods with out manus prints? Because they were walking bipedally. A 
> far fected notion but I think Emily Giffin is right. 

        There's also the reverse, but nobody's proposing
handstands. Lockley interprets the handprint-only ones (originally
thought to be made by swimming dinos) as possibly made by
brachiosaurs, which bore a lot of weight on the relatively small areas
of the forelimbs. The forelimbs just pressed deeper. It could well be
that diplodocids simply press down deeper with their hindlimbs than
brachiosaurs, despite the relatively greater surface area of the pes
compared to the manus, because of their center of balance.
        And how sure are we they're _not_ there? The hindprints in
the manus-only dinosaurs were there, just rather faint. Or, these could be
underprints. 

        Nick L