[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Bipedal apatosaurs and stegosaurs?
> I therefore speculate that Stegosaurus, Apatosaurus and dicraeosaurs
> often walked on just two legs.
>>In order for this senario to be accurate, it would require the
>>animal's center-of-gravity (CG) to be located directly above the hips
>>(providing good balance). I'm afraid I don't see this in the mounts
>>I've observed. Using the Diplodicus skeleton in the Science Museum of
>>Minnesota as a reference, it appears that the CG is located at the
>>animal's lower midsection. .
I still believe that the sauropods most effective feeding method
would be for the larger animals to 'walk' up a tree trunk with their
heavily clawed front feet as stabilizers for the inital placement of the
front feet on the tree, and then to walk or lean into the tree so as to
knock it over or at least get it to tip mightily. This has the advantage
of bringing the tastier leaves down past any prior 'browse' level, and
allows the younger and shorter sauropods to also have access to the
leaves normally left above the browse line. Not that this would have
been an exclusive method of feeding, but that they were able to take into
advantage this sort of behavior as modern elephants will also
occasionally do. When starving elephants will strip a tree down to the
ground, but when nibbling as they go, they just browse with what's in
reach and don't seem to be quite as destructive.
Which MIGHT account for the lesser weight on the front legs, as
these need to be able to rear up (as suggested by GSP) against the total
weight of the animal, without needing the center of gravity to shift as
much as walking bipedally as an upright locomotion would. And MIGHT have
a reason for the heavily clawed front toes. And would allow for
shorter(younger) animals in the herd to survive along side taller(older)
animals that would (obviously) raise the 'browsing' area above that of
the shorter animals..
Was it just me, or did we not get any mail from the list for Friday,
Saturday, and part of Sunday?
[I don't think I logged in on Saturday (so sue me). You should have
gotten plenty on Friday, though, and I spent a couple of hours
dealing with the list on Sunday afternoon. If you think you're
missing something, check the archives:
-- MR ]