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

SAKIS ARE _NOT_ SIFAKAS OF COURSE..



On Feduccia's comments on sakis (and I thought he was referring to sifakas..).
Ron Orenstein writes...

> Darren, I meant exactly what I said.  Feduccia was referring to sakis, not
> sifakas.  From p. 97:

D'oh!! OK, thanks for this. I haven't yet bothered with the New World monkeys
in my (sigh) read-up on primate evolution: gliding sakis? Cool..

> "Among New World primates, which lack prehensile tails, 

(quote from Feduccia book)

This is in error. Everyone knows that spider monkeys (_Ateles_) have highly
prehensile tails. In fact, isn't it the _Old World primates_ that lack
prehensile tails? To bring this around to the ol' bird origin thang, does
anyone know _how_ prehensile the megalancosaur tail was? (I have
S. Renesto's paper).  It's been suggested to me that the extant Green tree
monitor could be an analogue for a Triassic quadrupedal protobird. Being a
lizard, it obviously has a bunch of non-archosaurian specialisations, but
it *is* a wiry, gracile thing with long limbs and a prehensile tail.

> Feduccia compares their gliding abilities to those of sifakas (they are
> apparently a lot better at it) and includes photos of both.

That clinches it then. BTW, there's a viverrid that's supposedly capable of
gliding too: if true, we have a 'flying' carnivoran!
 
> PPS: there are three species of sifaka, not two - you forgot the recently
> described Golden-crowned Sifaka P. tattersalli.

D'oh!! The staggering number of recently discovered primate species is just too
much. Marmalade marmosets and cream lorises a-plenty..

"Dragonflies have been around for hundreds, thousands... perhaps millions of
years"

DARREN NAISH