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

Re: Ceratopsians: sprawling or straight?



>Larry Dunn writes;
>
>>I know Greg Paul says they couldn't have sprawled because trackways
>>prove otherwise.
>
>Actually, this is not true.

>For the best analysis of the forelimb that I have seen to date, see:
>
>Johnson, R. E., Ostrom, J. H.  1995.  "The forelimb of Torosaurus and an
>analysis of the posture and gait of ceratopsian dinosaurs."  Functional
>Vertebrate Paleontology.
>Rob Meyerson

For a counter-view nicely done see Tracy Ford's new article on ceratopsian
stance in the new Dinosaur World mag.
Tracy makes a summary of all the pros and cons and comes out with the
obvious conclusion (to his and mine eyes) that Greg Paul restorations are
right and on top of those tracks. Elbows bowing slightly outwards with
forelimbs well tucked underneath, not in a typical 'mammalian' stance but
in a typical dinosaurian high walk.
Paul demonstrated that Bakker had it wrong reconstructing the ceratopsians
as mammals and that Czerckas didn't have it completely right (although they
almost get it). It is a high stance from a different kind, but you have to
have the bones in the right place or you'll get a sprawling chimaera than
can barely move.

If you need the Dino World Mag contact Allen Debus on hellcreek@aol.com

Luis Rey

Visit my Website on http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~luisrey