[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ceratopsians: sprawling or straight?
> From: Joshua Dyal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Ceratopsians: sprawling or straight?
> Date: Thursday, December 18, 1997 5:34 PM
> >I know Greg Paul says they couldn't have sprawled because trackways
> >prove otherwise. Good point. But hasn't it been determined that it
> >would've been physically impossible for ceratopsians (or ceratopians,
> >you're so inclined) to fit their legs under their torsos in a
> >manner? How much of this is a Bakkeristic "they were like rhinos
> >because they are cooler that way?"
> >Hey, just asking.
> Steven Czerkas claims (and has illustrated in Dinosaurs: a global view)
> that it was some kind of "high sprawl." He also claims that articulated
> skeletons will bear this out. The illustration shows a ceratopsian that
> is massively pigeon-toed-- his feet turn almost directly inward. This
> doesn't seem to jive with any trackways I know of (not that I know lot).
I've never studied ceratopsian bones so I only have questions. Why would
most dinosaurs have their limbs and feet in linear fashion under their hips
or shoulder girdles and ceratopsians not?
Would an animal that large be able to move quickly with an articulation at
the knee (or otherwise) that was not linear? Additionally, would not there
be incredible stresses placed on the lateral collateral ligaments
(equivalent thereof) of the knee? Would not wear on the lateral leg
articulation area cause early degenerative joint disease? Doesn't the
stress on long bones cause them to strengthen along the lines of stress?