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


Michael E Teuton <tons@ccs.logicsouth.com> writes:
> Assuming they did not sweat

A reasonable assumption...

> then losses would be respiratory, urinary, and
> GI.  The latter two can be virtually eliminated in some animals 

...as in reptiles and birds, yes?  Even camels have adapted to the demands
of an arid climate by not eliminating fluids to the extent of most mammals.
 Conserve water, and exploit the desert.

> so we have
> to admit they could run the spectrum on either or both.  

And don't forget the tubercles!  They should help, too.  In some respects,
sauropods were most unlike mammals.

> Without
> turbinates?? then respiratory losses are going to be impressive in an
> that size in an arid environment.

See above.  Also, consider that the narrow air passage through the
remarkably long neck could have helped considerably with water retention,
just as the long, narrow air passages through the trunk of the endothermic
and turbinate-challenged elephant does.  Not that the above factors
wouldn't be enough by themselves, but hey, that long neck couldn't hurt.

-- Ralph Miller III     gbabcock@best.com