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

Re: Crocodilian vs Avian looks

> To David Marjanovic:
> > a protoceratopsian without cheeks looks very
> > awkward, because these animals chewed and would have
> > needed to prevent the food from falling out. I can't
> > buy it. I wouldn't expect exact identity to
> > mammalian cheeks (and lips) anyway, because we're
> > talking of convergences...
> There are a variety of herbivorous lizards that don't
> have cheeks and manage just fine.

Yes, they don't chew. Sauropods didn't have cheeks either.

> I do agreee that the
> protoceratops drawing looks a bit odd. It's almost as
> if the skin and muscles on the jaw were cut
> off....gives the head a skeletonized look. Nasty. I
> don't like it. But who cares if I like it? If there's
> reason to believe this is how they looked, we
> shouldn't let our biases get in the way of good
> science.

Of course.

> Maybe they had stiff lips that slid past
> eachother to help keep food in,

but when the dinos opened their jaws in chewing...

> or tongues that kept
> food from falling out.

Tongues are inside, erm...

> I don't think these guys were
> very good at masticating their food because they
> probably wouldn't need gastroliths if they were (i've
> never heard of cow gastroliths, have you?). Besides, I
> thought ceratopsians *sliced* their food. I'm no
> ceratopsian expert, so I yield to the superior
> intellects of others on the list with regards to this
> subject. So, maybe they just plucked a leaf off,
> sliced it a few times and gulped it down. If feeding
> was that fast, you wouldn't need cheeks.

Slicing is still close enough to chewing that I'd say that much would have
fallen out of their mouths if they didn't have cheeks.