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

RE: T. rex vs. Alamosaurus



        Patrick Mellor wrote:

> Sauropods moving back North in the latest Cretaceous has
> always seemed very strange to me, because I don't see how they could
> have competed effectively as herbivores against the hadrosaurs. It
> obviously happened though, and I wonder what advantage enabled the
> sauropods to do this.... 

        How did this theropod discussion turn into science? :)
        Seriously, though, since this is pretty much definitively my area
(being one of the VERY few hadrosaur students who works in the lad of the
titans), I probably ought to comment:

a) There are (as yet) no documented cooccurrences of hadrosaurs and
sauropods in North American. Note, I am not talkin about at the
formational level... they are present in the same strata, but there is no
evidence I have seen to indicate that they are present in the same facies.
If you can wait a few years, I'll publish a little on this.

b) hadrosaurs were low browser, sauropods were high-browsers (esp.
titanosaurs). I don't care what anyone's theories say, this is straight
from the morphology.

c) they have have entirely different dentition, which argues strongly for
entirely different feeding strategies. Thus, there does not seem 
to be a basis for statements such as "I don't see how they could
compete..."

d) hadrosaurs co-occurring in strata with sauropods are apparently pretty
rare (note that none have undisputed identifications).

        Speculate all you want as to why this is. Obviously, we need a
good deal more information, at least regarding points a and d, to really
say somethign definitive. If I were ya'll, I'd wait; the work *is* being
done.

        Wagner