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

Re: So here it is...



> >As *A.* lived at the seashore, where there aren't too many things to
sniff,
> >I'll suspect convergence.<
> Actually, I'd say that there is more stuff to smell at the seashore than
on,
> say, a plain. There is the saltwater smell that the animal would need to
> filter out, and then, it would need to seperate seaweed from crabs from
> washed-up ichthyosaurs from all kinds of animal dung from predators from
> prey from animals that aren't a threat from other archies. Just my take,
but
> I think that the animal would have to deal with all kinds of shore and sea
> smells, plus the usual inland smells.

Hm. This argument would work wonderfully for most mammals, but for birds and
suchlike... Birds, and probably dinosaurs in general, rely more heavily on
eyesight, e. g. they would simply ignore dung. (Of course, there are the
enormous olfactory lobes of *T. rex* and the king vulture, but these are
special adaptations.)
        Under water there is nothing to smell for nearly all tetrapods (has
been suggested otherwise for "pliosaurs", but nobody can argue Archie was
that specialized for an aquatic predator).

> Anyone know if there is a difference
> in olfactory lobes in a pelican versus a secretary bird?

No, would be quite interesting.