[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: [Re: [Re: A question about Feduccia's claim of convergence]]
"T. Mike Keesey" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 26 Mar 2001 email@example.com wrote:
> > Well, I'm pretty sure that _Gracilisuchus_ was an obligate biped and
> > today's extant reptilian fauna _Chlamydosaurus kingii_ is considered an
> > obligate biped as well.
> _Chlamydosaurus_ *never* moves on all fours? I find that hard to
It's true. They only come down on all fours to eat (i.e. they run bipedally
over to their prey, come down on all fours to eat it, then return to two legs
and run back to their roost).
I know that someone, somewhere wrote a paper on _Chlamydosaurus_ deeming it an
obligate biped (I'm pretty sure it was Shine & Lambeck). Unfortunately I can't
find the ref anywhere.
On the bright side though, there is someone else on this list who might know.
So if HP Darren Naish wouldn't mind giving me a hand with the ref, it would be
Besides that, you can also check out Shine & Lambeck's 1989 work on these guys
They also talk about some of the morphological and biomechanical adaptations
of these little critters that allow for this.
Finally there are two other papers that discuss the actual adaptations seen in
bipedally running lizards:
Snyder, R.C. 1952 Quadrupedal & Bipedal Locomotion of Lizards. Copeia pgs
__________ 1962 Adaptations for Bipedal Locomotion of Lizards. Am.Zool. vol 2
Now if we could just get some more work done on _Basiliscus_ , facultative
bipedalism in lizards could become a thing of the past :)
Oh and thanks all for the OOC bit.
Jurassosaurus's Reptipage: A page devoted to the study of and education on,
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1