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

Re: Sinosauropteryx feathers?

You wrote:

> Don't tar all theropods with the same brush.  We already know that there
> a great variety of integumental structures exhibited across the Theropoda,
> and the presence of hair-like or feather-like structures in many non-avian
> theropods does not necessarily imply the beginnings of flight nor the
> secondary loss of flight.  Each taxon should be evaluated separately -
> especially in the context of its phylogenetic affinities.
Or not, if we use phylogenetics, this would make the Troodontids feathered
and there is no evidence, absolutely no evidence, that Sinovenator and his
descendants had any feathery intugement. And this is of all places from the
Liaoning, where if feathers are preserved, they are preserved, and not only
feathers, body outlines of fish and the intugemental structures on the back
of Sinosauropteryx. Too give a few examples... Some while ago, HP Oyvind M.
Padron posted a similair message and I completely agree with him and with HP
Tim Williams that each taxon should be evaluated seperately and that one
should not restore any animal with feathers untill the evidence becomes
available. And not to restore the animal feathered because it was a)
raptorial b) related to Archaeopteryx and other Mesobirds c) possibly
warmblooded, or simply: that it looks cool. If we do find a specimen of
Sinovenator, or any other Troodontid, with feathery intugement or a similair
body covering, I'll accept that they were feathered, no problems, but untill
there is no evidence for this, Troodontids should be restored featherless.

Rutger Jansma