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

Re: birds/dino-birds with teeth

David Marjanovic wrote:

> Interesting idea, but wouldn't explain the loss of
> teeth (of course I don't have an idea what 
> would...).

I don't know why a beak would extend progressively
further from the labial margin of the 
(pre)maxilla/dentary in a protobird. Though I can say
that the usefulness of teeth would be reduced once the
beak impeded their ability to sink into flesh. If the
first beaked animals were insectivorous, I don't
suppose teeth would be greatly needed. The triangular
skulls of Archie, *Sinornithosaurus*, and a few other
basal birds and Deinonychosaurs look like they could
wiggle their way into loose bark. The slightly
upturned snout of Velociraptor looks like it would
serve that purpose well (no, I'm not suggesting an
insectivorous diet for *V.*....but maybe it's
ancestors). The propulsion joint in avian skulls might
also be good at getting those stubborn bugs that are
just out of reach. The "Aye-Aye" theropod's finger
could be further evidence of insectivory if it used it
in a similar fashion as the animal it was nicknamed
after. I'm pretty convinced that it was either bugs or
fish they were eating. While I'm not ready to accept
"FUCHSIA", I think the possibility of piscivorous
diving theropods is not out of the question yet.
Obviously it had to have happened for hesperornithids
to have evolved. You could even combine the ideas if
you wanted. There could have been little fish-eaters
sitting in trees overhanging lagoons waiting for prey
to swim below. Did I already mention this in a
previous post? Can't remember. Need rest.

Waylon Rowley

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness