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

Re: Dromaeosaur disease resistance



From: StephanPickering@cs.com

Polygyny among dromaeosaurs would be unlikely: a male would have too >high an energy expenditure to work with two females, and, if two >females shared the same nest, incubation success would be lowered.

So what do you suggest as the alternative? We could just as easily rule out polyandry for similar-but-opposite reasons. Monogamy and polygynandy being the only other alternatives. At this point, who knows?
And why would the two females share the same nest?


A dromaeosaur eating rotting flesh, or living animals infected with >virulent diseases, necessarily would have to possess highly efficient >immune systems (the carcass could be in water, and waterborne diseases >likewise could pose a hazard to our predator).
Thus, in the macroevolution of dinosaurs, the radiation of clades
within biozones, disease resistance would an integral part of their >genomes.

My question to you now is, why do you think dinosaurs (or dromaeosaurids in particular, it seems) had any higher a resistance to disease than extant organisms?


Jordan Mallon

http://www.geocities.com/paleoportfolio/

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx