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

Hadrosaur "mummy" questions



Are there any theories on why hadrosaurs seem to be more likely to be
"mummified" than other dinosaur species? Was it environmental preference
(ie. they happened to prefer areas where exceptional preservation was
more likely)? Or perhaps they had particularly thick leathery skin which
resisted decomposition just enough to increase the chance of preserved
skin impressions?

If it was enviromental, then why aren't there any non-hadrosaurian
dino's "mummified"? (Or are there, that I'm not aware of?). Surely other
types of dinosaurs lived near bye.

Since hadro's seem to lack any obvious means of defence (no horns or
spikes), perhaps they were literally thick-skinned. An obvious advantage
when being verbally abused by a ceratopian.  :)

On an almost-related note, I'm awaiting the delivery of my copy of
"Black Opal Fossils of Lightning Ridge" (thanks for the book info,
Tracy, way back in 2000 - I do things at glacial speed). I'm looking
forward to seeing the possible dinosaurian skin impression (opalised no
less) from Lightning Ridge.

-- 
________________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon                   Australian Dinosaurs:
GIS / Archaeologist         http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia        http://www.alphalink.com.au/~dannj/
________________________________________________________________