[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: questions and comments about new research
> Sampson et al suggest T. rex was an ectotherm
I haven't read that paper... what, if anything, are their reasons for this
strange suggestion? Or is that the paper on its supposed scavenging ability?
> and its giant size was causally linked to doubled habitat area in western
North America following regression.
Why should individual size and not population size respond?
> But wasn't eastern North America always considerably larger?
Yes. (But who knows if this also meant larger habitat for tyrannosaurs.)
> If large habitat area was conducive to gigantism, why did Dryptosaurus
remain relatively small to the late Maastrichtian?
"Remain"? How many specimens are known? <Glut encyclopedia: flick, flick>
One. Means, if there was any trend or not, we can't see it. And we know next
to nothing about the size of its prey, and its hunting methods, and so on,
which all ought to have influenced its size.
> Wegmeister mentions a lambeosaurine from the Lance. Does the specimen
include cranial material? Is it Hypacrosaurus? What is the stratigraphic
level of the specimen?
All unpublished apart from last year's SVP abstract, right?
> Andy Farke notes differences between ceratopsid and bovid horns which
call into question the supposed use of the former in intraspecific combat.
What are those differences?
> In view of J. Happ's study, isn't it likely that most ceratopsid horns
evolved as antipredator weapons?
Or for display. Or both. Or neither. Who knows.
> This does appear to be proof that T. rex actively hunted ceratopsids.
There are very good reasons why "we scientists" are so afraid of words like
"proof" and "truth". I'd say that, if correct, it's good evidence that
something did hunt ceratopsids. Just for the record, I am certain that *T.
rex* actively hunted ceratopsids, but there is no proof.
> The same may be true of putative Hell Creek lambeosaurs.
I suggest to W4tP.