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

Re: parthenogenetically derived reptile offspring

My bad Michael and you answered my dino related question in the followup research. Thanks. I missed your DML post of Oct 26th 2002 which covers the subject appropriately. (yet another bad pun...ARRRRGH). I stand corrected Ian as it appears that approximately 3 percent of bird species do have these structures. (Briskie and Montgomerie 1997) Seems that non-neoavian neornitheans (e.g. ratites, tinamiforms, anseriforms, galliforms) all have useful aparatus though not exactly the classical article.

I found the following papers that are somewhat to the point to clear up some of the confusion here.

Ultimate causation of aggressive and forced copulation in birds: Female resistance, the CODE hypothesis, and social monogamy
American Zoologist, Feb 1998 by Gowaty, Patricia Adair, Buschhaus, Nancy

available at: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3746/ is_199802/ai_n8791262/pg_9


Intromittent organ morphology and testis size in relation to mating system in waterfowl
Auk, The, Apr 2002 by Coker, Christopher R, McKinney, Frank, Hays, Helen, Briggs, Susan V, Cheng, Kimberly M


And by the way Michael, to follow up on the question on that old post, http://dml.cmnh.org/2002Oct/msg00587.html the birds I have known closely, (a few dozen different large parrots), were extraordinarily sensitive to touch and were quite aware of tactile stimulation of grooming by other birds/owner. It is a social thing to them certainly and they were remarkably adept at even grooming my individual eyebrow hairs or even earlobes in their beaks which could easily crush a walnut. Certainly feathered dinos had similar senses but the social significance is anyones guess.

Frank (Rooster with more options now) Bliss
MS Biostratigraphy
Weston, Wyoming

On Dec 23, 2006, at 10:08 PM, T. Michael Keesey wrote:

CMIIW, but isn't this only true for neoavians? I had thought that male
galliforms like turkeys (and paleognathes and anseriforms) were, um,
still all man. (Which of course suggests the same for other
non-neoavian dinosaurs.)