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

Re: Dinosaur temperature paper



The Gillooly et al. paper seems to work on the presumption that the dinosaurs 
under investigation were bradyenergetic like reptiles. Therefore their 
argument is circular. In order to estimate dinosaur metabolic rates from growth 
rates it would be necessary to show that the two factors are closely 
correlated. 
It is true that no demonstated bradyenergetic continental animal grows rapidly, 
so any extinct terrestrial form that exceeds the maximum reptilian growth 
rate at a given size is probably tachyenergetic like birds and mammals. 
However, 
tachyenergetic animals can grow slowly, and growth rates vary tremendously 
within mammals. As you can see in Append Fig 13A in your copy of DA, girl red 
kangaroos grow at a rate similar to that of crocodilians. Yet the marsupials 
are 
far more energetic than the crocs. Equally interesting is that boy red 
kangaroos are much larger than the females and grow a lot faster. There is 
little 
difference in the metabolics of the boys and girls roos. That some small 
dinosaurs grew as slowly as reptiles and female kangaroos does not tell us 
anything 
about their energy production. 

I say some small dinosaurs because it looks like some small ornithopods grew 
fast. A number of small ornithopods have extensive fibro-lamellar bone matrix 
which indicates rapid growth, and no deep bone growth rings. The only good 
explanation for this is that they grew up within a year before the dry season 
or 
winter came along, like similar sized birds. This point has been ignored by 
Erickson et al., who have concluded that all observed small dinosaurs grew 
slowly. But their methodology, in which only specimens with growth rings are 
measured for growth rates, automatically excludes any examples that lack growth 
rings. This too is circular reasoning. 

That Gillooly et al. excluded alvarezsaurs up front is telling. They grew 
slowly like the other small dinosaurs examined in the paper, but since they 
were 
feathered they should have had high metabolic rates. Had Gillooly et al. run 
an alvarezsaur through their process it would have turned out bradyenergetic 
like a reptile. That would have been awkward. 

The widely reported claim by Gillooly et al. that they found direct evidence 
for low metabolic rates in dinosaurs is silly since all they seem to have done 
is assumed that they had reptilian MRS, and following that assumption 
calculated reptilian level body temperatures at different body sizes. The 
people who 
have produced direct evidence for body temperatures in dinosaurs are the likes 
of Barrick and most recently Amiot et al. 06 Earth & Planet. Sci. Letters 
246: 41 who use bone isotopes. They find that dinosaurs of all sizes ran at 
pretty much the same high, constant temperature, and are distinctive from the 
lower 
temp., heterothermic herps found in the same deposits. 

GSPaul