[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: More on the baby Triceratops
But phyletic bracketing also includes the bowler bird, which does not
have parental care after hatching.
Kenneth Carpenter, Ph.D.
Curator of Lower Vertebrate Paleontology/
Department of Earth Sciences
Denver Museum of Nature & Science
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80205
for PDFs of some of my publications, as well as information of the Cedar
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf
Of T. Michael Keesey
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:27 AM
To: Dinosaur Mailing List
Subject: Re: More on the baby Triceratops
On 3/8/06, Richard W. Travsky <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Nick Pharris wrote:
> > Quoting Guy Leahy <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> >> http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2006/03/06_triceratops.
> >> shtml
> > Interesting that the baby, at a year old, is still very much in the
> > stage. Does this suggest fairly protracted parental attention?
What say ye?
> I also wonder how small they were at birth.
> Even at 1 year old there's no way their tiny legs could've kept up
> with adults; that implies, I think, some degree of parental attention.
Not really--who says marginocephalians cared for their post-hatchling
young at all? (Okay, phylogenetic bracketing does--but that's it,
TMK.) Young ones could have lived in independent creches--who knows?
The Dinosauricon: http://dino.lm.com
Parry & Carney: http://parryandcarney.com