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

RE: More on the baby Triceratops

No, not all tracks are underprints. The presence of scale patterns from
the underside of the foot proove that. Second, some very small juvenile
tracks of hadrosaurs are known from a coal swamp in Utah. These are
segregated from adult tracks. 

Kenneth Carpenter, Ph.D.
Curator of Lower Vertebrate Paleontology/
Chief Preparator
Department of Earth Sciences
Denver Museum of Nature & Science
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80205
Phone: 303-370-6392
Fax: 303-331-6492

for PDFs of some of my publications, as well as information of the Cedar
Mountain Project: 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu] On Behalf
Of dannj@alphalink.com.au
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 5:25 PM
Subject: RE: More on the baby Triceratops

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 09:30:26 -0700, Ken.Carpenter wrote
> No parental attention required. If we look at dinosaur trackways, the 
> smallest footprints are HALF adult size, implying segregation of 
> adults and juveniles.

Or some sort of marsuplal-like pouch. :)

Seriously though - aren't most prints actually underprints? If so, the
juvies may not have been heavy enough to make prints of sufficient depth
to be preserved. 

Alternatively, the sort of muddy areas where prints would be best
preserved may have been avoided by the juveniles (with perhaps a small
number of adults as chaperones). They may have gone around those areas,
while adults and sub- adults plowed straight through.

A third option: if juvies were kept in the middle of the travelling
group, their tiny prints might have been obliterated by larger animals
walking behind them.


Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist         http://heretichides.soffiles.com
Melbourne, Australia        http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs