[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
re: Long Bone Scaling in Neosauropod Dinosaurs
So what about those titanosaurs which possessed armor?
Would they have needed armor if they were immune to
attack by predators by size alone? Would titanosaur
scaling depart from isometry as a result?
--- Mike Taylor <email@example.com> wrote:
> Colin McHenry writes:
> > That's just so wierd. If I didn't know any
> better, I'd say that
> > the isometric scaling strongly suggested an
> aquatic habit....
> And yet isometry or near-isometry is much more
> common in limb bones
> that we'd naively expect. McNeill Alexander, for
> one, has repeatedly
> made the point that the long bones of elephants are
> more gracile than those of much smaller rhinos and
> hippos. The
> interpretation seems to be that large animals simply
> move much more
> carefully than smaller ones: they don't need to be
> athletic since they
> don't need to deal with all that dangerous messing
> about with predator
> avoidance that constrains smaller animals.
> Likewise, perhaps, with
> sauropods (despite that fascinating thread a few
> months ago about big
> theropods attacking their necks).
> /o ) \/ Mike Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> )_v__/\ "Hardware is just the same as in 1990, but
> faster. Software is
> just the same as in 1990, but slower" -- Ed Avis.