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

Re: Evolution of tyrannosauroid bite power

Not necessarily.

----- Original Message ----- From: "don ohmes" <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: Evolution of tyrannosauroid bite power

Keeping it simple; given that all theropods were constructed of the same materials, wouldn't relative arm size be expected to generally decrease as overall size increased, irregardless of the implications of diet?


----- Original Message ----
From: ptnorton <ptnorton@suscom-maine.net>
To: Dinosaur list mail <dinosaur@usc.edu>; tholtz@umd.edu
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 2:07:39 PM
Subject: RE: Evolution of tyrannosauroid bite power

Tom Holtz wrote on Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:25:19 -0500

Well, of course, and I think everyone working on this would agree
with that scenario.

But a biomechanical analysis must needs focus on one particular part
of the
organism, and later be integrated into other comparable systems.

That is the traditional approach, but methods for analyzing the motion of complex (i.e., multi-part) mechanical *systems* are being developed that show a lot of promise for analyzing biomechanical systems. The methodological problem in analyzing each part of an animal separately is that the parts are not independent of one another. Analyzing them as a

complex biomechanical system with multiple dependent parts is an effort
get away from that problem. For an example from mechanics, see Hong and

Cipra's 2003 paper illustrating a method to analyze the motion of
cable-pulley systems, which can be found on-line at
It's probably not the best example, but it's useful for illustrating
distinction I was trying to make. It seems to me that the relationship
between arm size and bite power, or arm strength and hip strength,
some real potential for using this type of systems analysis.


-------------------------------------------------------- The axes of truth and utility are not coincident.