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

Re: Hone and Benton 2007 (their second paper)

Eudimorphodon was capable of digitigrade bipedal progression. You
evidently missed my paper in Ichnos 2000.
Peters D., 2000, Description and interpretation of interphalangeal
lines in tetrapods. Ichnos 7, 11–41 which covers all your issues with
bipedality and trackways.

Well, unless you found trackways _of *Eudimorphodon*_, interphalangeal lines won't help you finding out whether the beast was capable of sustaining digitigrade bipedal locomotion for any serious amount of time. I can walk and run digitigradely; I just can't sustain it for more than a few minutes because it hurts...

In addition, the build and mechanics of most pterosaurs are not set up such that they would gain a great deal by bipedal locomotion (as best I can tell, in any case). I doubt that bipedal running would be faster for them, and quadrapedal launching would be more powerful (and is supported by several aspects of morphology, especially in larger pterosaurs). Just because we cannot see the benefit does not mean it did not exist, but it does make me more skeptical of the concept of bipedal progression in pterosaurs as a common means of transport. The fact that the interphalangeal lines do not preclude bipedality in pterosaurs is useful to know, but I suspect it is not a result of bipedal running.


--Mike H.