[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: A note on pterosaur nesting behavior
Imagine a bat baby buried.
The wear and tear on the wing and hind limb membrane as it escapes its
burial chamber would be problematic.
While all fossils are buried, the indications of the present three
embryos do not indicate intentional burial.
If buried, evidently pterosaurs buried their eggs one at a time.
If lepidosaurs, the eggs could have been laid within a short time of
hatching, which is the present indication.
On Jul 23, 2009, at 10:57 PM, Mike Habib wrote:
On Jul 23, 2009, at 6:25 PM, David Peters wrote:
New paper on ptero eggs
Grellet-Tinner, Gerald, Wroe, Stephen, Thompson, Michael B. and Ji,
Qiang(2007)'A note on pterosaur nesting
behavior',Historical Biology,19:4,273 — 277
Assuming they were archosaur eggs, yes, the eggs would probably
have to be buried.
But if not archosaurs, the possibilities expand.
Based on the data in the paper, I don't entirely agree that the egg
burial model depends on an archosaurian position. The structural
traits examined by the authors are also indicative of egg burial in
living squamates, for example. I don't see how alternative
phylogenetic positions would actually change the functional
conclusion based on physiological correlates in this case.
Regardless, and interesting paper and well worth the quick read for
anyone with an interest in pterosaurs.
Michael Habib, M.S.
Center for Functional Anatomy and Evolution
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
1830 E. Monument Street
Baltimore, MD 21205