[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Segregated vs age-mixed sauropod herds
John Bois wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. <email@example.com>
>> there are phylogenetic arguments (parental
>> care for at least several weeks is present in crocs and birds, and hence
>> in Archosauria ancestrally)
> My students wondered, then: why wouldn't the parents protect the
> hatchlings from the snakes (I suppose this is where the non-attendance
> assumption came from, i.e., if parents were there, they would have
> killed the snakes!)?
> I responded that while the parents were likely hanging around, they
> had strict genetic rules that said: under no circumstances enter the
> nest-ground proper...the risk of crushing babies being the strongest
> selective pressure here.
> The students said that was pretty stupid...that they could have leaned
> over with their long necks and bitten the snakes.
Let's not forget, snakes are MAJOR predators of baby birds today, even for
species with biparental care.
Parental care =/= total immunity of the babies from all attacks!!
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: 301-405-4084
Office: Centreville 1216
Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
Dept. of Geology, University of Maryland
Faculty Director, Earth, Life & Time Program, College Park Scholars
Faculty Director, Science & Global Change Program, College Park Scholars
Mailing Address: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology
Building 237, Room 1117
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742 USA