[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosaurs vs. mammals: a hypothetical scenario
About mammals eating dinosaur eggs, two words: *Repenomamus giganticus*.
Two more: *Estesia mongoliensis*, also known as "putting the 'monster'
in 'Gila monster'".
Sauropods and ankylosaurians are not going to do well in any
environment where trees lose their leaves for the winter *and* it's
cold during winter.
Of course, the Miocene was warm.
In the reverse, however, the "inhale and ferment" strategy of
sauropods and ankylosaurians might prove better at bypassing the high
silica content of grass than the erodible dental batteries of
hadrosaurs and ceratopsians.
Phytoliths are not, in fact, harder than enamel. It's not about grass,
it's about ground-level feeding and sand in the food; sand _is_ harder
Ornithomimids might be one of the few smaller-dinosaur clades
inherently fast enough to thrive in a Miocene "global savanna"
There was no global savanna. Roughly, today's steppes/prairies were
savannas; today's savannas were rainforest.
Smaller ornithischians (most hypsiloids, pachycephalosaurs, etc) are
going to have a rough time. Compared to the various horses and
ruminants dominating the planet, they're slow during escapes
(quadrupeds > bipeds in speed at a given size, usually, especially
when we're talking cursorial vs non-cursoiral),
You might be confusing speed and endurance here.
And for both, the caudifemoralis muscle may be a lot more important than
most people used to think.