[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Augusto Haro <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> My point is that I do not know if even Haplocheirus' or
> Acrocanthosaurus strong, trenchant, tridactyl manus was useful for
> trophic reasons as prey-securing. Years ago, we were discussing about
> the possibility of climbing in basal paravians, and you indicated they
> had not very movable articulations and wrists.
Well then, now I see the problem.... *never* believe anything I say. ;-)
> I think grasping prey
> also requires more mobility around wrists, a good deal of supination
> (at least comparing with carnivoramorphan forelimbs), not just large
> or trenchant claws.
It depends. I wouldn't think grasping large prey requires much
mobility at all, because the aim is to hold the prey in place. Both
forelimbs were used to hold the prey, on either side. The trenchant
unguals cut deep into the prey - and the prey's desperate struggles
would just impale it further.
For handling small prey, a grasping manus would certainly be an asset.
I don't think any maniraptoran was especially gifted when it came to
grasping and manipulating small prey with the hands. Not so much
because of the forelimb feathers, but because the long, inflexible
fingers were useless for this purpose.