[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 00:27:42 +0100
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Catch-22
> > Unfortunately, merely using a tree as refuge is not an arboreal or
> > even scansorial lifestyle. E.g., bears are not "arboreal"...
> Bears do, however, have plenty of "adaptations" for climbing. It just so
> happens that, in terms of their evolutionary history, they aren't
> adaptations; some are mammalian plesiomorphies (like the fairly short
> but not too short limbs and their wide ranges of movement), others are
> probably exaptations. Many of these character states do not occur in the
> theropods we're talking about.
Depends how seriously you take the more extreme interpretations of the
Secondarily Flightless school. (bears evolved from an arboreal ancestor - not
so sure about T.rex) :D
> Brian Choo's painting of *Microraptor* hunting birds shows it high up in
> the crown of a tree, where the branches are thin. How did it get there
> in the first place?
dropped down from a taller tree?
- Re: Catch-22
- From: David Marjanovic <firstname.lastname@example.org>