[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: 11th specimen of Archaeopteryx
From: Jaime Headden <email@example.com>
> This is not entirely consistent with arboreality, although that is possible,
> because climbing birds do not use just one ungual for climbing...
Yes, I agree.. oh hang on (!):
>..., they use all forward-projecting unguals,
Do they? Which climbing birds? What do climbing bird feet look like? Are they
different from perching bird feet? do you have a citation that explains this?
(hint, you are wrong).
> In birds, while the unguals are graded largest to smallest moving from toe
> two through toe four, then toe one,
Are they? which birds? do you have a citation that shows this? (hint, you are
>the unguals even in raptorial birds are relatively similar in size
Are they? which raptors? do you have a citation which shows this? (hint: you
>(cassowaries are freaks with straight pdII-3u's, ignore them)
Correct. The only thing you got right so far.
>; in dromaeosaurids, the pdII-3u is often twice the length of any other
>ungual, a suspiciously bizarre distinction that enforces a functional
>difference, especially in the strong curvature relative to the other unguals.
>And recall, despite the huge!
pdII-3u, the other pedal unguals are _terrestrially_ adapted, even in
*Archaeopteryx lithographica*. Moreover, it is questionable how one arrives at
a conclusion that the highly recurved, huge forward ungual is indicative of
"perching" or arboreality to begin with, merely that climbing is _not_ excluded.
Paper is nearly here (hopefully b4 xmas). That should give you the time to go
back and read some papers on claw morphology. You need to.
PS. I wrote Fowler et al. 2009. It has lots of claw data in it. Your email