[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: 11th specimen of Archaeopteryx

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Habib, Michael <MHabib@chatham.edu> wrote:
> Tim's point regarding birds nesting in abrasive plants is well taken, as is 
> Don's comments on Cycads etc.  However, I still find myself asking the 
> question: is there any reason we keep trying to put Archaeopteryx (and close 
> relatives) into elevated positions to begin with?  Don already pointed out 
> that, at best, we simply cannot exclude some arboreal roosting, etc for 
> Archaeopteryx.  We have no evidence that Archie was absolutely confined to 
> terrestrial life, but we have nothing to suggest it was arboreal in any 
> meaningful way, either.

What about the asymmetrical remiges? If Archie and/or its ancestors
were not at the very least using WAIR (to get up into high places,
presumably), why did they evolve? Symmetrical remiges are just as good
as asymmetrical for brooding nests, display, or any other alternate
uses of the wings that have been proposed.