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

Re: Dinosaur Revolution Review



This second option Scott lists is the closest analogue to the actual
fossil record, as far as I can tell. As Mickey states on The Theropod
Database:

"At the Armour Symposium (2001), Currie reported skin impressions
associated with the holotype of Gorgosaurus, which lacked scales. Some
other specimens from Dinosaur Park show this same morphology. Tanke
(DML 1996) reported a small patch of skin associated with a partial
tyrannosaurid skeleton (vertebrae, dorsal ribs, gastralia, ilium
impression, limb bones impressions, astragalus) from Alberta
presumably stored in the RTMP. The tyrannosaurid was ~8-9 m long, and
the skin impression (though associated with a gastralium and ilial
impression) could not be placed anywhere specifically on the body due
to the skeleton's disarticulation. It preserved small reticulate
scales similar to hadrosaurids."
http://home.comcast.net/~eoraptor/Tyrannosauroidea.html#Gorgosauruslibratus

Assuming both impressions come from Gorgosaurus libratus, this is a
concrete example of a tyrannosaur species with both scales and naked
skin on parts of its body.

--Matt

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Scott Hartman
<skeletaldrawing@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2) Have the adults have naked skin in those areas that were fuzzy as a
> hatchling.  I don't know if it would be aesthetically pleasing, but
> there's no reason a grown T. rex might not have a scale-covered tail,
> feet, and snout and be otherwise naked-skinned.

> -Scott
>