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

RE: Dinosaur Revolution Review



   Thank you for reminding me of something. I've seen several lizards with 
missing scales due to injury, shedding problems or mutation (silkback bearded 
dragons). The naked patches would look like, well... naked skin. So maybe in 
actuality a healthy, uninjured, living Tyrannosaur may have been completely 
scaly after all?

Sim

> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:04:11 +0000
> From: demetrios.vital@gmail.com
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: Dinosaur Revolution Review
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> Two questions:
> 
> 1. A few people here have observed or referred to the coexistence of feathers 
> and scales on the same area of skin in some birds today.  I can't remember if 
> it was also in this thread, but feathers growing directly out of/through 
> scales in living birds have also been described to me based on observation.
> 
> The subcutaneous arterial and muscular network controlling feather movement 
> is incredibly complex in living birds. Is it known whether this network is 
> functionally and morphologically the same if there are scales surrounding, or 
> pierced by, feathers?
> 
> 2. And for those who have observed dead scaly thing in the wild, are they 
> ever de-scaled taphonomically? Would de-scaled skin look like scaleless skin? 
> Is there research on this subject?
> 
> Curiously,
> 
> Demetrios Vital
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jura <pristichampsus@yahoo.com>
> Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu
> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:45:43 
> To: DML<dinosaur@usc.edu>
> Reply-To: Jura <pristichampsus@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Dinosaur Revolution Review
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> > From: Matthew Martyniuk <martyniuk@gmail.com>
> > To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
> > Cc: 
> > Sent: Thursday, 15 September 2011 1:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: Dinosaur Revolution Review
> 
> > "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.
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> I remember that symposium. I also remember what Dr. Holtz mentioned about it 
> on the DML:
> 
> http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Jul/msg00243.html
> 
> "Oh, and did get a chance to check with the tyrannosaurid skin impressions at
> the RTMP.  They do have mosaic scales, but these are smaller than those on
> typical hadrosaurid or ceratopsid skin (actually, the collections specimen
> is about as small-scaled as Gila monster scales).  The two patches I saw
> (one on display, one in collections) are not wrapped around bones (i.e., not
> full blown "tyrant mummies"), but the association of the specimen in
> collections is pretty secure.  Currie says that the impressions on the type
> of _Gorgosaurus_ (not recognized at first, only discovered a decade ago or
> so) are even finer and somewhat more dispersed, which is why he said that
> they had essenti