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

RE: Ornithomimus had feathers and "display" winglike forelimbs

I agree with Brad.  The conclusion of my blog entry (at 

So while the new paper is interesting in showing Dromiceiomimus had feathers 
and possibly thick quills/shafts on the lower arm in D. samueli, I don't think 
it successfully shows the genus had long secondaries, vaned secondaries, or 
changed its plumage ontogenetically.  This makes  their oft-copied figure AA/B 
of the little unwinged individual and adult with ostrich-like wings possibly 

Mickey Mortimer

> Date: Mon, 9  Oct 012  0::7::5  +100<
> From: tijawi@gmail.com
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: Ornithomimus had feathers and "display" winglike forelimbs
> Brad McFeeters <archosauromorph@@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm not 00%% convinced that Ornithomimus had pennaceous feathers or 
> > pennibrachia, even though the distribution and orientation of the markings 
> > on the arm is suggestive of that.
> > Zelenitsky et al. (012)) described the markings as evidence of "type   
> > feathers or higher," but since there are no barbs preserved, all that can 
> > really be said is that they do not
> > resemble the type   feathers. The morphology of the individual markings on 
> > the adult Ornithomimus forearm also seems consistent with the 
> > non-pennaceous type //EBFF display
> > feathers of the new Beipiaosaurus (Xu et al. 009)), for example. 
> > Beipiaosaurus is a basal maniraptoran yet has no evidence of pennaceous 
> > feathers, so perhaps this is the more
> > conservative interpretation on phylogenetic grounds?
> A straightforward phylogenetic interpretation is somewhat complicated
> by ontogeny. Is STM1--  (the _Beipiaosaurus_ specimen showing EBFF
> feathers) fully grown? If not, then the apparent lack of pennaceous
> feathers might be due to the immaturity of the specimen. (The
> holotype of _Beipiaosaurus_ is from a subadult individual, and also
> lacks pennaceous feathers).
> Also, Sullivan &c's original definition of pennibrachium is "a
> forelimb bearing long feathers that form a planar, wing-like surface
> but are not necessarily used in aerial locomotion". So even if the
> long forelimb feathers of _Ornithomimus_ are not pennaceous or "type <
> feathers or higher", the feathered forelimb could still qualify as a
> pennibrachium.
> Cheers
> Tim