[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Yet more on pterosaur quad arm posture
- To: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: Yet more on pterosaur quad arm posture
- From: "Thomas R. Holtz, Jr." <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:34:10 -0400
- In-reply-to: <CADHyUaRWRsYf_b15hq22w4-1W7ze+5zxjEbrgaA1MPJ6jM=XPg@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CA+nnY_Ec6hqEMTUxVPDB3_2HRkV7a-ftwVCh5OZ_RkmLqN=HUw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+nnY_EUccOTRYMXpJsp8BpVxPzKRfNjXXkPK=M2tGcviV8Qemail@example.com> <CADHyUaRWRsYf_b15hq22w4-1W7ze+5zxjEbrgaA1MPJ6jM=XPg@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu
I think part of the issue here is mixing terminology from mammology and
For mammalogists, "arboreal" typically means "animals that feed and live
primarily in the trees" while "scansorial" means "animals that feed and live
primarily on the ground, but hide, nap, or roost in trees." Since
non-chiropteran mammals don't really have the option of flying to get up into
trees, they have climb in order to get there, and hence "scansorial."
But to ornithologists the focus is on the bird-substrate contact: scansorials
are explicitly those that use their claws to access the tree environment
vertically. The distinction here is a locomotory one, not as much an
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Email: email@example.com Phone: 301-405-4084
Office: Centreville 1216
Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
Dept. of Geology, University of Maryland
Faculty Director, Science & Global Change Program, College Park Scholars
Mailing Address: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology
Building 237, Room 1117
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742 USA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu [mailto:owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu] On Behalf Of
> David Cerný
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 3:26 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Yet more on pterosaur quad arm posture
> David Marjanović <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> We agree that animals that are not scansorial do roost in trees.
> > ...if they can fly there. (WAIR probably counts, too.)
> > If they climb there instead -- if they do what practically no bird ever
> > does today: start on the ground and climb into the crown --,
> they're scansorial: natural selection for climbing ability kicks in, and they
> evolve adaptations to climbing.
> > Lots of terrestrial or semiaquatic birds roost in trees _because_ they can
> > do so without climbing.
> I'm sure this _must_ have been mentioned in the discussion about the
> arboreality of basal maniraptorans at some point (especially
> since that discussion seems to emerge on the list every two months or so),
> but -- what about seriemas? They are terrestrial, maybe
> even vaguely deinonychosaurian-like (although Farlow et al. 2011 found the
> comparison largely unsubstantiated), their hallux is
> reduced (like in tinamous), they roost in trees, but they climb up there:
> https://plus.google.com/104301904461877588678/posts/MEb3NDJLVTK (with links
> to photos of seriemas in trees and perched --
> somehow -- on
> Perhaps someone can find a better reference; the _Handbook of the Birds of
> the World_ may be worth checking out.
> Fowler DW, Freedman EA, Scannella JB, Kambic RE 2011 The predatory ecology of
> _Deinonychus_ and the origin of flapping in birds.
> PLoS ONE
> 6(12): e28964
> David Černý