Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

The Official Feathered Dinosaur Shitstorm Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thought you guys might get a kick out this:

A feathery tail preserved in amber

  • 3 months later...

The extent of plumage per species most likely varied heavily due to external factors, though. When I say "no feathers", I'm not saying they didn't have anything at all on their skin. Just there was a large degree of variance depending on environmental factors.

But it still would not surprise me of some specie's didn't have feathers at all, or to the point you couldn't call them feathers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The extent of plumage per species most likely varied heavily due to external factors, though. When I say "no feathers", I'm not saying they didn't have anything at all on their skin. Just there was a large degree of variance depending on environmental factors.

But it still would not surprise me of some specie's didn't have feathers at all, or to the point you couldn't call them feathers.

 

I would expect to see distributions of feathers and feather-like structures in avemetatarsalia that are more extensive than fur is in mammals. The reason for this is there are no ave.m.t. whale equivalents.

 

I also am hesitant to point to large sauropods and other dinosaurs as being possible low integument species because it's not really clear why elephants, rhinos, and hippos are low integument - at least so far as I know. The reasons for them being low integument might for all we know not at all apply to sauropods and other large dinosaurs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
3 hours ago, Xlucine said:

Ok, so going back to feathers on dinos with this new phylogeny. Would the sauropods + other basal dinos not having feathers make sense now as they aren't in the clade of the feathered theropods and ornithischians?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Ok, so going back to feathers on dinos with this new phylogeny. Would the sauropods + other basal dinos not having feathers make sense now as they aren't in the clade of the feathered theropods and ornithischians?

 

 

 

It depends on whether ptero fuzz is the same thing as feathers, or parallel evolution.

 

From the Naish article:

 

Quote

If sauropodomorphs and herrerasaurs are outside Ornithoscelida, it follows that they lack features common to members of that latter group. Today we know that both ornithischians and theropods (of at least some lineages) possessed hair-like or quill-like integumentary structures, whereas the absence (thus far!) of such structures from sauropodomorphs is slightly suspicious. Ok, that absence may be more to do with the quirks of the fossil record than anything else, but could it be that key events in integumentary evolution occurred in the ornithoscelidan common ancestor, not the dinosaurian one? In other words, might it be that the sauropodomorph + herrerasaur clade never possessed such structures? One good fossil could resolve this, and let’s not forget – as if – that the presence of integumentary fibres in pterosaurs provides support for a fuzzy dinosaurian common ancestor.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

Mark Witton on the latest papers which strongly suggest T. rex was entirely scaly:

 

Quote

A last interpretation of this new data is that Tyrannosaurus was actually just scaly, with no fibres whatsoever. This is the most contested suggestion made by Bell et al. (2017), but it's not unreasonable with our current knowledge. Existing skin data, representing seven parts of the body if you pool all the distinct skull correlates and postcranial points (add several more if you want to extrapolate scale patches from other tyrants), shows enough scales and consistency in the scalation pattern that uniform scale coverage is not a ridiculous or indefensible concept. I appreciate that some folks will point to regional fuzziness of animals like Kulindadromeus in response, and its sharply defined areas of different integument types, and that's valid point. But we can also point to plenty of dinosaurs with extensive or entirely scaly hides and - if there's any value to linking body size and thermoregulatory regimes - they're a better match to Tyrannosaurus body mass than any known fuzzy species. For the time being, wholly scale models fit our existing data just as reasonably as partly fuzzy ones so, archaic and counter-intuitive as it seems - a scaly Tyrannosaurus is not an unreasonable interpretation for the life appearance of this animal, given our current data. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...

BBC has a documentary coming out in January which portrays a realistic "roar" of the Tyrannosaurus Rex.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/12/09/sinister-sound-tyrannosaurus-rex-heard-first-time-66-million/

 

It seems to be more of a low rumble. The video clip in the Telegraph article which they chose to share is rather unsatisfying as it just has two people yammering so I guess we have to wait until the episode airs for the good stuff.

 

Also they gave T-Rex a hairdo that looks like Tommy Wiseau for some reason.

 

472AAABE00000578-0-image-a-56_1512870671

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By Collimatrix
      We'll start this one off with the recent discovery that Australian brown falcons deliberately spread fires in order to flush out prey.
       
       

×
×
  • Create New...