31 May 2012 08:47
Re: Paravian claw studies
Tim Williams <tijawi <at> gmail.com>
2012-05-31 06:47:04 GMT
2012-05-31 06:47:04 GMT
Denver Fowler <df9465 <at> yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Claws alone don't tell you as much as looking at the complete foot (and preferably, the whole animal). Yes, definitely. There is a typological element to all this. Because certain workers have already made up their minds that certain fossil critters were arboreal (such as _Archaeopteryx_ and _Microraptor_), they tend to view certain of their characters as indicative of arboreal behavior - including the orientation of the hallux (first toe) or shape of the claws. Alternative interpretations get left on the cutting room floor. (When I say "certain workers" I have the Feduccia/Burnham types in mind, not GSP.) > Basal paravians have a subarctometatarsalian metatarsus; a cursorial adaptation; both we (Fowler et al, 2011) and Dececchi & Larsson 2011 > raise this point. The arctometatarsalian pes is an adaptation found in cursorial theropods. But I wonder if it is a cursorial adaptation per se. The arctometatarsalian condition is thought to be associated with the transmission of forces along the proximodistal axis of the pes, resulting in a more effective dispersal of force across the mesotarsal joint. This would certainly be useful in a cursorial biped. But this character (and the less specialized subarctometatarsalian condition) might also be useful to theropods that habitually landed on the ground from heights. This does not necessarily indicate arboreality. What if small predatory paravians clambered up onto prey much larger themselves (or climbed a trunk to access small prey on a branch), and then had to get back to the ground by leaping into the air? Cheers Tim
RSS Feed