tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post4370684725969149009..comments2024-03-18T02:43:22.233-07:00Comments on Antediluvian Salad: Ye Shall Enter the SKINgdom of Heaven by Slaying Infidel Scale Loyalists & Feather NazisDuane Nashhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-42008323758150797172017-01-29T22:45:35.999-08:002017-01-29T22:45:35.999-08:00Yes, but we do have direct bony evidence of displa...Yes, but we do have direct bony evidence of display structures in theropods (e.g. Dilophosaurus, Monolophosaurus etc etc). All I'm saying is that there were probably loads of skin (and feather) derived display structures too in addition to the ones we know of for sure.<br /><br />Are you suggesting that, with regards to color, that even for the display structures we know (from bony evidence not just speculation) for certain that they were not brightly colored but more subdued in coloration? Is that what you are suggesting? Just for clarity because I do get this suggestion from others too... and following this you seem to suggest that "birds developed as a clade very keen eyesight" which, correct me if I'm wrong, sort of implies dinosaurs and non-avian theropods did not have color vision?<br /><br />I mean just for clarity are you suggesting a very drab dinosaur display culture? Sort of more like the tans, greys, and browns of large mammals? With the exception of say certain color vision capable primates...Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-81228108640902894472017-01-28T16:32:51.009-08:002017-01-28T16:32:51.009-08:00I wasn't speaking specifically to feathers, bu...I wasn't speaking specifically to feathers, but all display structures including crests, bills, horns, skin, etc. I probably could have been clearer on that, but you absolutely do have a section on display structures (including talking about hornbills, ground hornbills etc. as the closest matches to non-avians).<br /><br />But, even if those are the closest matches, those animals in most cases aren't direct matches, and in all cases modern birds are either capable of flight or secondarily flightless. That means that the thoughts about things like thin bird skin I feel can be a trap because they would have had the pressure to drop weight wherever possible while non-avians that never became capable of flight never would have had to deal with such an issue -- particularly the larger grazers and browsers.<br /><br />Flight also would have done two things to skew modern birds toward bright color displays (whether they are skin, scales, feathers, caruncles etc.)-- 1. birds developed as a clade very keen eyesight, skewing any sort of intra-species communication toward using visual cues instead of other senses and 2. gave most of them a defense mechanism which would have allowed them better defense against predators and reducing the need to have more subdued/camouflage colorations.Mr. Stronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808213299168308131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-61846115961718587592017-01-27T22:29:25.469-08:002017-01-27T22:29:25.469-08:00@Mr. Strongman Who is talking about brightly color...@Mr. Strongman Who is talking about brightly colored feathers? The post was mainly about naked skin (especially on head and neck) as a third option usually ignored by arguments over feathers vs scales. I don't know man are you commenting on the right post? This piece is not talking about bright coloration and neither are any of the above comments so…. I'll be talking about bright colors/display in theropods more in the future but I really doubt any need to infer the drab colorations of mammalian predatorsDuane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-57378962671517745752017-01-24T23:52:17.355-08:002017-01-24T23:52:17.355-08:00It's funny, because the thing that rustles me ...It's funny, because the thing that rustles me in this post isn't the feathers or lack thereof, but the discussion on them being brightly colored. I've even made a comment on it here before, lol.<br /><br />To avoid making the same comment twice, I'll just say I think it's a bit too easy to assign vivid colors and modern bird display structures on non-avian dinosaurs when they had evolutionary stresses placed on them that modern avians haven't. Not saying they weren't there, just that people are too cavalier about it. Based on the prehistoric color patterns we have assembled based on scientific research, ecological niche seems to be a much bigger indicator of coloration possibilities than what modern relatives are currently sporting. As things are now, a lot of people are depicting dinos with a niche fitting a jaguar/lion/grizzly with a distinctly turkey/cassowary/peacock color scheme.<br /><br />Moving on though, I think ultimately though that dinosaur feather patterns will prove much more varied than modern birds.<br /><br />Tails would provide a significant amount of surface area for releasing excess heat that birds don't have access to. I don't think it's a coincidence that we have several feather patterns that lack feathers on or under the tail. The tail also at least in many cases circumvents the ratite use of wings in maintaining balance while running. They also didn't need them for flight (obviously). Any relatively small-armed theropod wouldn't need feathers on their arms, and dropping from those two locations may be more efficient than dropping feathers on the head and neck.Mr. Stronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808213299168308131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-19237350902975219492017-01-21T12:22:54.346-08:002017-01-21T12:22:54.346-08:00@Carliro Good points as one commentator above has ...@Carliro Good points as one commentator above has already pointed out. Indeed I am guilty of too hastily putting forth such an ill-equipped comparison. However I do think that as we go more basal into many of these dinosaur groups we will be confounded with more diversity and unexpected structures and combinations there of.<br /><br />@SeanH. Indeed. There are multiple factions and I like to use the term "strata" of proponents on multiple sides to various degrees. I do mean no ill-will towards any of them. If anything my take home message to all is to be a little less dogmatic on all angles. Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-48783441456901011772017-01-19T13:12:27.767-08:002017-01-19T13:12:27.767-08:00I just have to note one thing: "strawman"...I just have to note one thing: "strawman" does not remotely describe the individuals I've seen in full comment-chain froth on sites such as Deviantart, belaboring other artists-even artists whose stated intent was to experiment with dinosaur-styled fictional monsters, as opposed to accurate paleo depictions. Any given trend with a little traction will have its dogmatic extremists, and I'd say our host has been underplaying their Greater Internet F@#$@%$ Theory(C) aggro level if anything. Granted, some of the commenters above may have been too busy actually contributing to the field to notice, but trust me: there is an opposite extreme to the sort of blinkered perspective which curates Creationist museums. Sean H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-24748939726352554602017-01-19T07:55:06.176-08:002017-01-19T07:55:06.176-08:00"I don't like to use the term "livin..."I don't like to use the term "living fossil" but I think it fair to call these mammals the least derived or most basal among extant mammals."<br /><br />No it's not. Both xenarthrans and monotremes are highly specialised groups, very divergent from the mammalian basic bauplan, and secondarily "pseudo-ectothermic".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-36750951576090347582017-01-18T12:54:18.662-08:002017-01-18T12:54:18.662-08:00Emily might be a tough nut to crack on this one sh...Emily might be a tough nut to crack on this one she seems pretty endeared to feathers but I would happily be proven wrong!!<br /><br />Soft tissue revolution, soft dinosaur revolution, have all been advanced. This "Dinosaur Enlightenment" has a good connotation. What I particularly like about now is that it is not dominated by one or two thinkers as opposed to the earlier eras; there is a rich and fertile breeding ground for new ideas and depictions via the internet; and open access and the openness of many primary researchers has created a very interesting and somewhat novel collaboration between all strata of dinosaur and paleontology enthusiasts, lay people, amateurs, professionals. Of course there are the David Peters and such, you have to take the good with the bad, but I do think that dinosaur science - perhaps more than many other sciences - is showcasing how all these disparate levels and "strata" of entities can work together to further things; advance new hypotheses, ask questions, debate etc etc. It is a bit sloppy and haphazard but I feel we are on the cusp of imagining new ways that science can work, be communicated, and really a way people at many levels can engage actively in it.Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-9285347996397896472017-01-17T21:53:00.434-08:002017-01-17T21:53:00.434-08:00We just need to get Emily Willoughby to paint an u...We just need to get Emily Willoughby to paint an ugly, caruncled maniraptoran one of these days; if there are indeed any militant feather nazis out there, that should get them to come around. (She was the one who first converted me from scale loyalism!)<br /><br />Somebody in the comments mentioned the phrase "Soft Dinosaur Revolution" (my eyes are glazing over as try to re-skim the comments to remember who): I think the term "Dinosaur Enlightenment" has more of a ring to it.<br /><br />Andrew Raymond Stuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16143192568248574758noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-10385852092350146352017-01-16T14:08:07.875-08:002017-01-16T14:08:07.875-08:00Overall good post. You've put into writing wha...Overall good post. You've put into writing what I've been saying for years. In fact your sketches at the end look very much like how I've pretty much always been drawing tyrannosaurids, albeit with more crazy cranial ornamentation.<br /><br />Though I do have to agree with Matt and some others above that you're essentially attacking a strawman or a group of people that don't actually exist, but it still serves its function of getting the greater point across, so whatever.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10558252320249112573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-30667280811294531012017-01-14T17:45:24.641-08:002017-01-14T17:45:24.641-08:00Regarding bird skin and dinosaur skin, your articl...Regarding bird skin and dinosaur skin, your articles have really opened up so many possibilities. I can't figure out how to post images on this platform, but please Google Image Search for "Dong Tao Chicken".RVhippohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00804739805073154389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-38489136858366030032017-01-13T07:52:24.769-08:002017-01-13T07:52:24.769-08:00@TheKatanarama Thanks I am glad you get something ...@TheKatanarama Thanks I am glad you get something from my posts!!Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-69922005722196183482017-01-12T22:15:26.719-08:002017-01-12T22:15:26.719-08:00I myself may not be as knowledgeable in biology an...I myself may not be as knowledgeable in biology and paleontology as many of the readers here but I just wanted to say that this post was a very informative read and I find the idea of dinosaurs possessing a variety of integument types very exciting. Your posts always make for fine reads and you bring up plenty of "outside-the-box" ideas that I really don't see in many other paleontology circles. I'll make sure to share this and several other posts with friends and family online. It may bring back interest in some of them, who knows. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17439012965125955554noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-54756131832198971012017-01-12T19:19:16.524-08:002017-01-12T19:19:16.524-08:00IMHO bald skin areas would be more useful as displ...IMHO bald skin areas would be more useful as display features than for thermoregulation, but I disgressBKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03759189747932749283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-34730073721398238292017-01-12T12:01:00.713-08:002017-01-12T12:01:00.713-08:00@David the idea I am referring to is S.I.G.I.L. wh...@David the idea I am referring to is S.I.G.I.L. which I linked to in the post. Follow the link to see further explanation of the idea. Maybe I was not clear enough but the idea is to have a keratinized, scaly outer layer for this to work. If you have a keratinized "scaly" outer integumentary structure and withdraw blood away from the epidermis won't those structures maintain their structural fidelity? Crocs can pump into and withdraw blood from their dorsal scutes, the scutes don't collapse when the blood leaves. If you have a hollowed out area under the scale it is now an insulation layer.<br /><br />On xenarthran integumentary structures: Good points. Perhaps not the best examples then. However the idea that the more basal we go in many of these groups the more varied the integumentary coats might be is still a good idea worth exploring. Kulindadromeus seems to suggest this!!<br /><br />On grammar errors: Uggh probably lots of errors. Probably not gonna change. Probably doing it a bit on purpose to elicit a response. Definitely working. Just a blog.<br /><br />@Dromo Sapien Happy New Years to you too. Basically, but I don't want even the ideas I suggest to veer into dogmatism. I don't want people to make it a rule that naked headed maniraptorans are the expected look anymore than fully feathered headed maniraptorans are the rule either. No absolutes. There are some trends but even with these trends there are exceptions.<br /><br />Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-81722627603514047302017-01-12T10:22:20.112-08:002017-01-12T10:22:20.112-08:00So what you think might have and probably was happ...So what you think might have and probably was happening was that many non-avians had feathers, lost them, and the nekked skinned areas of their bodies would be something along the lines of elephants, bare skin but thick and sturdy. It was a little odd at first but it's growing on me. Happy New Year btw.Dromo Sapienhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07341797935879038938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-72718537605390431822017-01-12T09:10:17.186-08:002017-01-12T09:10:17.186-08:00created an insulatory vacuum sealed layer when blo...<i>created an insulatory vacuum sealed layer when blood was withdrawn internally</i><br /><br />How would that have worked? There is no way to withdraw blood and leave a vacuum behind. Empty blood vessels just collapse under the pressure of the air or water outside the organism.<br /><br />(That's not an argument against naked skin here and there, of course.)<br /><br /><i>Consider xenarthrans - the strange and alluring mammals that include the extinct glyptodonts and giant grounds sloths, as well as armadillos, sloths, anteaters, probably some other weird ones too I am forgetting. I don't like to use the term "living fossil" but I think it fair to call these mammals the least derived or most basal among extant mammals. The </i>most basal<i> mammals but also the </i>most diverse<i> in terms of integumentary structures.</i><br /><br />What, if anything, do you mean by "basal"? Xenarthrans are placentals, and they're the only synapsids with osteoderms. If the diadectomorphs are theropsids, well, they don't have osteoderms either. The osteoderms of xenarthrans are not a plesiomorphy, they're an apomorphy, and so are the epidermal scales that sometimes cover them.<br /><br />Likewise, the scales of pangolins are apomorphic. Pangolins and carnivorans are sister-groups nested high up in Laurasiatheria.<br /><br />==========<br /><br />More (probably) later. For now, could you please work on your distinction of unstressed vowels in scientific terms? <i>Auc<b>a</b>saurus</i>, <i>Pel<b>e</b>c<b>a</b>nimimus</i>, pach<b>y</b>cephalosaurids, seriema... an "Aucusaurus" with "oo" churns my stomach.David Marjanovićnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-48083488004463314492017-01-12T08:25:50.184-08:002017-01-12T08:25:50.184-08:00Thanks for all the comments and kind words. I'...Thanks for all the comments and kind words. I'm not entirely comfortable with all this agreement and consensus building my instinct towards rebellion causing my pains… Yeah I mean the feather nazi thing is satirical and I get it. I think for those of us that remember when the Chinese revelations came about it was so exciting and opened up so many vistas of further exploration. We may have seen that wave reach its apogee and start to recede a bit so it feels a bit crestfallen. However as I made the point several times in the post scales/scutes/nekkid skin/keratinized skin are also interesting and may hold fruitful promise in unique and intriguing thermoregulatory/display benefit. Also things like the "bearded" filaments we see on turkeys which I learned our keratin outgrowths and not from feathers still offer a fruitful promise for that fabled somewhat filament covered sauropod… not there for insulation purpose but display!!Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-61751712455597018632017-01-12T07:09:54.644-08:002017-01-12T07:09:54.644-08:00I agree with William and Matthew by saying that th...I agree with William and Matthew by saying that the so-called 'feather nazis' are more satirical than fanatics (or, at least, the ones I know of) and things are already changing for some time now - but still, doesn't affect your points!<br /><br />The importance of skin structures and dewlaps is incredibly underrated and even if I'm not personally sure where the boundary between outrageously-weird and rightfully-weird ends (like we already discussed in a previous post of yours), we still need to remind how widespread these kind of structures are and how the dichotomy between Scales v. Feathers v. Naked skin shouldn't be a battle from a fantasy novel like you've said.<br /><br />Excelent article and excellent food for thought, Duane!Elijah Shandseighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15622423593087745170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-66489176011970569702017-01-11T23:17:14.208-08:002017-01-11T23:17:14.208-08:00Khalil, there is not evidence of osteoderms in Car...Khalil, there is not evidence of osteoderms in Carnotaurus.<br />Osteoderms are present just along the dorsal midline in Ceratosaurus and eventually Eoabelisaurus. Given that recent analyses suggest Eoabelisaurus as a ceratosaurid, not an abelisauroid, the dorsal string of osteoderms may be restricted just to ceratosaurids. <br /><br />We need more fossils and more careful description of the fossils before stating something robust on the tegument of most dinosaurs.Andrea Cauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10855060597677361866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-73549382295565639932017-01-11T17:30:09.329-08:002017-01-11T17:30:09.329-08:00On loss of feathers for thermoregulation:
IIRC, f...On loss of feathers for thermoregulation:<br /><br />IIRC, feathers are useful for soaking up a lot of heat and blocking external heat (though this doesn't address internal heat). While some birds have lost feathers for thermoregulation (discounting the wattles and display features of galliforms), most of these tend to be soaring flyers, and there it's a mixed bagBKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03759189747932749283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-9565443526114191222017-01-11T16:28:59.062-08:002017-01-11T16:28:59.062-08:00@Duane Nash oh don't get me wrong, I love myse...@Duane Nash oh don't get me wrong, I love myself Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit or any other fantasy novel (and don't forget the memes!!!). It's just that many people may be off set when expecting a post about Archosaur integument to have a playful jab at many ala a reference to a random franchise! Amazing post regardless and I'm very excited for more, especially regarding integument.Iris-Katyayanihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06188961246186305190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-33641565559335426592017-01-11T15:36:39.795-08:002017-01-11T15:36:39.795-08:00Great post! I think a lot of former "feather ...Great post! I think a lot of former "feather nazis " have been coming around to this way of thinking, but publication lags might make it look like the pendulum is still swinging towards "the enfluffening". I have dozens of illustrations of weird skin, combo skin, flashy fleshy patches, etc. in a variety of archosaur lineages, but they're earmarked for books and it'll be a few years ;)Matthew Martyniukhttp://mpm.panaves.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-47897249193535014632017-01-11T11:22:34.212-08:002017-01-11T11:22:34.212-08:00One of my personal pet peeves is how much people r...One of my personal pet peeves is how much people rail on about Jurassic World needing to update their dinosaurs to better reflect modern scientific data out of a moral obligation to science. The only reason to think this is because you don't understand how copyright laws work and how tricky and weird it is to have to merchandise a franchise based on factual real animals. <br /><br />The skin angle is wonderfully enlightening (especially that Croc thing. Very cool stuff!) The Abelisaurids are a favourite of mine and it's cool to see you finally touch on them. <br /><br />Is it possible that there were "Southern" variations of T.Rex that tended towards nudity to accommodate heat with more appropriately woolly northern ones? The hubris of some people (often not formally educated in Paleontology BUTTHATSNONEOFMYBUSINESS) to think that the anarchic world of biology and animals could so conveniently fit into their simple categorizations and dichotomies. Did you learn nothing from Jurassic Park?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00077775903586562286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-43983732080703020982017-01-11T10:02:32.179-08:002017-01-11T10:02:32.179-08:00that is what it says on the wikipedia page. there ...that is what it says on the wikipedia page. there is a citation to a paper by D. E. G. Briggs, P. R. Wilby, B. Pérez Pérez-Moreno, J. L. Sanz, M. Fregenal-Martinez, (1997). "The mineralization of dinosaur soft tissue in the Lower Cretaceous of Las Hoyas, Spain." Journal of the Geological Society London, 154: 587-588.<br /><br />According to Darren Naish, above comments, the interpretations (that I got from wikipedia I actually don't have the original paper) are ambiguous so I will take his word. I would like to more about what is going on there with Pelecanimimus myself...Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.com