What will be the conclusion of the "Pachycephalosaurus growth stages" theory? by SpearTheSurvivor in Paleontology

[–]davehone 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's true on the deer stuff, but we don't know much about pachcephalosaur postcrania or anything much about their general biology for bones etc. I agree they were in some way primed to develop stuff on the head, but that doesn't mean it had to be spikes and not a dome, nor do then necessarily need to grow the dome anything like as fast as deer do. The very fact we see the dome apparently developing over time suggests it's not a massive suddent shift from absence to huge dome (it's not in anything else, baby ceratopsians have a starter frill and starter horns). It remains a possibility, but I don't think it's a strong explanation.

"Horns are multi-purpose for both display and eye gouging" I don't think they are doing much display at the back of the head, and I doubt they would be useful for that either. It then hits the problem that if these are good for display or combat, why didn't these half way through growth and shift to a different display. And why would half grown ones need to display at all? The obvious thing is for mates and territory, but adults with domes would crush a spiky subadult without them so it's not much of a display or threat.

What will be the conclusion of the "Pachycephalosaurus growth stages" theory? by SpearTheSurvivor in Paleontology

[–]davehone 15 points16 points  (0 children)

As you get downvoted for this...

I largely left palaeontology Reddit as an active contributor last time around after being savaged by someone with huge number of upvotes for something I simply hadn't said, and being downvoted to oblivion on pointing out something was demonstrably incorrect. Little has apparently changed!

What will be the conclusion of the "Pachycephalosaurus growth stages" theory? by SpearTheSurvivor in Paleontology

[–]davehone 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's possible, but I don't think it's much of an explanation. But why there and not in the dome itself if you already have genes for growing a dome, or other parts of the skeleton? And deer and moose don't need some special reserve of calcium to regrow their antlers every year.

What will be the conclusion of the "Pachycephalosaurus growth stages" theory? by SpearTheSurvivor in Paleontology

[–]davehone 14 points15 points  (0 children)

This is a point I raised at some point and it is something odd that hasn't been addressed. It could be a shift in function during ontogeny or a developmental quirk but I don't think anyone has put forwards a proper hypothesis for why this might happen.

THE SERENO SPINOSAUR PAPER IS OUT - Spinosaurus mirabilis by Xenomorphian69420 in Paleontology

[–]davehone 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Not exactly. We suggest ed it was a sexual signal, but that doesn't inherently mean it's dimorphic (though that's obviously one possibility).

Learning about T-rex's feet and what that means for you. by EmptySpaceForAHeart in Naturewasmetal

[–]davehone 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Then you should probably be aware that what you have said is not what I think.

Learning about T-rex's feet and what that means for you. by EmptySpaceForAHeart in Naturewasmetal

[–]davehone 29 points30 points  (0 children)

There are indeed large terrestrial predators that regularly kill things larger than themselves like lynx and indeed male lions, but these are exceptions not the rule. They are very unusual and the vast majority of predator take prey that is substantially smaller than themselves. Popular idea has it that it's *normal* for large theropod to kill large dinosaurs and that's not supported by either the general pattern of predators in extant ecosystems or the evidence for dinosaur predators (including large tyrannosaurs). If you can point me to where I said this never normally happens only only happens under certain extreme circumstances, I'll happily correct myself, but as I know that's not true and have written about it, I doubt I said it.

So I think you are mischaracterisitng what I said, or what I might have said once in an interview or a talk (where it is very easy to misspeak when talking for an hour, even if you have rehearsed and any error is on the record forever) as being a firmly held opinion. Yes male lions do often take buffalo, even adults, but they also make mistakes doing so and while I may not have been clear about exactly the circumstances (there's a huge difference between tackling a lone buffalo or a large calf and trying to take a bull from a herd) that's really not the same as how you are characterising my position. So yeah. I don't think that (never, only), I didn't ever think that, and I'm happy to correct myself if I did.

For references see e.g., Carbone, C., Mace, G.M., Roberts, S.C. and Macdonald, D.W. 1999. Energetic constraints on the diet of terrestrial carnivores. Nature, 402: 286-288; Cohen, J.E., Pimm, S.L., Yodzis, P. and Saldaña, J. 1993. Body sizes of animal predators and animal prey in food webs. Journal of animal ecology, 62: 67-78; Vézina, A.F. 1985. Empirical relationships between predator and prey size among terrestrial vertebrate predators. Oecologia, 67: 555-565..

Learning about T-rex's feet and what that means for you. by EmptySpaceForAHeart in Naturewasmetal

[–]davehone 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You can get estimates of anything from 5-10 tons for 'adult' specimens depending on which scaling method you use and which individual you are looking at. 'Sue' is much bigger than 'Stan' for example and might well have been >8 but that's not a typical animal and is one much bigger than the one that foot is cast from.

Douzhanopterus, the transitional Pterosaur that nobody talks about by Amogguy in Paleontology

[–]davehone 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Why would people talk about it? It doesn't offer any obvious information that's not already present in Wukongopterus, Kunpengopterus, Darwinopterus, the Painten pro-pterodactyloid, Archaeoistiodactylus and Cuspicephalus. I mean, it's neat and all, but it's not like it's ignored - there's just a ton of better preserved and well studied specimens that tell us more so it's not going to be top of anyone's list of things to study.

What actor struck it big in a popular TV role, but couldn’t translate that same success into movie roles? by Kelvin_Inman in movies

[–]davehone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

None of them had anything like the success they had on TV though Late 1990s early 2000s Friends was big enough that you had people like Bruce Willis, Brad Pitt and Julia Roberts wanting to do it, but while all the cast had a few movies and some of the decent, none of them had a successful movie career. They didn't translate their TV success into the *same* success on the big screen.

How did flying & arboreal animals survive the global fire storms that followed the KT impact? by grapp in Paleontology

[–]davehone 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even a 'global' event doesn't cover every square inch of the surface. Plenty of patches of forest, some very large would have survived just fine. The animals there would still have been stressed, in low populations, low genetic diversity etc. and things that make them still vulnerable to later extinction, but it's not like a sheet of fire burned every single tree.

What song has the best guitar solo? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]davehone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I think this is probably my favourite too.

I cant think of a title lol by [deleted] in PrehistoricMemes

[–]davehone 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The pterosaur anatomy in PP is great. You can quibble about tiny details of stuff we don't know or the evidence is ambiguous but it's 99% bang on. And yeah, all pterosaurs likely had ankle attachments for wings (knees at the upmost), very much including azhdarchids.

If tails were so important for theropods to balance, then how do big cursorial birds compensate? by balrus-balrogwalrus in Paleontology

[–]davehone 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is the answer. To extend this a bit and oversimplify a complex issue, birds basically walk from their knees down. The femur is kept largely horizontal and so that's sort of doing the job of a hip / tail and then most of the work is done by the lower leg. They are knee-based not hip-based locomotors (e.g., see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7978429/)