Re: SAUROPOD POLING?

[John Erick Schneiderman <dino@cwis.unomaha.edu>]

On Mon, 7 Nov 1994, Scott wrote:

>   I REMEMBER READING ABOUT SOME SAUROPOD FOOTPRINTS WHERE ONLY THE FRONT 
> PRINTS
> WERE VISIBLE. THIS WAS INTERPRETTED TO MEAN THAT THE ANIMAL WAS IN DEEP ENOUGH
> WATER TO BUOY ITS REAR LEGS OFF OF THE LAKE BOTTOM. MY QUESTION IS: IF IT WAS
> DEEP ENOUGH FOR THIS, WASN'T IT ALSO DEEP ENOUGH THAT THE WATER PRESSURE WOULD
> PREVENT THE SAUROPOD LUNGS FROM OPERATING?

answer: the lungs of a floating or near floating sauropod were probably
just a little below the water surface.  Not 15 or more feet below the
surface as shown in pictures of sauropods standing on the bottom of lakes
and snorkling for air with fully craned neck to reach the surface.

> IS THERE ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF THE PRINTS POSSIBLE?

answer: the hind foot is superimposed over the smaller front foot
           print, and later the preservation of the hind footprint is lost.

> ARE WE SURE THAT THEY ARE _SAUROPOD_ FOOTPRINTS?

The footprints in question come from the early Cretaeous of Texas, Pauluxy
River.  Prosauropods are long since extinct.  It is thought that the
sauropod prints were made by a Pleurocoelus or some other kind of late
brachiosaur (hence the deeper front footprints).

> WEREN'T SOME PROSAUROPODS OCCASIONALLY BIPEDAL?

It is possible that some prosauropods may have been functionally bipedal,
although I believe them to be quadrapeds, maybe rearing up to a bipedal
stance to get at food.