Re: Bipedal fighting sauropods

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 95-12-04 02:22:42 EST, longrich@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
(Nicholas R. Longrich) writes:

>You know, I was cautiously in favor of tripodal sauropods, but I
> didn't buy into tripodal stegosaurs- the necks were just so short, it 
>seemed like that should be the first thing to evolve if they were high 
>feeders. Then I used Paul's S. stenops diagrams to make a little 
>eight-inch paper-mache model. The damn thing kept falling over backwards 
>at the slightest push. I am a convert. 
>
>

The Chinese stegosaur Wuerhosaurus seems to have had even shorter forelimbs
relative to hindlimb length than Stegosaurus. (If we had at least a femur, I
could take the qualifier out of that sentence.) It may have been a habitual
biped.