Re: DINO EGG NEWS

["Nicholas R. Longrich" <longrich@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>]

On Sun, 10 Dec 1995 steve.cole@genie.com wrote:
> Fossilized egg reveals embryo but no baby dinosaur
>  HOLLYWOOD, Fla, Dec 6 (Reuter) - Scientists used modern technology to peek
> inside a 70-million-year-old fossilized dinosaur egg on Wednesday and were
> disappointed to find a poorly developed embryo instead of a baby saltasaurus.
>  They had hoped to find a late-stage, fully-developed embryo with a complete
> skeleton that would have helped them understand the evolution of the
> saltasaurus, a long-necked, herbivor that roamed South America during the
> Cretaceous period, the last of three dinosaur eras.
>  What they found was an early-stage embryo that will not lend much insight
> into the development of the great beasts, said Dr Edward Petuch, professor of
> paleontology at Florida Atlantic University.

        Well, #@#$%... The irony is that a skeleton from a baby Saltasaur 
would make the thing the most complete titanosaur. Am I right in thinking 
that Alamosaurus is still the most complete titanosaur, or have some 
recent finds found anything better?
        I dug up the article on Pelicanomimus, too, and it's a weird 
creature. It has over two hundred twenty teeth, about seventy in the 
upper jaw, the rest in the lower- weird. The first thing that came to 
mind was "Piscivore!" but the descriptions didn't really seem to support 
this. The front teeth were D-shaped, the ones further back, bladelike. 
There are no serrations. It seems like the teeth themselves, however, 
which are very small, serve as serrations for the jaw. The mention of the 
integument was minimal, it mentioned a bit about fibers, which were not 
clearly visible in the photos, and a possible throat sack (though this 
could be a dewlap, as well, you'd think). Another weird thing about the 
teeth- the teeth in the upper jaw were all on the front half, the back 
was toothless. I didn't find the description of the integument any more 
enlightening than the photos. The thing is some kind of ornithomime, 
according to the authors. From the Lower Cretaceous of Las Hoyas, Spain.
        Very strange...
Has anybody heard any ideas about exactly what this animal ate? Or any 
further stuff on the feathers?
        -nick L.