Re: Insectivorous Ankylosaurians

["David Krentz" <david_krentz@fa.disney.com>]

        Reply to:   RE>>Insectivorous Ankylosaurians

 Matthew Troutman wrote:
>  First of all the body style is similiar to modern insect-eating
> edentates. Low,armored body style is advantageous because it is easier
> to eat bugs and the armor can be used for defence against stings as well
> as for defence against predators.
>  Second of all ankylosaurs had prehensile tongues that flipped in and
> out of the mouth like a snake's tongue. The hyoid bones were very well
> developed and they had a long entogossal process. I believe  in Gastonia
> and Pinacosaurus a "scoop" is found in the premaxxila. This would have
> allowed the tongue to flip in and out unhindered. This tongue would have
> been useful for collecting insects like an anteater.
>  These features can be made to support a insectivorous lifestyle for
> ankylosaurs, but I support the compromsse of a herbivore/insectivore
> ankylosaurs.

  I've often wondered about the possibility of Ankylosaurs having a diet of
tubers and bulbs.  Although their fore limbs were not adapted for digging,
they did "suggest a high force delivery to the manus'' (Dinosauria,Coombs and
Maryanska).  Even if they didn't dig , they had some adaptations that would
compensate.  I am unclear on the presence of soft tubers or bulbs in their
environment, present day marshes have plenty.  Perhaps they used their fine
sense of smell, as indicated by large olfactory bulbs, and rummaged around
with their heads close to the ground.  When they smell something good to eat,
they could exhume the ground with their shovel like beaks and manipulated the
bulbs into their mouths with their long tongues.  Fossil evidence suggests
that they were somewhat solitary animals, so  maybe they needed armour and
tail clubs to protect themselves while their faces were in the dirt.
  Recently on Animal Planet, a saw a special on the warthog.  It spends it's
days with it's face in the ground digging up food (I'm unclear as to what
food) and using it's tusks and dental comb to exhume.  They do not use their
front limbs at all, in fact, they bend their metacarpals so far back and walk
on their wrists!  This adaptation allows them to be lower to the ground, a
problem Anklylosaurs didn't have.  Warthoggs also have a great sense of
smell.  Although they don't have armour to protect themselves, they live in
groups that allow them to watch each others' backsides.
  As far as Ankylosaurs being partially insectivorous, I'm sure with a mouth
full of dirt they were guaranteed to get some juicy bugs as well.  Warthoggs
eat bugs as well, the Lion King is clear evidence of this.
  I'd be happy to hear criticism, I've thought about this a while and haven't
heard much about it.

"Some Clever Quote"
David Krentz

--------------------------------------
Date: 10/20/97 12:14 AM
To: David Krentz
From: jwoolf@erinet.com
Matthew Troutman wrote:
>
>  I believe in 1926 Nopcsa suggested that ankylosaurs were insectivores.
> This has fallen from favor in light of Coomb's and Carpenter's worrk on
> ankylosaurs. But I think that in recent years much evidence has been
> acculumated to support at least a hebivorous/insectivorous feeding habit
> in ankylosaurs.
>  First of all the body style is similiar to modern insect-eating
> edentates. Low,armored body style is advantageous because it is easier
> to eat bugs and the armor can be used for defence against stings as well
> as for defence against predators.
>  Second of all ankylosaurs had prehensile tongues that flipped in and
> out of the mouth like a snake's tongue. The hyoid bones were very well
> developed and they had a long entogossal process. I believe  in Gastonia
> and Pinacosaurus a "scoop" is found in the premaxxila. This would have
> allowed the tongue to flip in and out unhindered. This tongue would have
> been useful for collecting insects like an anteater.
>  These features can be made to support a insectivorous lifestyle for
> ankylosaurs, but I support the compromsse of a herbivore/insectivore
> ankylosaurs.

It's an interesting notion, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  But it
appears to have a few major holes.  The first question that leaps to
mind is "where would something the size of an ankylosaur find enough
insects to keep it fed?"

-- JSW