Re: forelimb posture

["Pat Grant (Library: Serials Catalog" <PATG@vax2.concordia.ca>]

Gee, first of all get your sleep!  Then, as soon as you're rested up,
please let me know whether the new Dodson/Farlow article explains the
natural, in-situ articulation of the ribs and scapulocoracoid.  Do
they attribute it to postmortem slumping, or to some other factor?

I was disappointed in reading Dodson's _Horned Dinosaurs_ book to
notice that he reiterates the old chestnut about the flange on the
proximal end of the humerus being a danger to the ribs, thus
justifying the sprawl, without explaining why he thinks the two bones
could be close enough together to constitute a problem.

I have seen enough restorations where the glenoid was plunked over
a dorsal rib (where it DOESN'T belong, UNLESS postmortem
distortion moved it from there), but don't recall any involving the
articulation of scapulacoracoid with cervical ribs.  (Not that I've
seen a lot of museum mounts--know of any admonitory examples I could
see in readily-available books or websites?)  And, of course, whether
a mount looks strange to us or not doesn't matter if the bones
articulate properly.  (Personally, I think the scooped-out forehead of
a rhino looks totally unrealistic, but nobody seems willing to do
anything about it; and don't get me started about the walking
movements of egrets, flamingoes, etc.)

As for the trackways--others have used Ceratopsipes measurements to
justify an erect posture!  Not having any first-hand access (and, in
the face of such disparite results, doubting that I'd be able to come
to any better-informed conclusions than those who have published on
the matter, of either camp) I will, for now, treat all claims of
"fits Ceratopsipes" with skepticism.

But I really would like to know why D&F put the humeral flange that
close to the rib.

Pat Grant
patg@vax2.concordia.ca