Re: Sordes "feathers?" (was Shuvuuia`s feathers)

[Dave Unwin <h0662eka@rz.hu-berlin.de>]

Hello Larry Febo, and other dinolist people

>Hello Dr Holtz! Do you,...(or does anybody on the list) know if such an 
>analysis has been done on the "integuementary fibres" of Sordes pilosus??? 
>Also,...hasn`t Unwin tried to show that these fibres are not featherlike 
>in nature?....(I would know this one if I had a copy of his book "Biology 
>of Pterosaurs",...but alas, have not yet recieved a copy.....ps,...does 
>this book even exist or is it just a rumor????


Sordes does have 'integumentary fibres' but no, they are not 
feather-like, at least compared with the feathers of extant birds. 
Interestingly though, they show some gross similarity to the 
integumentary strucutres reported on some of the Laioning theropods. 
However, before this leads to endless speculation on the evolution of 
feathers, the relationships of pterosaurs to   other ornithodirans and so 
on, I have a general comment that applies to pterosaurs, Longisquama and 
theropod/bird feathers at least. Its hard enough to describe skeletal and 
dental anatomy and get even a majority of ones colleagues to agree on the 
definition and distribution of such hard tissue structures. Fossilised 
soft tissue structures are much, much harder to deal with and until one 
has seen (what one hopes) is the same structure preserved in a variety of 
taphonomic settings and in a variety of taxa we should be extremely 
cautious about drawing any kinds of conclusions regarding the 
construction, function and homolgy of such structures. In some cases, and 
Longisquama (which I have also examined) is a good one, we may have to 
accept that the preservation, at least among known specimens, may not be 
good enough (now or ever) to resolve some of the key questions. 
(Incidentally, regarding Longisquama - the bone remains are rather poorly 
preserved - considerably worse for example than in Sharovipteryx, and 
fine details are likely to be a matter of personal interpretation).

Anyway, back to the main thread - I agree with earlier contributors that 
what is really needed are detailed, desk-bending, monographic accounts of 
these key taxa, with oodles of photos and drawings. I hope to contribute 
to this with a couple of biggies next year on pterosaurs. Speaking of 
which, we come to the thorny topic of the 'Biology of Pterosaurs'. An 
incomplete MS does exist and is inching toward completion - but don't 
hold your breath. Quite a lot has been happening (and changing ) with 
pterosaurs in the last few years (see for example a new animation of 
pterosaur walking I plan to present at SVP with Don Henderson - yes I 
know - it was a shameless plug) so the book MS gets moved down the 
pile(s) and so on. Earliest publication date is now likely to be 2001 and 
thats assuming no one finds any more interesting pterosaurs between now 
and then - which of course they won't. 

OK, its my tea time now,

Ta ra

Dave



 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

David M Unwin
Curator for Fossil Reptiles and Birds
Institut fur Palaontologie
MUSEUM FUR NATURKUNDE 
Zentralinstitut der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin
Invalidenstrasse 43
D-10115 Berlin
GERMANY

Email: david.unwin@rz.hu-berlin.de

Tel. numbers:   

0049 30 2093 8577 (office)
0049 30 2093 8862 (department secretary)
0049 30 2093 8868 (fax)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx