RE: Magnosaurus & matrilineal dinosaurs

["Thomas R. Holtz, Jr." <tholtz@geol.umd.edu>]

From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
StephanPickering@cs.com

>Shalom, good morning.
>
>For those seemingly horrified by the proposition of female dinosaurs
(ceratopsians et al.)
>being dominant (in sensu strictu, dinosaurology is ideological, contrary to
Keith Parsons et
>al.), an ethnography of dinosaurology reuires a semiosis analysis of
meaning rather than
>explanation.

However, for those of us who are more interested in the ethnology of
dinosaurs rather than the ethnography of 'dinosaurology', we seek for the
best supported pattern based on multiple lines of evidence rather than
"meaning".

[Furthermore, the use of the term 'dinosaurology' is a bit problematic, as
nearly all those practitioners of this science do not use this term for
their own discipline!]

> To point to extant avialian theropods, where males are often larger and
more
>colourful, 65 million years after the K/T event(s), is meaningless. Their
morphogenesis,
>breeding biologies, etc., are the result, I believe, of the catastrophic
events of K/T. I am
>interested in pre-K/T behaviour (which can be inferred with careful
analysis of parallel
>ecological niches observable in mammals; crocodylomorphs are useless).

While it is certainly true that we might gain some insight on the behavior
of Mesozoic dinosaurs by *analogy* from mammals, there are certainly many
behaviors which track phylogenetic history rather than gross ecological
comparisons (nest building, for instance).

Additionally, "matrilinearity" (an odd concept for non-human animals, as
this term as used generally includes societal concepts of wealth, "name",
"title", and so forth) is rare among mammalian herd animals.  Elephants
demonstrate it, but bovids and (to my knowledge) cervids do not.  Colonial
pinnipeds most certainly do not.  Hyenas do; lions do not (even though
lionesses are responsible for hunting among non-"teenage" male prides, no
particular lioness has protection of the only real evolutionary wealth:
children.  When a new male lion joins a pride, it eliminates the cubs of the
previous lion.  Thus, there is no gain for a lioness in terms of investment
into the distribution of "power" within the pride).

Indeed, in terms of investment of energy resources there is good
evolutionary sense why in many groups of vertebrates males are rarer and
showier than the females: the ability for a male to fertilize multiple
females during breeding seasons is an easier matter than for a female to
breed successfully (with capacity to generate offspring) with multiple
males.  There are, of course, exceptions (ratite males are the child
rearers); that's Nature for you.

                Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
                Vertebrate Paleontologist
Department of Geology           Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland          College Park Scholars
                College Park, MD  20742
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/tholtz.htm
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/eltsite
Phone:  301-405-4084    Email:  tholtz@geol.umd.edu
Fax (Geol):  301-314-9661       Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796