Re: JP3 Thoughts (frilled Dilophosaurus revisited)

[Christopher Srnka <theclaw10@home.com>]

I'm certainly speculating here again, but would it be unreasonable to speculate 
that a neck frill might exist for sexual display? And couldn't such a frill be 
utilized in juveniles and/or adults who feel threatened secondarily
as a defensive display? And if Dilophosaurus' ancestors originally developed 
venom and frills as a defense (bad taste, scare away predators), couldn't those 
adaptations be retained and applied to different use when the larger
species evolved? Otherwise, how do you explain snake venom? If they developed 
venom originally so they would taste bad to predators, and now use it against 
prey, why not Dilophosaurus?

Keep in mind, I'm not trying to defend JP's depiction of Dilophosaurus' use of 
frills and whatnot so much as I'm trying to figure out why the neck frill seems 
to get poo-pooed so much. It still doesn't seem to me to be any more
unreasonable a speculation than David Peters showing dromaesaurids with skin 
flaps between upper and lower arms....

Leonidus AK Giganotosaurus wrote:

>
>
> For one, they're completely unnecesary.
>
> Dilophosaurus was the largest predator of its time and region.
>
> Conjecturally, poison starts as trying to taste bad to a higher predator. 
> This eventually results in toxicity. Venom, like that of a snake, is most 
> likely, from my PoV, an adaptation of that. Either way, a Dilophosaur
> would not have need of venom or poison because it's already tops in the food 
> chain.
>
> (And sorry if I added the poisonous part, but the two go hand in hand in many 
> people's minds in relation to the species.)
>
> As for the sail frill, same thing again. In frilled lizards, it's a defense 
> mechanism against larger predators, making the lizard seem larger than it 
> really is. Dilophosaurus wouldn't need it because it's already larger than
> everything else. Even as, say, defense against others of its species, I doubt 
> it would work, it's a scare tactic, really, and wouldn't work against one who 
> knows what's going on.
>
> and, some might point out a gap in my logic, that maybe the Dilophosaur 
> didn't evolve as the top predator. Partially true, it's ancestors would have 
> faced against the phytosaurs(or whatever pusedo crocodiles that
> lived in the triassic), but such defenses wouldn't really work against them, 
> due to the tactics used in capturing prey. I dunno if a psuedo-croc would 
> have the neccesary visual recognition for a bad-taste scenario to
> work out, because it's doubtful a small creature like that would survive even 
> a single bite, at least long or well enough to mate and pass on whatever 
> developing bad-taste genes it may have had. And since by the
> time Dilophosaurus came about as we know it, the Triassic extinction had come 
> about and wiped the psuedo-crocs out, I dunno that it would have lasted that 
> long amongst them for no reason whatsoever.
>
> Anyway, that's just what I think. Rip it to shreds as you will.
>
> ---
> Leonidus AK Giganotosaurus
> alex@voyager.net