Re: WING FEATHER ATTACHMENT

["Zoe Heraklides" <z_heraklides@hotmail.com>]

Tim Williams writes:

> Was there a gap in _Archaeopteryx's wing between the elbow and the body
> wall?  Maybe not.  It is possible that _Archaeopteryx_'s inner wing was
> filled in with a more simplified, primitive type of feather between the 
> most
> proximal secondaries and the body wall.  These feathers (unlike the more
> distal remiges - the primaries and secondaries) were not preserved, just as
> the contour feathers on the body were not preserved.


I would disagree. I can see no reason why any faethers along the upper arm 
would not be preserved. Even if they were not flight feathers (like 
primaries, secondaries, tail feathers) there only difference from the other 
wing feathers would be shape. Why should they not be preserved?
I think it is best to assume the most simplest explanation: that the reason 
Archaeopteryx fossils do not show upper arm feathers is that they were never 
there.

ZH

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp