Re: Dromaeosaur disease resistance

["Jordan Mallon" <j_mallon@hotmail.com>]

> From: StephanPickering@cs.com

> Polygyny among dromaeosaurs would be unlikely: a male would have too >high 
> an energy expenditure to work with two females, and, if two >females shared 
> the same nest, incubation success would be lowered.

So what do you suggest as the alternative?  We could just as easily rule out 
polyandry for similar-but-opposite reasons.  Monogamy and polygynandy being 
the only other alternatives.  At this point, who knows?
And why would the two females share the same nest?

> A dromaeosaur eating rotting flesh, or living animals infected  with 
> >virulent diseases, necessarily would have to possess highly efficient 
> >immune systems (the carcass could be in water, and waterborne diseases 
> >likewise could pose a hazard to our predator).
> Thus, in the macroevolution of dinosaurs, the radiation of clades
> within biozones, disease resistance would an integral part of their 
> >genomes.

My question to you now is, why do you think dinosaurs (or dromaeosaurids in 
particular, it seems) had any higher a resistance to disease than extant 
organisms?

Jordan Mallon

http://www.geocities.com/paleoportfolio/

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx