Re: B. walkeri neural spines

[Steven Coombs <gasperex@hotmail.com>]

I'm not really implying that it did have a structure that was a mammalian 
analogue. From the paper and some personnal observations, I just see some 
similarities. I don't think the whole hump idea a very plausible one though, 
I really think it had a structure that wasn't quite a hump or a sail. 
Nothing what Dimetrodon or a Bison have. Would it make sense that this 
structure had air sacs, which would have been able to enflate or deflat? (be 
good to attract mates, fend off other individuals etc.) Would this be more 
of a Chameleon analogue then?

Steven Coombs
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Steven's Dinosaurs: http://www.stevensdinosaurs.com




> From: Christopher Collinson <Chris_Collinson@monarch.net>
> Reply-To: Chris_Collinson@monarch.net
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: B. walkeri neural spines
> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 20:13:48 -0700
>
> Why do people immediately look to a mammalian analogue when there are 
> better
> reptilian examples? For one thing I'd like to know how Spinosaurus could
> have walked with so much weight so far forward of its hips. Someone on the
> list previously brought up the possibility of a Chameleons analogue, where
> many species have high spined vertebra, some more so than others, but do 
> not
> store fat on them. Like all other reptile, not including birds of course,
> Chameleons store fat in their tails its probable to assume most dinosaurs
> did the same.
>
> Cheers,
> Christopher Collinson

_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the MSN Premium and get 2 months FREE*    
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines