Re: Trex as a good smeller

[Dann Pigdon <dannj@alphalink.com.au>]

Quoting don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>:

> I once made some casual observations on turkey buzzards, and found   
> that if _no_ visual could be obtained (eg, carcass _completely_   
> covered by brush), the birds could not access a armadillo carcass.   
> Much circling, possibly a landing, but no meal. My provisional   
> conclusion was that scent might bring them to a general location,   
> but visual confirmation was needed for final location.

This probably holds true for a lot of animals. Tiger sharks can follow  
and hone in on a scent across huge distances, but once they get in the  
general vacinity they tend to find the bloated snack visually. Hyaenas  
also tend to move about in a search pattern once their nose has lead  
them to an area with a potential meal, so scent doesn't seem to be  
precise enough for pin-point accuracy.

Over short distances with little intervening cover sight is probably  
the more reliable sense, however in circumstances where target objects  
aren't sitting in plain sight (such as in forests, gullies, murky  
water, or heavy undergrowth) scent might be the better option (since  
you can literally smell something around corners).

--
___________________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist         http://heretichides.soffiles.com
Melbourne, Australia        http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs
___________________________________________________________________