Nappy-headed dinOHs (Re: Non-theropod dinosaurs and feathery/fluffy integument

[Swift Claw <MissRaptor@deadraccoon.com>]

Brandon Pilcher wrote:
> Why is it conventional for paleoartists to cover their smaller theropods 
> (or infants of larger theropod genera) with feathers or proto-feathers, 
> but not dinosaurs from other clades? I have almost never seen, say, a 
> "coated" ornithopod, psittacosaurid, or stegosaurid hatchling. 

There is a gorgeous painting by Larry Felder of a fluffy Parasaurolophus 
hatchling in the book 'In the Presence of Dinosaurs.' It reminds one of 
a fawn. It is, of course, highly speculative.

> BTW, is it possible that some dinosaurs may have had "nappy" or kinky 
> integument (thinking Afro-type), as opposed to the straight 
> fluff/feathers usually found on fossils bearing impressions?

Sorry, I just couldn't resist the pun in email heading.
Maybe it'd be easier to refer to feather-dreads as 'musk-ox like?'


~Tiffany Miller


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         {"Look where all this talking got us, baby"}
                                         O
                                             o    .     _______ ~~~~~
                                                      /@ _____  <O>   \
                                                     /___       __/    )
               (http://www.deadraccoon.com)                 ~~~        /
                                                                \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~