Re: Late night thoughts: Pathetica and Interspersal

[Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

David Marjanovic wrote:

> > No, David didn't say that at all.  What he said was that after a dramatic 
> > increase in size that occurred early in their evolution (from 
> > _Anchisaurus_-sized to _Isanosaurus_-sized and beyond), sauropods had 
> > essentially hit their maximum size by the Middle Jurassic.
>
> No, not that either. I said that after a drastic increase in the size 
> _range_, into both directions, with -- in sum -- _no trend_, the smallest 
> ones (like *Anchisaurus*) died out, and the bigger ones kept diversifying, 
> though neither the minimum nor the maximum size changed much from the MJ 
> onwards.

I read your response a few times, and I still can't figure out how my 
response is different to your response.  This is a distinction without a 
difference, surely.

> > Within each of the major sauropod lineages (diplodocoids, brachiosaurids, 
> > titanosaurs) average size
> > appears to have peaked, and then gone downhill.
>
> No, not even. There is no trend. :-)

I was referring to Carrano's study, not yours (because I haven't seen your 
study).

Cheers

Tim

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t miss your chance to WIN $10,000 and other great prizes from Microsoft 
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0540003042mrt/direct/01/