Re: Funny New Papers

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

On Wed, Aug 5th, 2009 at 10:20 AM, B tH <soylentgreenistrex@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> So, fossil dino-poo doesn't show much bone in the diet?  Is the "chomp and 
> swallow big pieces"
> presentations of carnosaurs eating not accurate?
> I could see a pack eating at a downed large sauropod/titanosaur/ceratopsian 
> probably scraping 
the
> flesh off the big bones and not going after the marrow in times of plenty 
> [did the large
> herbivores have a lot of marrow to begin with?) ... but somehow dropping the 
> notion of
> bone-injestion is difficult for this amateur observer. 

I think the important word in the original sentence below is 'deliberate'. 
Smaller bones were almost 
certainly injested incidentally, so you can expect bone pieces in some 
coprolites. 

However few theropods had the dental equipment to crack bones for the marrow. 
Not even 
the 'banana' teeth of tyrannosaurs would have been capable of cracking open a 
large femur to 
reach the gooey centre. Blade-toothed beasties like carcharodontosaurids would 
have deliberately 
avoided contact with bone if at all possible.

> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Jerry D. Harris <jharris@dixie.edu> wrote:
> 
> > A review of the known incidences and possible ecological
> > implications of theropod bone use concludes that there is
> > currently no definitive evidence supporting the regular
> > deliberate ingestion of bone by these predators.


-- 
_____________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist                Australian Dinosaurs
Melbourne, Australia               http://home.alphalink.com.au/~dannj
_____________________________________________________________