[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Bipedalism
>In a message dated 98-04-03 03:17:17 EST, rjmeyer@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
><< I merely suggest that the bipedalism *trait* is most likely to develop on
>the ground. >>
>
>If so, we'd see a lot more extant obligatory bipedal mammals and reptiles than
>we do. Most of these animals' ancestral forms lived "on the ground."
Okay, how about this for an idea [modification of hypothesis ahead]:
It has already been stated that extant mammalian bipeds have recent arboreal
ancestors. What if arboreal life preadapts a quadreped for a bipedal
existance? In watching the resident gray squirell (I CAN'T SPELL!!!) climb the
trunk of a tree, I have to admit that it's vertical-technique is basically a
bipedal climb. Now, when I watch the squirell on the ground, it is pretty
ungainly as a quadreped, tending to travel by bounding rather than walking.
Now, if the trees were to disappear, or if selection pressure encouraged ground
life, I could see this bounding habit developing the critter into a kangaroo
like animal.
I do have one problem with the idea of bipedalism evolving completely in the
trees: for an arboreal animal to become completely bipedal, it will have to let
go of the branch with it's front limbs. It's hands would have to let go, if it
is to stand up. Even if we can allow for a simultaneous evolution of a bipedal
posture, in association with foot adaptations to hold the branch better, it
seems like we are asking too much. To me, it seems far easier for the animal
to move to a cursorial existance, and then evolve full bipedalism. Does the
fossil record let us see a bipedal animal adapt to ground life? What happens
next?
Therefore, I envision a yo-yo scenario for theropod/bird evolution.
Prototheropods evolve to life in the trees; these animals move to the ground
and evolve bipedalism; then, they move back to the trees to evolve flight.
I know, I know, the above scenario involves more than one drastic change in
habitat, which is a detriment to the idea.
Comments?
Shalom,
Rob Meyerson
***
"Listen to the song, not the words."
-Kosh