Re: Sinosauropteryx at Dinofest

["Ralph Miller III" <gbabcock@best.com>]

Regarding my post today on Betty's question about the taphonomy of
_Sinosauropteryx_ specimens which are claimed to have intact eyeballs, my
ignorance is showing.  (Again?)!

While it may be that anything and everything died at virtually the same
instant in Liaoning in the Cretaceous (a la Pompeii), I haven't a clue what
happened next that would have enabled the eyes to be preserved, when -- as
Betty asserts -- the eye tissues should have been the first items to rot
away.  If all biotic activity ceased for a period of time so that no
decaying occurred prior to fossilization, then perhaps we should have
fossil animals which are a good deal more intact than the fossils excavated
there (gorgeous as they are).  Instead, delicate feather-like structures
were well-preserved (mainly) on the midline in the same plane as the fossil
matrix, but came off with the flesh elsewhere on the bodies, for the flesh
and guts were not preserved.  How might the volcanic ash and the lagoon
sediment chemistry have imposed a preferential preservation of tissues? 

Can dead eyeballs persist longer than Betty suggests?  Or is it not clear
whether the eyes _are_ actually present in the Liaoning specimens?  Are
there qualified scientists familiar with the specifics of this case who
would care to comment?  

-- Ralph Miller III     gbabcock@best.com

"Yellow matter custard"