Re: New alvarezsaurid

[Dinogeorge <Dinogeorge@aol.com>]

In a message dated 98-03-23 16:49:22 EST, m_troutman@hotmail.com writes:

<<  Regardless, a mobile 
 manus is not a predatory design. A manus where the phalanges are 
 parallel to the radioulna is better for "prey handling" because it 
 resists strain and is inheritantly more stable.  >>

I don't think that this has ever been demonstrated or even can be
demonstrated; I don't even know what "better" means in this context. If all
you have is a mobile manus as a predator--inherited from ancestral forms that
had a mobile manus for grasping and climbing in trees, for example--then that
is what you have, and you make the best of it. If you believe that a manus
such as you describe is "better" than a mobile manus, you should show why you
believe this. In BCF, the manus becomes elongate and stiff because this is a
clear aerodynamic advantage--an improvement to the wing that is shared by all
maniraptorans (not all of which are predators), flying and nonflying (by
descent)--not a predatory advantage. And in flying maniraptorans in any case,
the phalanges are practically at right angles to the radius and ulna, not
parallel to them as you describe.