Re: Duckbill necks

["Allan Edels" <edels@email.msn.com>]

Greg:

    I used the terms "silly" and "nice" to indicate how  *I*  FELT about the
look.  Some animals look silly (to me - or to other people) - but that is
the way they look.

    My opinion is based on historical perspective of past reconstructions.
I think that some of the hadrosaurs with long necks (especially in
comparison to the skull size) and those sigmoid neck curves seem to look
better with the thinner neck (not necessarily as thin as some of us older
folks are used to :-) ).   I say better because the shape is more in
proportion with the rest of the body and skull, and allows more freedom of
movement for these longer necked creatures.  Whereas the shorter-necked
(again in proportion to the skull and the rest of the body) animals look
fine with the thicker, more muscled neck.

    I'm wondering if it is possible for there to be 2 morphs for
hadrosaurian necks?  I'm not saying there has to be - just wondering because
it seems to fit available data.

        Thanks for your reply.

            Allan Edels

-----Original Message-----
From: GSP1954@aol.com <GSP1954@aol.com>
To: dinosaur@usc.edu <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Date: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 12:01 AM
Subject: Duckbill necks


>The data on the depth of the dorsal neck muscles and nuchal ligaments in
>hadrosaurs is ambiguous at this time, there is no truly well preserved
mummy
>in that region. The deep nuchal ligament hypothesis is a good one,
>illustrating hadrosaurs with either slender or deep necks is viable at this
>time. Whether or not any given arrangment looks silly or nice is
irrelevant.
>
>GSPaul
>