Re: hippos & sauropods

["Krzic" <krzic@slo-kabel.si>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey Willson <jwillson@harper.cc.il.us>
To: krzic@slo-kabel.si <krzic@slo-kabel.si>
Date: 3. september 1999 15:56
Subject: hippos & sauropods


>
>You posted to DINOSAUR list:
>
>>>Considering how pneumaticized sauropod skeletons were, it might indeed
have
>>>been impossible for them to submerge completely, since their overall
>>>density would have been significantly less than that of water.
>
>>Hard, but not impossible. See hippopotamus for example.
>
>My amateur understanding is that hippo skeletons are modified *for* density
>& weight and *away* from pneumaticization,
>to counterbalance the buoyancy of the lungs, so hippos aren't a good
>analogue to sauropods in this respect.
>
>Jeffrey Willson <jwillson@harper.cc.il.us>
>



I think that the body density in the case of hippo versus sauropod isn't too
significant (referring to the weight of the water they replace with their
bodies, when submerged) for the case. Nevertheless,..
O.K. than take the elephants for example - they are good swimmers and swim
almost completely submerged - using a trunk as a snorkel. Besides, they are
true terrestrial animals - the closest analogy to the sauropods we can
obtain nowadays.

Sincerely,
Berislav Krzic: economist, editor, illustrator, webmaster, writer
dinosaurbero@geocities.com
illustrissimus@usa.net
ILLUSTRISSIMUS PRODUCTIONS
http://illustrissimus.virtualave.net/
DINOSAUR ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE
http://illustrissimus.virtualave.net/dimfront.html
BERI'S DINOSAUR WORLD
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1638/front.html
PORTFOLIO
http://members.tripod.com/~dinosaurbero/portfront.html
A TRIBUTE TO DAN DARE
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/austen/64/d.html