Re: WING FEATHER ATTACHMENT

["David Marjanovic" <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> <IMHO it is more likely that such feathers weren't present on
> the animal, and even if, then there's still the question why
> there aren't simply remiges on the humeri. The brooding
> oviraptorid specimens may answer this -- their humeri are
> appressed to the ribcage, with not enough space for a wing in
> between.>
>
>   Not so ... take a closer look. I also hope you've seen Hopp
> and Orsen's work on the subject, as they show in step-wise
> addition of feather development how oviraptorids with nesting
> posture do not have appresed humeri to the back. This and
> personal observation should indicate the actual posture.

These illustrations, the reconstructions as well as the drawings of the
fossil, show the forearms and hands diverging from the sides of the trunk
and the humeri lying nearly parallel to it. The little gap that there is
between humerus and ribs must have been filled by the soft tissue of the
upper arm along with the contour/protofeathers, there's not enough space for
remiges or even tertials, and Hopp & Orsen didn't draw any in their figures.

In living (flying) birds this gap (which is pretty large when the wings are
extended) is completely filled by long contour feathers originating from the
upper arm (tertials) and the sides.

The books of Feduccia (1996) and Shipman (1998) contain reconstructions
(copied from elsewhere) of wings without tertials.