Re: Revising Hou et al, 96 (very very long)

["Fam Jansma" <fam.jansma@worldonline.nl>]

>> Protoarchaeopteryx is probably a very basal Oviraptorid,
>
>Do you mean oviraptorosaur?
>
That's what I meant... Just don't really know how high I should place in a
cladogram, more closely to the ancestors of the Oviraptorosaur group or more
closely to the Oviraptorids. The paper I have concerning it's description is
from the Polyglot website and can not be called comprehensive. My main
concern are the teeth of the animal, which are also found in Caudipteryx,
although they are more reduced in the latter genus.
>
>It's easily conceivable -- the most parsimonious assumption, actually --
>that protofeathers (e. g. those seen in *Sinosauropteryx*) evolved only
>once; the "longscales" of *Longisquama* are, as has been discussed onlist
at
>length, hardly similar to (proto)feathers.
>
But from what I have heard, they share the same design as proto-feathers, or
should I check my sources again?
>
>> But for what means could it have used it's new found flexibility for, if
it was reversed as you have said/ wrote? Alright, a very difficult question
to answer, since it's for most part speculation, but
>does someone have any idea?
>
>Well, what can one use a hand for? :-) Churning muddy waters, as proposed
>yesterday for ornithomimosaurs?
>
As HP Tim Williams stated, which is totally consistent with the range of
movement the fingers had, they could only bend a few degrees, nothing
noteworthy. Combine this type of movement with the more moveble wrist, there
is a perfect tool for churning muddy waters or pulling down branches.
Speeking of which, has there been any new studies concerning the gastrolith
Ornithomimid from Asia? But as he also wrote in his post, he said that
Therizinosaurs, Oviraptorids and "certain other critters" (names please...?)
showed the same type of development. My question was meant to be more wide
in terms of dinosaur groups, not just Ornithomimids. Maybe it was said all
wrong, but that is how it was meant.
>
>