RE: theropod scavenging

["no go" <honkietong@hotmail.com>]

> Both these asumptions have been convincingly refuted.  (1) Tyrannosaurid
> hindlimbs and feet were actually very cursorial (one professional
> paleontologist has actually done rather a lot of work on this; he actually
> posts regularly to this list).  (2) Tyrannosaurid forelimbs, though small,
> were nonetheless invested with an impressive amount of musculature and
> mobility, suggesting they were used for *something*.  I like Carpenter and
> Smith's idea that the arms were used to clasp prey close to the
> tyrannosaur's chest while (or after) the jaws went and feet went to work
> subduing the prey.

I wonder if T.rex's arms really had any predatory function. Despite being 
able to curl an impressive 400 lbs, its still seems rather featherweight to 
haul in...say 11,000 lbs of prey. But I seriously doubt the idea of "you 
must have good arms to hunt dingdarnit", for should that hold true, I can 
think of a great deal of modern predators that would be by that argument, 
unable to hunt. As a matter of fact, it seems that the use of forelimbs to 
hunt is an exception, rather then the rule in most predatory animals. Arms 
or not, it's probablt irrevelant to Tyrannosaurus' status as a predator. It 
just happens to be one part of Tyrannosaurid anatomy that people view as 
"weak" and it seems to me an argument for obligate "scavengery" out of 
convenience, rather then it holding any water. Ironically, the entire 
argument of having arms too "weak" to hunt is rather weak in itself.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com