Re: Feathered Dragons: Bakker and Teeth

[DinoBoyGraphics@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/26/2004 3:53:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Mickey_Mortimer111@msn.com writes:

>>As for Bakker's article, I was pleasantly surprised.  I'm not a fan of 
>>Bakker's style in general, but the article's thesis seems sound- shed 
>>dinosaur teeth are abundant and dropped while the organism was alive, so can 
>>be used to show preferred habitats of various taxa.   A good level of
statistical data, though some of the higher level inferences seem less certain. 
 Having all sizes of Allosaurus teeth preserved at a feeding site could just as 
easily mean juveniles moved in to scavenge sauropods killed by adults than it 
could indicate adults fed juveniles, as advocated by Bakker.<<

   Mickey's review of the book is essentially the same as my opinon, which is 
why I haven't chimed in so far.  It is well worth the $50 (I bought mine 
directly from IUP, so they would get a larger share of the revenue).

    In some ways the Bakker paper neatly sums up the last decade of his work.  
I think the idea of analyzing shed teeth is really good, provided you can get 
sites that haven't already been scoured by rock hunters.  Alas, his application 
of the idea is probably unusable.   He points out that shed tooth shed rates 
are unknown but knowable.  It seems possible that good histological work could 
allow at least relative shed rates of Morrison theropods to be estimated, but 
he instead just comes up with some guesses to use, which _could_ be right, but 
are totally unsubstantiated.   He also infers an elevated grwotha nd emtabolic 
rate for the Goniopholis, which _could_ be true, but would require at least one 
publication on just this subject to make it a reasonable inference.  He simply 
states that thin sections of Goniopholis show that it had "theropod levels of 
growth."

   While I maintain that the statistical analysis of tooth sites could yield 
valuble paleoecological data, it will require excellent and detailed 
sedimentological work at each site;  It is possible that Bob and/or members of 
his team have done so, but since the sites are not published in peer-reviewed 
journals, it is hard to evaluate the data.

I could go on like this, but I think the point is made.  Bakker has a really 
good idea here, but the application of it leaves a little to be desired.


Scott Hartman
Zoology & Physiology
University of Wyoming
Laramie, WY 82070

(307) 742-3799