Re: Lizard study asks: Why go bipedal?

[Michael Habib <mhabib5@jhmi.edu>]

> Surprisingly, endurance and speed both were found to be 
> inconsequential. Those were the two forces that I figured would have 
> driven the push towards bipedalism. Apparently this is not the case. 
> The only correlate found was that bipedalism tends to go with a faster 
> acceleration. Other than that, the authours are viewing bipedalism as 
> more of a side effect of speedy locomotion, rather than anything else. 
> To quote one of the authours: "The lizards were pulling a wheelie."

Also keep in mind that the fastest living lizards are all quadrupedal 
runners.  So, speedy locomotion in lizards does not, in and of itself, 
produce bipedalism.  At least, it does not do so in all clades.  
Ctenosauria don't "pull wheelies" despite having a faster running speed 
than the species in the paper.


> What were theropods using their forelimbs for? If one believes the 
> majority of paleo-art out there, the answer is apparently nothing 
> (seriously guys, have them grab something with those claws).

Actually, most theropods wouldn't be able to grab anything with the 
claws - at least, not long after the jaws had already passed it.  To be 
honest, it really isn't clear what those forelimbs were for.

> Furthermore, what the heck do kangaroos get out of having their 
> forelimbs freed up? I've seen wallabies use their forearms to help 
> hold food, but kangaroos in general just seem to use them for > standing.

Well, 'roos do engage in male-male combat using the forelimbs.  My 
guess, though, would be that the freeing of the forelimbs occurred 
simultaneously with the shift to saltation.  The saltatory gait is 
important for endurance, having massive elastic storage capacity.

> One advantage alluded to, but never really elaborated on, was the 
> faster acceleration noted in bipeds. Though maximum speed was no 
> different than in a quadruped, this speed was obtained faster. 
> Ecologically I could see this being very advantageous.

I can, as well.  The question is whether or not this hold across more 
species - it would be good to know the accelerations in the fastest 
running lizard species (which are quad runners), for example.

> Bringing this around to archosaurs, how does one figure this affects 
> views on archosaur bipedality? If there is no speed benefit (barring 
> the acceleration component), and no increase in endurance by removing 
> the "Carrier's constraint," then what other reasons would cause a 
> quadruped to go the bipedal route?

Good question.  Of course, the bipedal gain in lizards, given that they 
are sprawlers, may not be a good model for understanding bipedal gaits 
in archosaurs.  Note, as well, that Carrier's Constraint wouldn't apply 
to most archosaurs, anyway (except perhaps to crown-group 
crocodilians).  Apparently it doesn't mean as much as expected for 
lizards, either, which I admit is a surprise.

Cheers,

--Mike


Michael Habib, M.S.
PhD. Candidate
Center for Functional Anatomy and Evolution
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
1830 E. Monument Street
Baltimore, MD 21205
(443) 280 0181
habib@jhmi.edu