RE: Mr. Magorium's New Papers Emporium

[John Scanlon <riversleigh@outbackatisa.com.au>]

Hey Jerry,

Any idea what Dr Lockley's been smokin', and where we can get some?
Holismionism* in biology can lead to the production of confusing but
attractive pictures that seem to me of about as much lasting practical use
as a sand mandala. But of course there may be more to it that we
reductholists* just can't understand.

Cheers,
John

*see D.R. Hofstadter, 'Prelude... Ant Fugue' in GEB:EGB

-----------------------------------------------
Dr John D. Scanlon, FCD
Riversleigh Fossil Centre, Outback at Isa
riversleigh@outbackatisa.com.au
http://tinyurl.com/f2rby
 
"Get this $%#@* python off me!", said Tom laocoonically.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry D. Harris [mailto:jharris@dixie.edu] 
Sent: 12 May, 2008 8:09 AM
To: 'DINOSAUR Mailing List'
Subject: Mr. Magorium's New Papers Emporium

Lockley, M.G. 2008. The morphodynamics of dinosaurs, other archosaurs, and
their trackways: holistic insights into relationships between feet, limbs,
and the whole body; pp. 27-51 in Bromley, R.G., Buatois, L.A., Mángano, G.,
Genise, J.F., and Melchor, R.N. (eds.), Sediment-organism Interactions: A
Multifaceted Ichnology. SEPM Special Publication 88.

ABSTRACT: Organisms are homeostatic organic wholes. Their organization is
understandable, and fractally repeated, from the level of the cell to whole
individual organisms, through higher taxonomic groups up to the level of the
biosphere. This is not fully appreciated by most biologists and
paleontologists owing to emphasis on investigation of the parts (individual
organs) that constitute static anatomy, rather than the dynamic
morphological interrelationships. The morphodynamic approach, which is
largely synonymous with a holistic heterochronic approach, also allows us to
view organisms as complex systems: i.e., as manifestations of iterative or
recursive fractal organization.
     Using the Schadian paradigm, already successfully applied to an
understanding of modern mammals, and the relationships between morphology
(form), physiology, and behavior, it is possible to gain insight into
reiterating, recursive, or fractal patterns of organization in dinosaurs,
pterosaurs, and other extinct archosaurs. Once these whole-body
morphodynamic relationships are understood, as inherent, intrinsic, or
?formal? aspects of vertebrate development, all natural groups of organisms
can be seen in a new light: i.e., recurrent patterns of morphological
organization (convergence) are seen as necessary correlates of physiological
organization and behavior. In turn, all these organic attributes help us
understand dynamic evolutionary development of any natural taxonomic group
(clade). Thus, ontogeny reiterates and creates phylogeny (and vice versa) in
a series of fractal, recursive manifestations of form, physiology, and
behavior.
     Appreciation of the intricacy of this complex fractal organization is
an exercise in pattern recognition, with surprising implications, especially
for paleontology. First, it confirms the interrelatedness of all organisms,
one of the central tenets of modern evolutionary theory. Second, it supports
the view that higher natural taxonomic groups, already recognized by biology
and paleontology, are in reality superorganisms, with inherently similar
organizational structure, modified only by spatial and temporal scaling
(heterochrony). Thus, all have their own inherent spatio-temporal
developmental trajectories (form, life span, and relative emphasis of
proximal and distal?or inner and outer/peripheral organs). Third,
convergence and iterative evolution can be understood as an inherent quality
of a reiterating or recursive fractal system and not merely as an adaptation
to external pressures of the environment. This inference is strongly
supported by evo-devo studies. Fourth, the modification of the natural
organic system, in part or wholly, will lead to a compensation or ripple
effect throughout the whole system. Moreover, the phylogeny of a particular
group may not be controlled by external environmental pressures to the
degree often supposed. Rather, such phylogenies may be natural heterochronic
cycles of repeated growth at levels of organization corresponding to higher
taxonomic groups (= superorganisms). Such intricate, inherent (or formal)
organic organization reveals lawful patterns of morphological relationships
that extend beyond isolated and/or shared character recognition. Thus, it
may be possible to predict the general form and physiology of the whole
animal from an analysis or understanding of the parts (a process akin to
modeling). This is particularly useful in paleontology. The morphodynamic
approach does more than revive Cuvier?s principle of the correlation of
?some? parts. It impels us to recast our previously static understanding of
morphology in the light of the inherently dynamic nature of complex systems,
showing us how ?all? parts are ultimately related.



Chin, K., and Bishop, J.R. 2008. Exploited twice: bored bone in a theropod
coprolite from the Jurassic Morrison Formation of Utah, U.S.A.; pp. 379-387
in Bromley, R.G., Buatois, L.A., Mángano, G., Genise, J.F., and Melchor,
R.N. (eds.), Sediment-organism Interactions: A Multifaceted Ichnology. SEPM
Special Publication 88.

ABSTRACT: Unusual compound trace fossils of bored bone within coprolites
provide direct fossil evidence for successive exploitation of dinosaur
tissues by vertebrates and invertebrates. These specimens are best described
as matrix-supported conglomerates of dinosaur bone, and were found as float
in the Brushy Basin Member of the Jurassic Morrison Formation in the San
Rafael Swell of eastern Utah. The high concentration of bone, absence of
sorting, paucity of inorganic clasts, and presence of microcrystalline
phosphate point to a fecal origin, and the contents and large size of the
coprolitic masses indicate that they were produced by a large theropod.
     Several fragments of bone in the coprolites have been conspicuously
bored. Casts formed by separation of lithified fill from some of the
cylindrical boreholes reveal bullet-shaped termini; this distinctive
morphology suggests that the cavities were utilized for protection. Inasmuch
as pupating larvae of dermestid beetles make the closest modern analogs of
comparable boreholes in bone, we deduce that ancestors of modern dermestids
may have bored the Jurassic bone. Although these are the first reported
fossils of boreholes in coprolites, a number of examples of bored bone have
been described from the Mesozoic and the late Cenozoic. Such trace fossils
may reflect changing patterns in the availability of large-bodied vertebrate
carcasses over time.
     It is not clear whether the bone fragments were bored before or after
theropod consumption, but it is likely that the bone borers
opportunistically exploited bone found in theropod feces. These compound
traces reveal complex trophic interactions linking dinosaurs and insects,
whereby refractory dinosaur tissues were exploited and recycled in a
Jurassic ecosystem.





Makovicky, P.J. 2007. Telling time from fossils: a phylogeny-based approach
to chronological ordering of paleobiotas. Cladistics 24(3):350-371. doi:
10.1111/j.1096-0031.2007.00184.x.

ABSTRACT: The potential for using fossils for temporal ordering of
sedimentary rocks is as old as historical geology itself. In spite of this,
however, most current biostratigraphic and biochronologic techniques do not
make use of phylogenetic information, but rely instead on some measure of
species' presence or absence or their turnover in the fossil record. A
common phylogenetic approach to biochronology has been to use "stage of
evolution" arguments, whereas more rigorous, cladogram-based methods have
been proposed but have seen little use. Cladistic biochronologic analysis
(CBA) is developed here as a new method for determining biochronologic order
between paleobiotas based on the phylogenetic relationships of their
constituent taxa. CBA is adapted from Brooks' parsimony analysis, and
analyzes syntaxon information from clades that transcend a number of
paleobiotas to determine relative temporal order among these paleobiotas.
Because CBA is based on phylogenetic information, it is suited to problems
where a good fossil record is available, but where stratigraphic or
chronologic relationships are poorly constrained, such as the terrestrial
vertebrate record. A practical example, based on the Cenozoic fossil record
of North America, pits CBA against a test case in which the correct temporal
order of biotas is known beforehand. The method successfully recovers
correct temporal order between paleobiotas with reasonable levels of
support, and is also shown to outperform a previously proposed cladistic
biochronologic method. In a second example, CBA is used to achieve the first
empirical temporal ordination for several Late Cretaceous localities in the
Gobi Desert that produce fossils crucial to the understanding of modern
amniote clades, but which have poorly resolved temporal relationships. CBA
is sensitive to large amounts of extinction and poor sampling of the fossil
record, but problems such as gaps in the fossil record (Lazarus taxa) can be
dealt with efficiently through a number of a priori and a posteriori scoring
techniques. CBA offers a novel approach for biochronologic analysis that is
independent of, but complementary to and readily combinable with other
chronologic/stratigraphic methods.




Schweitzer, M.H., Avci, R., Collier, T., and Goodwin, M.B. 2008.
Microscopic, chemical and molecular methods for examining fossil
preservation; pp. 159-184 in Vigne, J.-D. and Darlu, P. (eds.),
Paléogénétique en Paléontologie, Archéologie et Paléoanthropologie:
Contributions et Limites. Comptes Rends Paleovol 7(2-3).

ABSTRACT: Advances in technology over the past two decades have resulted in
unprecedented access to data from biological specimens. These data have
expanded our understanding of physical characteristics, physiological,
cellular and subcellular processes, and evolutionary relationships at the
molecular level and beyond. Paleontological and archaeological sciences have
recently begun to apply these technologies to fossil and subfossil
representatives of extinct organisms. Data derived from multidisciplinary,
non-traditional techniques can be difficult to decipher, and without a basic
understanding of the type of information provided by these methods, their
usefulness for fossil studies may be overlooked. This review describes some
of these powerful new analytical tools, the data that may be accessible
through their use, advantages and limitations, and how they can be applied
to fossil material to elucidate characteristics of extinct organisms and
their paleoecological environments.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jerry D. Harris
Director of Paleontology
Dixie State College
Science Building
225 South 700 East
St. George, UT  84770   USA
Phone: (435) 652-7758
Fax: (435) 656-4022
E-mail: jharris@dixie.edu
 and     dinogami@gmail.com
http://cactus.dixie.edu/jharris/

"There's a saying that goes 'people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw
stones'... OK. How about...NOBODY should throw stones. That's crappy
behavior! My policy is 'no stone-throwing regardless of housing situation.'
There's an exception, though. If you're TRAPPED in a glass house...and you
have a stone, then throw it! What are you, an idiot? It's really 'ONLY
people in glass houses should throw stones'... provided they're trapped, in
a house... with a stone. It's a little longer, but you know..."
                                 --- Demetri Martin