[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
New feather-like fossil from the Jurassic of Kazakhstan, Dzik et al 2010
Dzik, J., T. Sulej & G. Niedwiedzki, 2010. Possible link connecting reptilian
scales with avian feathers from the early Late Jurassic of Kazakstan.
Historical Biology 22 (4): 394-402.
Abstract: "Organic tissue of a recently found second specimen of feather-like
*Praeornis* from the Karabastau Formation of the Great Karatau Range in
southern Kazakstan, has a stable carbon isotope composition indicative of its
animal affinity. Three-dimensional preservation of its robust carbonised shaft
indicates original high contents of sclerotic organic matter, which makes the
originally proposed interpretation of *Praeornis* as a keratinous integumental
structure likely. The new specimen is similar to the holotype of *Praeornis* in
the presence of three 'vanes' on a massive shaft not decreasing in width up to
near its tip. Unlike it, the vanes are not subdivided into barbs and the
pennate structure is expressed only in the distribution of organic-matter-rich
rays. Similar continuous blades border the 'barbs' in the holotype, but the
organic matter was removed from them by weathering. It is proposed that the
three-vaned structure is a remnant of the ancestral location of scales along
the dorsum and their original function in sexual display, similar to that
proposed for the Late Triassic probable megalancosaurid *Longisquama*. Perhaps
subsequent rotation around the shaft, in the course of evolution from an
ancestral status similar to *Praeornis* towards the present aerodynamic and
protective function of feathers, resulted in the tubular appearance of their
buds."
Unfortunately Dzik et al. do not compare their *Praeornis* fossil with any
known stage of dinosaur feathers, so it is not clear from their paper how, if
at all, their findings can be incorporated into the current mainstream model of
feather evolution. *Anchiornis* is referenced as "the oldest unquestionable
bird". *Longisquama* is variously called a "megalancosaurid" or a
"prolacertid" in this paper, and there is really no discussion about when
feathers are supposed to first appear in archosauromorph phylogeny (or indeed
if birds are dinosaurs in their view). The acknowledgements mention that new
specimens of *Longisquama* have been collected, which should be exciting if
they are not merely additional plumes. All in all a rather unusual and
surprising paper, what do the fossil feather experts on the list think of it?