Re: Science feather strength debate

[Tim Williams <tijawi@gmail.com>]

Erik Boehm <erikboehm07@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I'd be more inclined to believe they tertials just weren't attached as well, 
> or something else that leads to just a preservation artifact.


Without wanting to refudiate Scott Hartman, I concur.  But I'd be
quite happy to be convinced that the absence is real.  Because the
humerus of _Archaeopteryx_ is quite long compared to the birds that
came after it, this would translate into a sizeable gap.


> Otherwise, it seems like Microraptor would have a more bird like wing than 
> Archie, which is odd (though this is hardly an argument
> against the possibility).


I know that coverts have been reported for _Microraptor_, but I wasn't
aware that anyone had found definitive humeral feathers
(tertials/tertiaries).


Also, unless something has changed recently, AFAIK it is not known
if_Confuciusornis_ had humeral feathers.  In many specimens the
primaries and certain rectrices are clearly defined, but the degree of
preservation is poor for most of the other feathers.


Cheers

Tim