Did Triceratops have feathers?
I think the theory that dinosaurs had feathers is the most well-known, but so far this has only been applied to carnivores or bird-like dinosaurs. What about the Triceratops? Could it have had feathers too?
(0 rating, 0 votes, rated)You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...
Triceratops are currently not known as complete or so well-preserved fossils that give us information about its skin condition. In many feathered dinosaurs, the feathers served primarily as an insulator against the cold, but Triceratops lived in a subtropically warm environment in the western North American of the late Cretaceous period 67,000,000 years ago, in which it remained really warm in winter. Triceratops was also a very large animal with a weight of over eight tons, which is why he was certainly not reliable on cold protection – yes, a feather dress could even be impediable to him and could bring him a touch in the high summer, which is why it is rather unlikely that triceratops had boiled all over the body.
However, it is likely to some extent that triceratops had been boiled at least in some places of its body. With his former relative Psittacosaurus mongoliensis feathers were detected from the 130,000,000 years old Yixian formation of the Chinese undercrowd. Although most of the skin of this little dinosaur was covered with sheds, some very long feather evasions stood up on the approach of its tail. These could have been jewelry feathers which, on the one hand, could have served art recognition and also played a role in the case of the bellows.
In the case of other ornithic eggs, such as, for example, culinary dadromaeus, a body covering with feathers has now been detected, so it is clear that not only the bird-like theropods have had feathers, but were also widely used in bird basin dinosaurs. And they not only fulfilled the purpose of thermal insulation, but also had an important role in social interactions. It is therefore certainly not too daring to imagine the triceratops as a very colorful animal with jewelry feathers above the tail.
Could it also be possible for the spinosaurus to jump on the body at certain points?
As we know, everything is possible.
Recent studies suggest that the theropods and the bird basin dinosaurs (such as triceratops) were more closely related to each other than previously assumed – that would explain why the representatives of both orders found evidence for feathers. Accordingly, it would be likely that all dinosaurs of these two groups had the genetic plants for feathers. And so Spinosaurus might have had feathers.
But whether then all kinds of dinosaurs, which this It is a different question. Spinosaurus belonged to the group of megalosauroidea, and so far no theropods of this group have found a skin impression with the detection of feathers. All known skin prints show a skillful skin. So it could be that this branch of them had no feathers and Spinosaurus was springless.
So maybe not all the theropods had feathers. Some might have lost them secondary in the course of evolution. For such a large animal as Spinosaurus that, in addition, also lived in one of the hottest areas of the early upper chalk, a feather dress would have a disadvantage, which is why the feathers reappeared at Spinosaurus and its ancestors.
Or some theropods did not belong to the common line of dinosaurs who have developed feathers for whatever purpose. Perhaps the Megalosauroidea and other families that were previously assigned to the basal theropods are outside the common order of spring-bearing dinosaurs and never had feathers.
The exact relationship of the dinosaurs is currently all on the test bench. So far one can only speculate and there is little room for actualities.
It is certain that Psittacosaurus proven structures were really homologous to theropod springs? If not, "feathers" would have been created twice independently of each other, or would have been born very early in the developmental history of the dinosaurs, would it? So either then, so to speak, directly on the basis of the dinosaurs (where Sauropods and Herrerasaurs would also have to originate from spring-bearing ancestors?) or at least before the splitting up of the Ornithoscelida into Ornithischians and Theropods. Or do I have a mistake?
I'm not a biology or even evolutionary expert now, but I mean, that's nothing so unusual. Such "Parallel Developments" have existed several times, for example, air carriers (eg bats) and birds use exactly the same physics, but in another "skeleton mechanics", and both "mechanics" differ from that of the Pterosauria.
The (independent) evolution of the eye in different ways is an example of such a "parallel development".
Oops, accidentally came to "send". There was something missing.
Another possibility is that filaments have developed independently in both orders as protection against the cold entering the middle Jura. At that time, it was bitterly cold in China, where we found most feathered dinosaurs. Snow and frost returned there annually. Adaptation to this was essential for all dinosaurs, as they all had an equal body.
Further well-preserved fossils of ornithic eggs with feathers could give information as to whether the feather originates as a common feature from the same "root" or whether it has appeared several times in convergent evolution. So far there is no certainty about it.
No, you didn't. The fiber structures of the psittacosaurus could actually not be homologous to the theropod springs.
Yeah, I've read that too! The discussion remains exciting.
Parallel developments, so-called convergences, are of course not necessarily rare. Nevertheless, the question of whether feathers are of the same origin or have been produced independently is quite interesting.
And behold, there has recently been something new: A research group wants to have demonstrated that also had airborne fans . Thus, the first feathers should not have been formed at all with the dinosaurs, but already much earlier with the common ancestors of dinosaurs and pterosaurs.
Thanks for the info. A very exciting topic, unfortunately, we lost little time about it in the evolutionary lecture. At any rate, it remains exciting until new findings are made. =)
The dinosaur feathers have long been no longer a theory, all still living dinosaurs (villages) have closed feathers and also among the classic dinosaurs in the Mesozoic, which belong to the reptiles as a class in the classical systematics, there are enough examples of various species and genres, in which doubtless feathers have been detected. No, not only carnivores had feathers, but also various plant-eating theropods had doubtless feathers.
Although there are reconstructions for fiber-like filaments on the pelvis and tail, for example the protoceratops, the name-giving genus of protoceratopsia, quasi precursors of ceratopsia such as triceratops. Also at Psitacosaurus there were signs for a spicy feather with protosprings. However, there were neither properly designed feathers nor would a covering body feather be indicated.
Real durable signs, there would be real feathers at Ceratopsia or such looking reconstructions would not be known to me. Truly completely boiled triceratops should not have been, but there are no sufficiently preserved residues which could prove or reappear.
It's not possible, of course. According to the latest findings and theories, one third of all types of dinosaurs could have been the young animals of the different breeds, so why shouldn't Triceratops have had feathers, perhaps only to disguise the young animals better. Since dinosaurs have died 65 million years ago, you can speculate a lot. So your theory is not so divisive.
Nice ☺Triceratops was a "typical" dinosaur, so I don't think so. Rather the birdlikes, with the lighter bones, which later made the step towards the development of the planes. But I'm not an expert, so I guess.