Accordingly, if theseare actually homologous to the ‘‘protofeathers
ok so integumentary filaments are feather-like? kinda? maybe?
46 Matching Annotations
- Aug 2023
-
onlinelibrary.wiley.com onlinelibrary.wiley.combrv_94.dvi46
-
-
integumen-tary filaments
feathers? does this mean feathers or something else?
-
each major dinosaurgroup seems to have independently acquired its typicaldental traits, in some cases along with a significant increasein size
simplification: teeth independently specialized in each group
-
plesiomorphic
ancestral character for the group
-
although a full herbivore ancestryof dinosaurs can be dismissed, there is some evidence that astrictly carnivorous origin was also not the case
omnivores for the win
-
edentulous beak
beak with no teeth (now that I'm making this annotation I think I made the same one like 20 pages ago, oops)
-
abiolinguall
what is labiolingually flattened? I tried to google it but only got more confused :(
-
In fact, a fully quadrupedal dinosaurorigin is consistently ruled ou
if a quadrupedal origin is consistently ruled out, why do they keep bringing it up as a possibility only to be like "but actually the evidence says probably not". This article is literally so frustrating >:(
-
but the condition among sauropodomorphsis less clear
It might be due to "basing assumptions on what exists today" bias but it's incredibly hard for me to imagine sauropods having ancestors that were bipedal. I don't see how 2 limbs could support an animal so large
-
In conclusion, the radiation of dinosaurs comprises at leastthree landmark moments (Fig. 12), mainly characterizedby early diversification (Carnian); increase in diversityand, especially, abundance (Norian); and occupation ofnew niches (Early Jurassic).
Again, why did it take them so long to get to the point. I feel like I would be less lost if they at least started with these conclusions before launching into their long-winded explanations of how they got there.
-
opportunistic and competitive scenariosof dinosaurs rise are not mutually exclusive, and competitionmay have played an important role in that radiation episode
Basically in summary: it's probably a mix of both scenarios and neither is fully "wrong" or fully "right".
-
Instead, the exacerbation ofbiotic interactions (including competition) in a changingenvironment probably also played a major role
I feel like that's what happens with most extinctions. I feel like its pretty rare for extinctions to be like "oops something came through and directly killed EVERYTHING". It's much more typical for extinctions to be due to environmental changes that impact interactions.
-
dinosaurs radiated during theIschigualastian despite the high diversity and abundanceof other tetrapods
oooo interesting, I feel like its less usual for things to radiate like dinosaurs did when they're going to overlap and compete with other species
-
VII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I don't think I understood 90% of this article until the conclusions. It had absolutely no business being 39.5 pages long and the writing style was atrocious. Probably one of the top 10 worst scientific papers I've ever read, no offense to whoever picked this one.
-
Fig. 11.
I love these drawings they're so cute and fun!!! The rhynchosaur is my favorite in the drawing, he looks so goofy :)
-
Usually, theimproved locomotory capability of the fully erect, bipedalearly dinosaurs was considered the most notable advantage ofthe group
originally thought that dinosaurs survived and diversified because they were bipedal
-
as well as the first mammals
woooooo mammals!!
-
The period starts with theimpoverished remaining diversity of the end-Permian massextinction (Benton, 2003), ending up with an essentiallymodern fauna, that includes the first representatives of thechelonian, lepidosaur, crocodilian, avian (in the form ofdinosaurs), and mammal lineages.
sounds like a fun time to be alive
-
the climateexperienced a trend towards higher instability comparedto Paleozoic settings
all this change sounds like a recipe for extinction, not radiation. My guess is that as other things expereienced declines they left niches open which dinosaurs were somehow able to quickly adapt to fill- thus increasing their diversity and range while other things declined.
-
In this context, the lack ofsauropodomorphs in the Norian of continental North Amer-ica (Nesbittet al., 2007), though not in Greenland (Jenkinset al., 1994), is intriguing.
that is very interesting
-
Sauropodomorphs are surely the most abundant dinosaurgroup of Triassic times
Sauropods stay winning fr (I love sauropods)
-
Yet, this fossil assemblage is imperfectly known
just because we haven't found any theropods there YET doesn't mean that there AREN'T theropods there
-
Yet, the most debated aspect of earlydinosaur macroevolution corresponds to their first radiation,and various scenarios were invoked to explain the rise ofthe clade in a time interval during which most terrestrialtetrapods suffered important diversity losses
simplified: why did dinosaurs experience a boom in diversity when similar(ish) groups were experiencing diversity losses?
-
more comprehensive studies, discussing these methodologi-cal issues, are necessary to achieve a better understanding ofthe phylogenetic relationships of basal dinosaurs
it's hard to talk about relationships further up in the tree if you don't have a solid understanding of the basal species, hence the importance of more comprehensive studies.
-
everal aspects of basal dinosaur phy-logeny remain controversial
it seems like a lot of their phylogeny is controversial judging from the past few pages filled with controversies. I'm genuinely so done with this paper, it's so much of nothing 80% of the time.
-
In conclusion, although a Middle Triassic (Ladinian) originof dinosaurs might be hypothesized, the oldest definitiverecords of the group date from about 230 million years ago.
I love (HATE) how they take nearly 3 full pages to say this.
-
palaeoichnological
relating to dinosaur tracks
-
other coeval deposits
deposits of the same age.
I HATE when authors (like the ones of this paper) use the most technical words to say something that could be said plainly. They're so reliant on jargon that most of their paper is nearly incomprehensible.
-
Phylogenetic definitions: naming early dinosaurs
this whole section is practically incomprehensible to me. What are they even trying to say?
-
The femur is possibly the most scrutinized bone in the studyof early dinosaurs
the femur is typically one of the largest bones in the body so it makes sense that it is the most studied as it's probably the bone the most reliably fossilizes. is it the most commonly found fossilized bone?
-
homoplastic character,
same trait in different species that serves the same or similar function but is a product of convergent evolution, not a common ancestor
-
apomorphies
it just occurred to me that I'm actually not quite sure what this word means and it's popping up all over the place and seems pretty important. oops.
apomorphies: a specialized trait or character that is unique to a group or species
-
17 and18 characters as diagnostic for Dinosauria
I'd love to see a bulleted list of the characters (I probably wouldn't understand half the words describing the characters but I'd still like to see them)
-
till represent the major dinosaursubdivisions as currently understood
yay, some things have stayed the same! (although I'm sure the species within these subdivisions have been constantly shifting and growing as time goes on)
-
these morederived basal dinosauromorphs fill a gap (betweenMarasuchuslilloensisand dinosaurs) in archosaur evolution. Moreimportantly, they fill that gap with the unsuspected diversity
all of that back and forth just to say that "actually there was more diversity here than we originally thought". cool, thanks.
-
whileSacisaurus agudoensismight provide evidence that evenSilesaurus opolensisrepresents a basal member of that dinosaurclade
they're starting to lose me with all this back and forth about which groups different species belong in. This is why I will never be a taxonomist.
-
corneous
resembling a horn (likely made of the same material as horns)
-
edentulous
lacking teeth
-
Its longfore limbs suggest that the animal was at least facultativelyquadrupedal
was this the first discovery of a facultatively quadrupedal dinosaur?
-
Those authorsidentified typical dinosaur hind-limb traits on these taxa
does this make them a transitional fossil leading into dinosaurs?
-
different evolutionary scenarioswere proposed based on independent cladistic analyses
it's crazy to think about the fact that we were all born before dinosaur evolutionary scenarios were proposed.
-
ornithischian
the other basic dinosaur division as classified by their hip structure also known as the "bird-hipped" dinosaurs. Defining characteristics: a pubis that points backwards (running parallel with the ischium).
Source: https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/ornithischia/ornithischia.html
-
This is in part due to thepoor preservation of the specimens, which do not allow acomprehensive assessment of their morphological features
a very valid reason to be unsure
-
saurischian
one of 2 basic dinosaur divisions classified by their hip structure also known as the "lizard-hipped" dinosaurs. Defining characteristics: grasping hand, asymmetrical fingers, long mobile neck, and downward pointing pubis (pair of bones that form the pelvis)
Source: https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/saurischia/saurischia.html
-
is crucial for the understanding of dinosaurinterrelationships and palaeobiology as a whole
understanding why they flourished is key to understanding a lot of things about dinosaurs
-
Triassic dinosaurs were mostly bipedal, and not exception-ally large
that's interesting, I would have guessed that bipedalism evolved later on!
-