Suddenly we have plausible fossil evidence for the gargoyle cumChupacabra. My reason for not considering such an evolutionary pathother than extending the bat lineage was zero fossil evidence. Thatjust disappeared and we now have a convincing start point.
We have even retrieved reports in which this creature ha beeneyeballed. That it is part of the pterosaur lineage solves all sortsof difficulties. Even the fur evidence conforms nicely.
Of interest is the second sketch which explains wing handling.
We already knew that there is evidence of extant pterosaurs who huntat night and avoid us. The large ones are able to span the globe andhave been spotted in North America.
They also represent the best and likeliest explanation for cattlemutilation deaths.
Was there really avampire who fed on dinosaur blood?
http://io9.com/5887411/was-there-really-a-vampire-dinosaur
Prepare to beconfronted with something scarier (and cuter) than JurassicPark's raptors. In the mid to late Jurassic, the world was full offurry, flying vampire pterosaurs who fed on dino blood.
The Jeholopterus wasa small pterosaur who was found in Northeastern China. Thoughoriginally identified as an insect-eater, an odd mystery about theanimal eventually led one researcher to suggest the creature wasactually feeding on the blood of nearby sauropods. Let's take a lookat the discovery of Jeholopterus, and what spurred great debateover whether it was a blood-sucker.
The top image isartist Maija Karala's interpretation of Jeholopterus.
Soaring over China inthe Jurassic
Researchers at theChinese Academy of Sciences published the journal article Anearly complete articulated rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur withexceptionally well-preserved wing membranes and "hairs"from Inner Mongolia, Northeast China. The paper recorded thediscovery of a new pterosaur,Jeholopterus ninchengensis.
The researchers namedthe pterosaur for the area of its discovery, Ningcheng County ofInner Mongolia. The wingspan ofJeholopterus is a little lessthan three feet and the pterosaur likely weighed in around five toten pounds - a little smaller than the average Barn Owl. Severalfibers of "hair" are seen among the wings and body in thespecimen, along with imprints from a large amount of soft tissue. Theskull of the fossil is crushed, limiting interpretation of the head.
The authorsplaced Jeholopterus within the Anurognathidae group – agroup of small pterosaurs known for feeding on insects.But Jeholopterus, unlike most pterosaurs, does not have a longbeak. This absence played into speculationabout Jeholopterus' interactions with dinosaurs.
The Vampire Theory
In the 2003article The Chinese vampire and other overlooked pterosaurptreasures published in the peer-reviewed Journal ofVertebrate Paleontology, David Peters observed a couple ofunusual features in Jeholopterus separating it from theaverage Jurassic pterosaur.
Peters is not apracticing archaeologist, but an art director and natural historywriter with several peer reviewed journal articles under his belt.Peters did his work using a scanned and enlarged image ofthe Jeholopterus fossil uncovered by the researchers at theChinese Academy of Sciences. Using imaging techniques and Photoshop,Peters created tracings of theJeholopterus specimen in order toelaborate on the soft tissue features of the pterosaur and the skull,as the one in the fossil is crushed. It is important to note Petersdid not examine the fossil itself, only images of the fossil.
In this analysis,Peters reconstructed the skull, observing elongated teethakin to like pliers, a fortified palate able Jeholopterus todeliver a swift blow and powerful blow, a possible mechanism by whichthe teeth could be locked into place after a strike. Additionally,Peters observed a horse-like tail possibly used to swat away smallinsects.
The pterosaur seemedto have the ability to deliver a strong blow, plus it had fangs —and a method to lock the fangs into another animal after striking.All these features led Peters to suggest Jeholopterus latchedonto the backs of sauropods and lapped up blood from fang wounds.Peters doesn't offer any reasons for vampiric behavior — he simplyoffers it as a physiological possibility.
Backlash from thePaleontology Community
Not allpaleontologists are fans of Peters' methods. ChristopherBennett, a Professor at Fort Hays State University, assails Peters'conclusions in the article Pterosaur Science or PterosaurFantasy? Bennett points out that several fellow paleontologistsare unable to independently repeat the imaging techniques leading toevidence for vampirism.
Additionally, Bennetnotes several paleontologists are uncomfortable with Peters'separation from the fossils themselves, as Peters performs most ofhis work without observing the fossils in person. The inability forother paleontologists to reproduce Peters' findings using the sametechniques calls the vampirism into question.
Can we ProveThat Jeholopterus Slurped Vital Fluids?
Honestly, without aliving Jeholopterus to observe, we really cannot be sure ofits unique attributes. That said, I would certainly feel morecomfortable about accepting the vampireJeholopterus view if anumber of other interested parties reproduced Peters' results.
What is interesting inthis situation is the use of non-traditional imaging techniques bysomeone outside of the world of traditional paleontology to informthe world of academia, regardless of widespread acceptance. Think ofit as citizen science on an extreme level - David Peters is makingimportant contributions, even if he's succeeding only in rattling thecage of the academic mainstream.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder