Dinosaurs and Modern Mammals Developed Comparable Traits by Ted Bailey

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Dinosaurs and Modern Mammals Developed Comparable Traits by Ted Bailey Refuge Notebook • Vol. 5, No. 4 • January 24, 2003 Dinosaurs and modern mammals developed comparable traits by Ted Bailey Although the dinosaurs and today’s mammals are cause they lacked plant-grinding teeth, just as modern separated by more than 65 million years—an immense spruce grouse pick up gravel for grinding food in their gap of time too great for our minds to comprehend— gizzards. many of the dinosaurs developed traits comparable to The next generation of plant-eating dinosaurs gave those of today’s modern mammals. These similarities up the rock-and-gizzard approach, and developed became evident to me during the past several months complex plant snippers and plant-grinding teeth. Fast- while I was teaching a class entitled “The Dinosaur Re- forward roughly 70 million years to the present day naissance” at the Kenai Peninsula College. Although and we see similar mechanisms for plant snipping and some may still believe dinosaurs were obsolete, dumb, plant grinding in today’s moose, caribou and many giant “lizards” that were driven to extinction by the other hoofed mammals. These mammals snip off plant efforts of “advanced” mammals, this is untrue. Most parts in the front of an elongated mouth with spe- scientists now believe the demise of the dinosaurs was cial teeth or bones, and then pass snipped-off parts caused by a catastrophic event, probably an asteroid through a toothless gap in the jaw to the back of the impacting the earth with devastating worldwide en- mouth where highly specialized teeth are used to grind vironmental destruction, rather than by any lack of up the plant tissue into small pieces for efficient nu- adaptability on the part of the dinosaurs. An assess- trient extraction. Thus, many of today’s “advanced” ment of the various adaptations of dinosaurs reveals mammalian herbivores are using some of the same ba- that many dinosaurs were superbly adapted to their sic feeding mechanisms that the dinosaurs developed environment, not unlike today’s mammals. millions of years ago. Unlike many people who became fascinated with One of the most agile and intelligent predatory dinosaurs as a child, I became interested in them in dinosaurs was a species paleontologists have named middle age, specifically in 1975, the year my family Troodon. It had one of the largest brains relative to and I returned to the United States after living for two its body size of any dinosaur. Its method of locomo- years in Africa. That was the same year that a maver- tion was bipedal, similar to the method used by to- ick paleontologist named Bob Bakker published an ar- day’s famous bird of the southwest—the roadrunner. ticle entitled “The Dinosaur Renaissance” in the mag- Troodon’s rear leg bones and other features indicate azine Scientific American. In that article he proposed it was also swift running; its large eyes set partially that unlike previous views of dinosaurs as lethargic forward in its head indicated it probably had binoc- cold-blood reptiles, new evidence suggested that di- ular vision for depth perception. Its arsenal also in- nosaurs were warm-blooded animals—like mammals cluded flexible, grasping front hands with sharp re- and birds—and that some were very active, agile and curved claws. It may have been a stalker or a fast pur- intelligent. That article and later his book Dinosaur suer or perhaps both but regardless, it was an efficient Heresies initiated a revolution in the study of dinosaurs two-legged predator well adapted to capturing elusive that continues unabated today. And since then, I have prey. attempted to keep informed of the latest findings. A close relative of Troodon was Velociraptor. It had Here are a few examples of dinosaur adaptations the same features but was smaller and weighed only compared to mammal adaptations with which we are about 33 pounds. I find several similarities between familiar, including mammal adaptations on the Kenai Velociraptor and the modern lynx. The lynx, like many Peninsula. The earlier, more primitive and famil- wild cats, has a relatively large brain; it is intelligent iar plant-eating dinosaurs—the giant sauropods like and has large forward-looking eyes with binocular vi- Brontosaurus and Brachiosaurus—swallowed stones sion for depth perception. A lynx can either secre- (gastroliths) to help grind up the plants they ate be- tively stalk or swiftly pursue its prey, usually a snow- USFWS Kenai National Wildlife Refuge 7 Refuge Notebook • Vol. 5, No. 4 • January 24, 2003 shoe hare, then grasp it in its claws while delivering a breasted nuthatches and others—are actually nothing lethal bite. By the way, Velociraptor was the intelligent less than small, feathered dinosaurs whose ancestors and cunning dinosaur portrayed stalking humans in somehow survived the great extinction event 65 mil- the movie Jurassic Park. Those swift, agile, intelligent lion years ago. I find it even more remarkable that and misnamed “Jurassic” Park dinosaurs were actually some of these flying “dinosaurs” have adapted so well modeled on yet another larger but related predatory to exceptionally harsh environments including our dinosaur Deinonychus, a species that also had many of cold, dark and snowy Alaskan winters. the same features as Velociraptor and Troodon, includ- Ted Bailey is a retired refuge wildlife biologist who ing a large sharp claw on each hind foot. Deinonychus has worked on the Kenai Peninsula for over 25 years. He are thought to have hunted in packs—like wolves—to is an adjunct instructor at the Kenai Peninsula College bring down prey much larger then themselves. and maintains a keen interest in the Kenai Peninsula’s I find these similarities between dinosaurs and to- wildlife and natural history—and in dinosaurs. For more day’s mammals fascinating. And I get great satisfac- information about the Refuge, visit the headquarters in tion watching the living descendents of the dinosaurs Soldotna, call (907) 262-7021. Previous Refuge Notebook in my backyard and on winter walks. Yes, most biol- columns can be viewed on the Web at http://kenai.fws. ogists and paleontologists believe that today’s birds— gov. our familiar black-capped and boreal chickadees, red- 8 USFWS Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.
Recommended publications
  • A New Troodontid Theropod, Talos Sampsoni Gen. Et Sp. Nov., from the Upper Cretaceous Western Interior Basin of North America
    A New Troodontid Theropod, Talos sampsoni gen. et sp. nov., from the Upper Cretaceous Western Interior Basin of North America Lindsay E. Zanno1,2*, David J. Varricchio3, Patrick M. O’Connor4,5, Alan L. Titus6, Michael J. Knell3 1 Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America, 2 Biological Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, Wisconsin, United States of America, 3 Department of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America, 4 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Athens, Ohio, United States of America, 5 Ohio Center for Ecology and Evolutionary Studies, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, United States of America, 6 Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Bureau of Land Management, Kanab, Utah, United States of America Abstract Background: Troodontids are a predominantly small-bodied group of feathered theropod dinosaurs notable for their close evolutionary relationship with Avialae. Despite a diverse Asian representation with remarkable growth in recent years, the North American record of the clade remains poor, with only one controversial species—Troodon formosus—presently known from substantial skeletal remains. Methodology/Principal Findings: Here we report a gracile new troodontid theropod—Talos sampsoni gen. et sp. nov.— from the Upper Cretaceous Kaiparowits Formation, Utah, USA, representing one of the most complete troodontid skeletons described from North America to date. Histological assessment of the holotype specimen indicates that the adult body size of Talos was notably smaller than that of the contemporary genus Troodon. Phylogenetic analysis recovers Talos as a member of a derived, latest Cretaceous subclade, minimally containing Troodon, Saurornithoides, and Zanabazar.
    [Show full text]
  • CPY Document
    v^ Official Journal of the Biology Unit of the American Topical Association 10 Vol. 40(4) DINOSAURS ON STAMPS by Michael K. Brett-Surman Ph.D. Dinosaurs are the most popular animals of all time, and the most misunderstood. Dinosaurs did not fly in the air and did not live in the oceans, nor on lake bottoms. Not all large "prehistoric monsters" are dinosaurs. The most famous NON-dinosaurs are plesiosaurs, moso- saurs, pelycosaurs, pterodactyls and ichthyosaurs. Any name ending in 'saurus' is not automatically a dinosaur, for' example, Mastodonto- saurus is neither a mastodon nor a dinosaur - it is an amphibian! Dinosaurs are defined by a combination of skeletal features that cannot readily be seen when the animal is fully restored in a flesh reconstruction. Because of the confusion, this compilation is offered as a checklist for the collector. This topical list compiles all the dinosaurs on stamps where the actual bones are pictured or whole restorations are used. It excludes footprints (as used in the Lesotho stamps), cartoons (as in the 1984 issue from Gambia), silhouettes (Ascension Island # 305) and unoffi- cial issues such as the famous Sinclair Dinosaur stamps. The name "Brontosaurus", which appears on many stamps, is used with quotation marks to denote it as a popular name in contrast to its correct scientific name, Apatosaurus. For those interested in a detailed encyclopedic work about all fossils on stamps, the reader is referred to the forthcoming book, 'Paleontology - a Guide to the Postal Materials Depicting Prehistoric Lifeforms' by Fran Adams et. al. The best book currently in print is a book titled 'Dinosaur Stamps of the World' by Baldwin & Halstead.
    [Show full text]
  • The Braincase, Brain and Palaeobiology of the Basal Sauropodomorph Dinosaur Thecodontosaurus Antiquus
    applyparastyle “fig//caption/p[1]” parastyle “FigCapt” Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2020, XX, 1–22. With 10 figures. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/advance-article/doi/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaa157/6032720 by University of Bristol Library user on 14 December 2020 The braincase, brain and palaeobiology of the basal sauropodomorph dinosaur Thecodontosaurus antiquus ANTONIO BALLELL1,*, J. LOGAN KING1, JAMES M. NEENAN2, EMILY J. RAYFIELD1 and MICHAEL J. BENTON1 1School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1RJ, UK 2Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PW, UK Received 27 May 2020; revised 15 October 2020; accepted for publication 26 October 2020 Sauropodomorph dinosaurs underwent drastic changes in their anatomy and ecology throughout their evolution. The Late Triassic Thecodontosaurus antiquus occupies a basal position within Sauropodomorpha, being a key taxon for documenting how those morphofunctional transitions occurred. Here, we redescribe the braincase osteology and reconstruct the neuroanatomy of Thecodontosaurus, based on computed tomography data. The braincase of Thecodontosaurus shares the presence of medial basioccipital components of the basal tubera and a U-shaped basioccipital–parabasisphenoid suture with other basal sauropodomorphs and shows a distinct combination of characters: a straight outline of the braincase floor, an undivided metotic foramen, an unossified gap, large floccular fossae, basipterygoid processes perpendicular to the cultriform process in lateral view and a rhomboid foramen magnum. We reinterpret these braincase features in the light of new discoveries in dinosaur anatomy. Our endocranial reconstruction reveals important aspects of the palaeobiology of Thecodontosaurus, supporting a bipedal stance and cursorial habits, with adaptations to retain a steady head and gaze while moving.
    [Show full text]
  • Theropod Teeth from the Upper Maastrichtian Hell Creek Formation “Sue” Quarry: New Morphotypes and Faunal Comparisons
    Theropod teeth from the upper Maastrichtian Hell Creek Formation “Sue” Quarry: New morphotypes and faunal comparisons TERRY A. GATES, LINDSAY E. ZANNO, and PETER J. MAKOVICKY Gates, T.A., Zanno, L.E., and Makovicky, P.J. 2015. Theropod teeth from the upper Maastrichtian Hell Creek Formation “Sue” Quarry: New morphotypes and faunal comparisons. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 60 (1): 131–139. Isolated teeth from vertebrate microfossil localities often provide unique information on the biodiversity of ancient ecosystems that might otherwise remain unrecognized. Microfossil sampling is a particularly valuable tool for doc- umenting taxa that are poorly represented in macrofossil surveys due to small body size, fragile skeletal structure, or relatively low ecosystem abundance. Because biodiversity patterns in the late Maastrichtian of North American are the primary data for a broad array of studies regarding non-avian dinosaur extinction in the terminal Cretaceous, intensive sampling on multiple scales is critical to understanding the nature of this event. We address theropod biodiversity in the Maastrichtian by examining teeth collected from the Hell Creek Formation locality that yielded FMNH PR 2081 (the Tyrannosaurus rex specimen “Sue”). Eight morphotypes (three previously undocumented) are identified in the sample, representing Tyrannosauridae, Dromaeosauridae, Troodontidae, and Avialae. Noticeably absent are teeth attributed to the morphotypes Richardoestesia and Paronychodon. Morphometric comparison to dromaeosaurid teeth from multiple Hell Creek and Lance formations microsites reveals two unique dromaeosaurid morphotypes bearing finer distal denticles than present on teeth of similar size, and also differences in crown shape in at least one of these. These findings suggest more dromaeosaurid taxa, and a higher Maastrichtian biodiversity, than previously appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, Second Edition
    MASS ESTIMATES - DINOSAURS ETC (largely based on models) taxon k model femur length* model volume ml x specific gravity = model mass g specimen (modeled 1st):kilograms:femur(or other long bone length)usually in decameters kg = femur(or other long bone)length(usually in decameters)3 x k k = model volume in ml x specific gravity(usually for whole model) then divided/model femur(or other long bone)length3 (in most models femur in decameters is 0.5253 = 0.145) In sauropods the neck is assigned a distinct specific gravity; in dinosaurs with large feathers their mass is added separately; in dinosaurs with flight ablity the mass of the fight muscles is calculated separately as a range of possiblities SAUROPODS k femur trunk neck tail total neck x 0.6 rest x0.9 & legs & head super titanosaur femur:~55000-60000:~25:00 Argentinosaurus ~4 PVPH-1:~55000:~24.00 Futalognkosaurus ~3.5-4 MUCPv-323:~25000:19.80 (note:downsize correction since 2nd edition) Dreadnoughtus ~3.8 “ ~520 ~75 50 ~645 0.45+.513=.558 MPM-PV 1156:~26000:19.10 Giraffatitan 3.45 .525 480 75 25 580 .045+.455=.500 HMN MB.R.2181:31500(neck 2800):~20.90 “XV2”:~45000:~23.50 Brachiosaurus ~4.15 " ~590 ~75 ~25 ~700 " +.554=~.600 FMNH P25107:~35000:20.30 Europasaurus ~3.2 “ ~465 ~39 ~23 ~527 .023+.440=~.463 composite:~760:~6.20 Camarasaurus 4.0 " 542 51 55 648 .041+.537=.578 CMNH 11393:14200(neck 1000):15.25 AMNH 5761:~23000:18.00 juv 3.5 " 486 40 55 581 .024+.487=.511 CMNH 11338:640:5.67 Chuanjiesaurus ~4.1 “ ~550 ~105 ~38 ~693 .063+.530=.593 Lfch 1001:~10700:13.75 2 M.
    [Show full text]
  • R~;: PHYSIOLOGICAL, MIGRATORIAL
    ....----------- 'r~;: i ! 'r; Pa/eont .. 62(4), 1988, pp. 64~52 Copyright © 1988, The Paleontological Society 0022-3360/88/0062-0640$03.00 PHYSIOLOGICAL, MIGRATORIAL, CLIMATOLOGICAL, GEOPHYSICAL, SURVIVAL, AND EVOLUTIONARY IMPLICATIONS OF CRETACEOUS POLAR DINOSAURS GREGORY S. PAUL 3109 North Calvert Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218 ABSTRACTT- he presence of Late Cretaceous social dinosaurs in polar regions confronted them with winter conditions of extended dark, coolness, breezes, and precipitation that could best be coped with via an endothermic homeothermic physiology of at least the tenrec level. This is true whether the dinosaurs stayed year round in the polar regime-which in North America extended from Alaska south to Montana-or if they migrated away from polar winters. More reptilian physiologies fail to meet the demands of such winters -in certain key ways, a· point tentatively confirmed by the apparent failure of giant Late Cretaceous phobosuchid crocodilians to dwell north of Montana. Low metabolisms were also insufficient for extended annual migrations away from and towards the poles. It is shown that even high metabolic rate dinosaurs probably remained in their polar habitats year-round. The possibility that dinosaurs had avian-mammalian metabolic systems, and may have borne insulation at least seasonally, severely limits their use as polar paleoclimatic and Earth axial tilt indicators. Polar dinosaurs may have been a center of dinosaur evolution. The possible ability of polar dinosaurs to cope with conditions of cool and dark challenges theories that a gradual temperature decline, or a sudden, meteoritic or volcanic induced collapse in temperature and sunlight, destroyed the dinosaurs. INTRODUCTION America suggests that dinosaurs were regularly crossing, and NCREASINGNUMBERSof remains show that dinosaurs lived living upon, the Bering Land Bridge within a few degrees of the I near the North and South Poles during the Cretaceous.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Palaeoart
    Palaeontologia Electronica http://palaeo-electronica.org State of the Palaeoart Mark P. Witton, Darren Naish, and John Conway The discipline of palaeoart, a branch of natural history art dedicated to the recon- struction of extinct life, is an established and important component of palaeontological science and outreach. For more than 200 years, palaeoartistry has worked closely with palaeontological science and has always been integral to the enduring popularity of prehistoric animals with the public. Indeed, the perceived value or success of such products as popular books, movies, documentaries, and museum installations can often be linked to the quality and panache of its palaeoart more than anything else. For all its significance, the palaeoart industry ment part of this dialogue in the published is often poorly treated by the academic, media and literature, in turn bringing the issues concerned to educational industries associated with it. Many wider attention. We argue that palaeoartistry is standard practises associated with palaeoart pro- both scientifically and culturally significant, and that duction are ethically and legally problematic, stifle improved working practises are required by those its scientific and cultural growth, and have a nega- involved in its production. We hope that our views tive impact on the financial viability of its creators. inspire discussion and changes sorely needed to These issues create a climate that obscures the improve the economy, quality and reputation of the many positive contributions made by palaeoartists palaeoart industry and its contributors. to science and education, while promoting and The historic, scientific and economic funding derivative, inaccurate, and sometimes exe- significance of palaeoart crable artwork.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bird's Eye View of the Evolution of Avialan Flight
    Chapter 12 Navigating Functional Landscapes: A Bird’s Eye View of the Evolution of Avialan Flight HANS C.E. LARSSON,1 T. ALEXANDER DECECCHI,2 MICHAEL B. HABIB3 ABSTRACT One of the major challenges in attempting to parse the ecological setting for the origin of flight in Pennaraptora is determining the minimal fluid and solid biomechanical limits of gliding and powered flight present in extant forms and how these minima can be inferred from the fossil record. This is most evident when we consider the fact that the flight apparatus in extant birds is a highly integrated system with redundancies and safety factors to permit robust performance even if one or more components of their flight system are outside their optimal range. These subsystem outliers may be due to other adaptive roles, ontogenetic trajectories, or injuries that are accommodated by a robust flight system. This means that many metrics commonly used to evaluate flight ability in extant birds are likely not going to be precise in delineating flight style, ability, and usage when applied to transitional taxa. Here we build upon existing work to create a functional landscape for flight behavior based on extant observations. The functional landscape is like an evolutionary adap- tive landscape in predicting where estimated biomechanically relevant values produce functional repertoires on the landscape. The landscape provides a quantitative evaluation of biomechanical optima, thus facilitating the testing of hypotheses for the origins of complex biomechanical func- tions. Here we develop this model to explore the functional capabilities of the earliest known avialans and their sister taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anatomy and Phylogenetic Relationships of Antetonitrus Ingenipes (Sauropodiformes, Dinosauria): Implications for the Origins of Sauropoda
    THE ANATOMY AND PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS OF ANTETONITRUS INGENIPES (SAUROPODIFORMES, DINOSAURIA): IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ORIGINS OF SAUROPODA Blair McPhee A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Science, University of the Witwatersrand, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science. Johannesburg, 2013 i ii ABSTRACT A thorough description and cladistic analysis of the Antetonitrus ingenipes type material sheds further light on the stepwise acquisition of sauropodan traits just prior to the Triassic/Jurassic boundary. Although the forelimb of Antetonitrus and other closely related sauropododomorph taxa retains the plesiomorphic morphology typical of a mobile grasping structure, the changes in the weight-bearing dynamics of both the musculature and the architecture of the hindlimb document the progressive shift towards a sauropodan form of graviportal locomotion. Nonetheless, the presence of hypertrophied muscle attachment sites in Antetonitrus suggests the retention of an intermediary form of facultative bipedality. The term Sauropodiformes is adopted here and given a novel definition intended to capture those transitional sauropodomorph taxa occupying a contiguous position on the pectinate line towards Sauropoda. The early record of sauropod diversification and evolution is re- examined in light of the paraphyletic consensus that has emerged regarding the ‘Prosauropoda’ in recent years. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to express sincere gratitude to Adam Yates for providing me with the opportunity to do ‘real’ palaeontology, and also for gladly sharing his considerable knowledge on sauropodomorph osteology and phylogenetics. This project would not have been possible without the continued (and continual) support (both emotionally and financially) of my parents, Alf and Glenda McPhee – Thank you.
    [Show full text]
  • Visions of the Prehistoric Past Reviewed by Mark P. Witton
    Palaeontologia Electronica http://palaeo-electronica.org Paleoart: Visions of the Prehistoric Past Reviewed by Mark P. Witton Paleoart: Visions of the Prehistoric Past. 2017. Written by Zoë Lescaze and Walton Ford. Taschen. 292 pages, ISBN 978-3-8365-5511-1 (English edition). € 75, £75, $100 (hardcover) Paleoart: Visions of the Prehistoric Past is a collection of palaeoartworks spanning 150 years of palaeoart history, from 1830 to the second half of the 20th century. This huge, supremely well-pre- sented book was primarily written by journalist, archaeological illustrator and art scholar Zoë Les- caze, with an introduction by artist Walton Ford (both are American, and use ‘paleoart’ over the European spelling ‘palaeoart’). Ford states that the genesis of the book reflects “the need for a paleo- art book that was more about the art and less about the paleo” (p. 12), and thus Paleoart skews towards artistic aspects of palaeoartistry rather than palaeontological theory or technical aspects of reconstructing extinct animal appearance. Ford and Lescaze are correct that this angle of palaeo- artistry remains neglected, and this puts Paleoart in prime position to make a big impact on this pop- ular, though undeniably niche subject. Paleoart is extremely well-produced and stun- ning to look at, a visual feast for anyone with an interest in classic palaeoart. 292 pages of thick, sturdy paper (9 chapters, hundreds of images, and four fold outs) and almost impractical dimensions (28 x 37.4 cm) make it a physically imposing, stately tome that reminds us why books belong on shelves and not digital devices. Focusing exclu- sively on 2D art, the layout is minimalist and clean, detail, unobscured by text and labelling.
    [Show full text]
  • Screaming Biplane Dromaeosaurs of the Air. June/July
    5c.r~i~ ~l'tp.,ne pr~tl\USp.,urs 1tke.A-ir Written & illustrated by Gregory s. Paul It is questionable whether anyone even speculated that some dinosaurs were feathered until Ostrom detailed the evidence that birds descended from predatory avepod theropods a third of a century ago. The first illustration of a feathered dinosaur was a nice little study of a well ensconced Syntarsus dashing down a dune slope in pursuit of a gliding lizard in Robert Bakker's classic "Dinosaur Renaissance" article in the April 1975 Scientific American by Sarah Landry (can also be seen in the Scientific American Book of the Dinosaur I edited). My first feathered dinosaur was executed shortly after, an inappropriately shaggy Allosaurus attacking a herd of Diplodocus. I was soon doing a host of small theropods in feathers. Despite the logic of feath- / er insulation on the group ancestral birds and showing evidence of a high level energetics, images of feathered avepods were often harshly and unsci- Above: Proposed relationships based on flight adaptations of entifically criticized as unscientific in view of the lack of evidence for their preserved skeletons and feathers of Archaeopteryx, a generalized presence, ignoring the equal fact that no one had found scales on the little Sinornithosaurus, and Confuciusornis, with arrows indicating dinosaurs either. derived adaptations not present in Archaeopteryx as described in In the 1980s I further proposed that the most bird-like, avepectoran text. Not to scale. dinosaurs - dromaeosaurs, troodonts, oviraptorosaurs, and later ther- izinosaurs _were not just close to birds and the origin of flight, but were see- appear to represent the remnants of wings converted to display devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Giants from the Past | Presented by the Field Museum Learning Center 2 Pre-Lesson Preparation
    Giants from the Past Middle School NGSS: MS-LS4-1, MS-LS4-4 Lesson Description Learning Objectives This investigation focuses on the fossils of a particular • Students will demonstrate an understanding that group of dinosaurs, the long-necked, herbivores known as particular traits provide advantages for survival sauropodomorphs. Students will gain an understanding by using models to test and gather data about the of why certain body features provide advantages to traits’ functions. Background survival through the use of models. Students will analyze • Students will demonstrate an understanding of and interpret data from fossils to synthesize a narrative ancestral traits by investigating how traits appear for the evolution of adaptations that came to define a and change (or evolve) in the fossil record well-known group of dinosaurs. over time. • Students will demonstrate an understanding of how traits function to provide advantages Driving Phenomenon in a particular environment by inferring daily Several traits, inherited and adapted over millions of years, activities that the dinosaur would have performed provided advantages for a group of dinosaurs to evolve for survival. into the largest animals that ever walked the Earth. Giant dinosaurs called sauropods evolved over a period of 160 Time Requirements million years. • Four 40-45 minute sessions As paleontologists continue to uncover new specimens, Prerequisite Knowledge they see connections across time and geography that lead to a better understanding of how adaptations interact • Sedimentary rocks form in layers, the newer rocks with their environment to provide unique advantages are laid down on top of the older rocks. depending on when and where animals lived.
    [Show full text]