DOCSLIB.ORG

Thesis, Dissertation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thesis, Dissertation SCRATCH-DIGGING IN THE CRETACEOUS BASAL ORNITHOPOD DINOSAUR ORYCTODROMEUS CUBICULARIS: EVIDENCE FROM MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSES AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FORELIMB MUSCULATURE by Jamie Lynn Fearon A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Earth Science MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana May 2013 ©COPYRIGHT by Jamie Lynn Fearon 2013 All Rights Reserved ii APPROVAL of a thesis submitted by Jamie Lynn Fearon This thesis has been read by each member of the thesis committee and has been found to be satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citation, bibliographic style, and consistency and is ready for submission to The Graduate School. David J. Varricchio Approved for the Department of Earth Sciences David Mogk Approved for The Graduate School Ronald W. Larsen iii STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master’s degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it available to borrowers under rules of the Library. If I have indicated my intention to copyright this thesis by including a copyright notice page, copying is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with “fair use” as prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this thesis in whole or in parts may be granted only by the copyright holder. Jamie Lynn Fearon May 2013 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 Focus of Study .................................................................................................................1 Purpose of Study ..............................................................................................................2 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................5 Morphology of Digging ...................................................................................................7 Forelimb Musculature ......................................................................................................9 Digging in Dinosaurs .....................................................................................................11 Phylogenetic Framework ...............................................................................................12 Morphometrics ...............................................................................................................14 3. MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF THE FORELIMB AND PECTORAL GIRDLE OF THE CRETACEOUS ORNITHOPOD DINOSAUR ORYCTODROMEUS CUBICULARIS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR DIGGING ................................................................................16 Contributions of Authors and Co-Authors Page ............................................................16 Manuscript Information Page ........................................................................................17 Title Page .......................................................................................................................18 Abstract ..........................................................................................................................18 Introduction ....................................................................................................................19 Materials and Methods ...................................................................................................23 Traditional Morphometric Analysis .......................................................................24 Geometric Morphometric Analysis ........................................................................27 Results ............................................................................................................................31 Traditional Morphometrics ....................................................................................31 Humerus .....................................................................................................31 Scapula .......................................................................................................34 Coracoid .....................................................................................................36 Geometric Morphometrics .....................................................................................39 Humerus .....................................................................................................39 Scapula .......................................................................................................42 Coracoid .....................................................................................................44 Discussion ......................................................................................................................47 Morphological Trends ............................................................................................47 Humerus .....................................................................................................47 Scapula .......................................................................................................49 Coracoid .....................................................................................................51 General Morphological Trends ..................................................................52 v TABLE OF CONTENTS – CONTINUED Morphologic Specializations in Oryctodromeus .......................................52 Implications for Digging ........................................................................................54 Limitations of this Study ........................................................................................55 Conclusion .....................................................................................................................56 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................58 Tables .............................................................................................................................59 Figures............................................................................................................................62 References ......................................................................................................................75 4. RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FORELIMB MUSCULATURE OF THE CRETACEOUS ORNITHOPOD DINOSAUR ORYCTODROMEUS CUBICULARIS: IMPLICATIONS FOR DIGGING...................79 Contributions of Authors and Co-Authors Page ............................................................79 Manuscript Information Page ........................................................................................80 Title Page .......................................................................................................................81 Abstract ..........................................................................................................................81 Introduction ....................................................................................................................82 Materials and Methods ...................................................................................................86 Results ............................................................................................................................90 Axial Musculature ..................................................................................................91 Levator Scapulae (LSC) .............................................................................91 Serratus Superficialis (SES) .......................................................................91 Sternocoracoideus and/or Costocoracoideus Superficialis (STC or CCS) .......................................................................92 Trapezius (TRA) ........................................................................................93 Appendicular Musculature .....................................................................................94 Biceps Brachii (BIC)..................................................................................94 Brachialis (BRA) .......................................................................................95 Coracobrachialis Brevis (CBB) .................................................................96 Deltoideus Clavicularis (DCL) ..................................................................96 Deltoideus Scapularis (DSC) .....................................................................97 Latissimus Dorsi (LAT) .............................................................................98 Pectoralis (PEC) .........................................................................................99 Scapulohumeralis Caudalis (SHC) ..........................................................100 Subcoracoideus (SBC) .............................................................................100 Subscapularis (SBS).................................................................................101 Supracoracoideus (SCC) ..........................................................................102 Teres Major (TMA) .................................................................................103 Triceps Brevis (TRIB) .............................................................................104
Load more

Recommended publications
  • At Carowinds
    at Carowinds EDUCATOR’S GUIDE CLASSROOM LESSON PLANS & FIELD TRIP ACTIVITIES Table of Contents at Carowinds Introduction The Field Trip ................................... 2 The Educator’s Guide ....................... 3 Field Trip Activity .................................. 4 Lesson Plans Lesson 1: Form and Function ........... 6 Lesson 2: Dinosaur Detectives ....... 10 Lesson 3: Mesozoic Math .............. 14 Lesson 4: Fossil Stories.................. 22 Games & Puzzles Crossword Puzzles ......................... 29 Logic Puzzles ................................. 32 Word Searches ............................... 37 Answer Keys ...................................... 39 Additional Resources © 2012 Dinosaurs Unearthed Recommended Reading ................. 44 All rights reserved. Except for educational fair use, no portion of this guide may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any Dinosaur Data ................................ 45 means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other without Discovering Dinosaurs .................... 52 explicit prior permission from Dinosaurs Unearthed. Multiple copies may only be made by or for the teacher for class use. Glossary .............................................. 54 Content co-created by TurnKey Education, Inc. and Dinosaurs Unearthed, 2012 Standards www.turnkeyeducation.net www.dinosaursunearthed.com Curriculum Standards .................... 59 Introduction The Field Trip From the time of the first exhibition unveiled in 1854 at the Crystal
    [Show full text]
  • Feeding Height Stratification Among the Herbivorous
    Mallon et al. BMC Ecology 2013, 13:14 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6785/13/14 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Feeding height stratification among the herbivorous dinosaurs from the Dinosaur Park Formation (upper Campanian) of Alberta, Canada Jordan C Mallon1,5*, David C Evans2, Michael J Ryan3 and Jason S Anderson4 Abstract Background: Herbivore coexistence on the Late Cretaceous island continent of Laramidia has been a topic of great interest, stemming from the paradoxically high diversity and biomass of these animals in relation to the relatively small landmass available to them. Various hypotheses have been advanced to account for these facts, of which niche partitioning is among the most frequently invoked. However, despite its wide acceptance, this hypothesis has not been rigorously tested. This study uses the fossil assemblage from the Dinosaur Park Formation of Alberta as a model to investigate whether niche partitioning facilitated herbivorous dinosaur coexistence on Laramidia. Specifically, the question of feeding height stratification is examined in light of the role it plays in facilitating modern ungulate coexistence. Results: Most herbivorous dinosaur species from the Dinosaur Park Formation were restricted to feeding no higher than approximately 1 m above the ground. There is minimal evidence for feeding height partitioning at this level, with ceratopsids capable of feeding slightly higher than ankylosaurs, but the ecological significance of this is ambiguous. Hadrosaurids were uniquely capable of feeding up to 2 m quadrupedally, or up to 5 m bipedally. There is no evidence for either feeding height stratification within any of these clades, or for change in these ecological relationships through the approximately 1.5 Ma record of the Dinosaur Park Formation.
    [Show full text]
  • A Phylogenetic Analysis of the Basal Ornithischia (Reptilia, Dinosauria)
    A PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF THE BASAL ORNITHISCHIA (REPTILIA, DINOSAURIA) Marc Richard Spencer A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December 2007 Committee: Margaret M. Yacobucci, Advisor Don C. Steinker Daniel M. Pavuk © 2007 Marc Richard Spencer All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Margaret M. Yacobucci, Advisor The placement of Lesothosaurus diagnosticus and the Heterodontosauridae within the Ornithischia has been problematic. Historically, Lesothosaurus has been regarded as a basal ornithischian dinosaur, the sister taxon to the Genasauria. Recent phylogenetic analyses, however, have placed Lesothosaurus as a more derived ornithischian within the Genasauria. The Fabrosauridae, of which Lesothosaurus was considered a member, has never been phylogenetically corroborated and has been considered a paraphyletic assemblage. Prior to recent phylogenetic analyses, the problematic Heterodontosauridae was placed within the Ornithopoda as the sister taxon to the Euornithopoda. The heterodontosaurids have also been considered as the basal member of the Cerapoda (Ornithopoda + Marginocephalia), the sister taxon to the Marginocephalia, and as the sister taxon to the Genasauria. To reevaluate the placement of these taxa, along with other basal ornithischians and more derived subclades, a phylogenetic analysis of 19 taxonomic units, including two outgroup taxa, was performed. Analysis of 97 characters and their associated character states culled, modified, and/or rescored from published literature based on published descriptions, produced four most parsimonious trees. Consistency and retention indices were calculated and a bootstrap analysis was performed to determine the relative support for the resultant phylogeny. The Ornithischia was recovered with Pisanosaurus as its basalmost member.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny and Biogeography of Iguanodontian Dinosaurs, with Implications from Ontogeny and an Examination of the Function of the Fused Carpal-Digit I Complex
    Phylogeny and Biogeography of Iguanodontian Dinosaurs, with Implications from Ontogeny and an Examination of the Function of the Fused Carpal-Digit I Complex By Karen E. Poole B.A. in Geology, May 2004, University of Pennsylvania M.A. in Earth and Planetary Sciences, August 2008, Washington University in St. Louis A Dissertation submitted to The Faculty of The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 31, 2015 Dissertation Directed by Catherine Forster Professor of Biology The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University certifies that Karen Poole has passed the Final Examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy as of August 10th, 2015. This is the final and approved form of the dissertation. Phylogeny and Biogeography of Iguanodontian Dinosaurs, with Implications from Ontogeny and an Examination of the Function of the Fused Carpal-Digit I Complex Karen E. Poole Dissertation Research Committee: Catherine A. Forster, Professor of Biology, Dissertation Director James M. Clark, Ronald Weintraub Professor of Biology, Committee Member R. Alexander Pyron, Robert F. Griggs Assistant Professor of Biology, Committee Member ii © Copyright 2015 by Karen Poole All rights reserved iii Dedication To Joseph Theis, for his unending support, and for always reminding me what matters most in life. To my parents, who have always encouraged me to pursue my dreams, even those they didn’t understand. iv Acknowledgements First, a heartfelt thank you is due to my advisor, Cathy Forster, for giving me free reign in this dissertation, but always providing valuable commentary on any piece of writing I sent her, no matter how messy.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Mesozoic
    DEBRA LINDSAY THE MESOZOIC/DEFINING DISCIPLINES: LATE NINETEENTH- CENTURY DEBATES OVER THE JURASSIC–CRETACEOUS BOUNDARY DEBRA LINDSAY Department of History and Politics University of New Brunswick, Saint John, NB, Canada E2L 4L5 [email protected] ABSTRACT The last two decades of the nineteenth century were exciting times in American paleontology, with disputes over Jurassic dinosaurs between Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh appearing in the press. Less well known is the dispute over defining the Mesozoic that began in 1888 when Marsh invited Lester Frank Ward, a colleague with whom he had been working on the Potomac Formation for the United States Geological Survey, to speak on the plant fossils found there. Initially agreeing with Marsh that the Potomac was a Jurassic formation, work on fossil cycads led Ward to conclude that the Potomac was Lower Cretaceous. As Ward and Marsh grappled with the question of how to determine the age and identity of Mesozoic systems, they joined other paleontologists and Earth Sciences History geologists such as William J. McGee, Albert Charles Seward, and Samuel W. Williston in 2011, Vol. 30, No. 2 a debate that often reflected scientific training and sub-specializations as much as pp. 216–239 stratigraphic principles, becoming caught up in a trans-Atlantic dispute in which their reputations were on the line as they claimed that ‘their’ fossils were key determinants of Mesozoic systems. In the end, Marsh’s reputation as a paleontologist was far better established than that of Ward, who moved on to another career as a sociologist at Brown University, but cycad discoveries from Maryland, Colorado and Wyoming, and fieldwork, trumped laboratory studies—even when performed by a master systematist—as the Potomac Formation proved to be Lower Cretaceous.
    [Show full text]
  • Inferring Body Mass in Extinct Terrestrial Vertebrates and the Evolution of Body Size in a Model-Clade of Dinosaurs (Ornithopoda)
    Inferring Body Mass in Extinct Terrestrial Vertebrates and the Evolution of Body Size in a Model-Clade of Dinosaurs (Ornithopoda) by Nicolás Ernesto José Campione Ruben A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto © Copyright by Nicolás Ernesto José Campione Ruben 2013 Inferring body mass in extinct terrestrial vertebrates and the evolution of body size in a model-clade of dinosaurs (Ornithopoda) Nicolás E. J. Campione Ruben Doctor of Philosophy Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto 2013 Abstract Organismal body size correlates with almost all aspects of ecology and physiology. As a result, the ability to infer body size in the fossil record offers an opportunity to interpret extinct species within a biological, rather than simply a systematic, context. Various methods have been proposed by which to estimate body mass (the standard measure of body size) that center on two main approaches: volumetric reconstructions and extant scaling. The latter are particularly contentious when applied to extinct terrestrial vertebrates, particularly stem-based taxa for which living relatives are difficult to constrain, such as non-avian dinosaurs and non-therapsid synapsids, resulting in the use of volumetric models that are highly influenced by researcher bias. However, criticisms of scaling models have not been tested within a comprehensive extant dataset. Based on limb measurements of 200 mammals and 47 reptiles, linear models were generated between limb measurements (length and circumference) and body mass to test the hypotheses that phylogenetic history, limb posture, and gait drive the relationship between stylopodial circumference and body mass as critics suggest.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dinosaurs of North America
    FEOM THE SIXTEENTH ANNUAL KEPOKT OF THE U. S, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY THE DINOSAURS OF NORTH AMERICA OTHNIEL CHARLES MARSH TALE UNIVERSITY WASHINGTON 1896 ^33/^, I/BRAKt 4 ,\ . THE DINOSAURS OF NORTH AMERICA. BY OTHNIEL CHARLES MARSH. 133 CONTENTS. Pajje. Introduction 143 Part I. —Triassic dinosaurs 146 Theropoda 146 Anchisaurida? 147 Anchisaurus 147 The skull 148 The fore limbs 149 The hind limbs 149 Anchisaurus solus 149 Amniosaurus rTT 150 Eestoration of Anchisaurus 150 Dinosaurian footprints 151 Distribution of Triassic dinosaurs 152 Part II. —Jurassic dinosaurs 152 Theropoda : 153 Hallopus 153 Fore and hind limbs 154 Coelurus _ 155 The vertebra:- 155 The hind limbs 156 Ceratosaurus 156 The skull 157 The brain 159 The lower iaws 159 The vertebra: 159 The scapular arch 160 The pelvic arch 160 The metatarsals 162 Eestoration of Ceratosaurus 163 Allosaurus 163 European Theropoda 163 Sauropoda 164 Atlantosaurus beds 164 Families of Sauropoda 165 Atlantosauridie 166 Atlantosaurus 166 Apatosaurus 166 The sacral cavity 166 The vertebra- 167 Brontosaurus 168 The scapular arch 168 The cervical vertebra.- 169 The dorsal vertebree 169 The sacrum 170 The caudal vertebra- 171 The pelric arch 172 The fore limbs 173 The hind limbs 173 135 136 CONTENTS. Part II. —Jurassic dinosaurs—Continued. Page. Sauropoda—Continued. Atlantosaurida? —Continued. Restoration of Brontosaurus 173 Barnsaurus 174 Diplodoeida? 175 Diplodocus 175 The skull 175 The brain 178 The lower jaws 178 The teeth 179 The vertebra; 180 The sternal bones 180 The pelvic girdle 180 Size and habits 180 Morosaurida? 181 Morosaurus 181 The skull 181 The vertebra? 181 The fore limbs 182 The pelvis 182 The hind limbs 183 Pleuroccelida? : 183 Pleurocoelus 183 The skull 183 The vertebras 183 Distribution of the Sauropoda 185 Comparison with European forms 185 Predentata ».
    [Show full text]
  • Lyons SCIENCE 2021 the Influence of Juvenile Dinosaurs SUPPL.Pdf
    science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6532/941/suppl/DC1 Supplementary Materials for The influence of juvenile dinosaurs on community structure and diversity Katlin Schroeder*, S. Kathleen Lyons, Felisa A. Smith *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Published 26 February 2021, Science 371, 941 (2021) DOI: 10.1126/science.abd9220 This PDF file includes: Materials and Methods Supplementary Text Figs. S1 and S2 Tables S1 to S7 References Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following: (available at science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6532/941/suppl/DC1) MDAR Reproducibility Checklist (PDF) Materials and Methods Data Dinosaur assemblages were identified by downloading all vertebrate occurrences known to species or genus level between 200Ma and 65MA from the Paleobiology Database (PaleoDB 30 https://paleobiodb.org/#/ download 6 August, 2018). Using associated depositional environment and taxonomic information, the vertebrate database was limited to only terrestrial organisms, excluding amphibians, pseudosuchians, champsosaurs and ichnotaxa. Taxa present in formations were confirmed against the most recent available literature, as of November, 2020. Synonymous taxa or otherwise duplicated taxa were removed. Taxa that could not be identified to genus level 35 were included as “Taxon X”. GPS locality data for all formations between 200MA and 65MA was downloaded from PaleoDB to create a minimally convex polygon for each possible formation. Any attempt to recreate local assemblages must include all potentially interacting species, while excluding those that would have been separated by either space or time. We argue it is 40 acceptable to substitute formation for home range in the case of non-avian dinosaurs, as range increases with body size.
    [Show full text]
  • What Are Dinosaurs?
    Tote Hughes, 140819 [email protected] Dinosaurs 1/20 What Are Dinosaurs? The following are not dinosaurs∗: • Things that aren’t organisms—There is no rock that is a dinosaur. • Things that existed before the Triassic period† • Pterosaurs The following are dinosaurs: • Birds (Aves) The following contain dinosaurs: • Archosaurs (X.Archosauria) • Reptiles (Reptilia) Dinosaur Overview A discussion of the important dinosaur clades. Dinosaurs are divided into two main groups: the eusaurischians‡ and ornithischians. Eusaurischians • Sauropods – Apatasaurus: diplodocoidean – Barosaurus: diplodocoidean – Brachiosaurus: macronarian – Diplodocus: diplodocoidean • Theropods – Allosaurus: carnosaurian – Archaeopteryx: maniraptor – Giganotosaurus: carnosaurian – Megalosaurus: megalosaurid – Spinosaurus: megalosaurid – Tyrannosaurus: tyrannosauroid – Velociraptor: maniraptor ∗See the Dinosaur Encyclopedia section for details on terms. †See Appendix: Time for details on geological time. ‡These are commonly called saurischians, but since almost every interesting saurischian is actually in the subclade X.Eusaurischia, I’ve taken the liberty of breaking the standard. I hope you will grow to understand and accept my decision. 1/20 Tote Hughes, 140819 [email protected] Dinosaurs 2/20 Ornithischians • Eurypodans (thyreophor) – Ankylosaurus: ankylosaurian – Stegosaurus: stegosaurian • Marginocephalians (cerapod) – Pachycephalosaurus: pachycephalosaurian – Triceratops: ceratopsian • Ornithopods (cerapod) – Hadrosaurus: hadrosauriform – Iguanodon: hadrosauriform
    [Show full text]
  • Lesothosaurus, "Fabrosaurids," and the Early Evolution of Ornithischia Author(S): Paul C
    Lesothosaurus, "Fabrosaurids," and the Early Evolution of Ornithischia Author(s): Paul C. Sereno Source: Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Jun. 20, 1991), pp. 168-197 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4523370 Accessed: 28-01-2019 13:42 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Taylor & Francis, Ltd. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology This content downloaded from 69.80.65.67 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 13:42:40 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 11(2): 168-197, June 1991 © 1991 by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology LESOTHOSAURUS, "FABROSAURIDS," AND THE EARLY EVOLUTION OF ORNITHISCHIA PAUL C. SERENO Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, 1025 E. 57th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637 ABSTRACT -New materials of Lesothosaurus diagnosticus permit a detailed understanding of one of the earliest and most primitive ornithischians. Skull proportions and sutural relations can be discerned from several articulated and disarticulated skulls. The snout is proportionately long with a vascularized, horn-covered tip.
    [Show full text]
  • Dinosaur (DK Eyewitness Books)
    Eyewitness DINOSAUR www.ketabha.org Eyewitness DINOSAUR www.ketabha.org Magnolia flower Armored Polacanthus skin Rock fragment with iridium deposit Corythosaurus Tyrannosaurus coprolite (fossil dropping) Megalosaurus jaw www.ketabha.org Eyewitness Troodon embryo DINOSAUR Megalosaurus tooth Written by DAVID LAMBERT Kentrosaurus www.ketabha.org LONDON, NEW YORK, Ammonite mold MELBOURNE, MUNICH, AND DELHI Ammonite cast Consultant Dr. David Norman Senior editor Rob Houston Editorial assistant Jessamy Wood Managing editors Julie Ferris, Jane Yorke Managing art editor Owen Peyton Jones Art director Martin Wilson Gila monster Associate publisher Andrew Macintyre Picture researcher Louise Thomas Production editor Melissa Latorre Production controller Charlotte Oliver Jacket designers Martin Wilson, Johanna Woolhead Jacket editor Adam Powley DK DELHI Editor Kingshuk Ghoshal Designer Govind Mittal DTP designers Dheeraj Arora, Preetam Singh Project editor Suchismita Banerjee Design manager Romi Chakraborty Troodon Iguanodon hand Production manager Pankaj Sharma Head of publishing Aparna Sharma First published in the United States in 2010 by DK Publishing 375 Hudson Street, New York, New York 10014 Copyright © 2010 Dorling Kindersley Limited, London 10 11 12 13 14 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 175403—12/09 All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Published in Great Britain by Dorling Kindersley Limited. A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN 978-0-7566-5810-6 (Hardcover) ISBN 978-0-7566-5811-3 (Library Binding) Color reproduction by MDP, UK, and Colourscan, Singapore Printed and bound by Toppan Printing Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Collaborative Multimedia Judy Diamond University of Nebraska–Lincoln, [email protected]
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Alan Bond Publications Papers in the Biological Sciences 1995 Collaborative Multimedia Judy Diamond University of Nebraska–Lincoln, [email protected] Alan B. Bond University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Beth Schenker University of Nebraska–Lincoln Debra Meier University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Dana Twersky University of Nebraska State Museum Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/bioscibond Part of the Animal Sciences Commons, Biodiversity Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Museum Studies Commons, and the Science and Technology Studies Commons Diamond, Judy; Bond, Alan B.; Schenker, Beth; Meier, Debra; and Twersky, Dana, "Collaborative Multimedia" (1995). Alan Bond Publications. 12. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/bioscibond/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Papers in the Biological Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Alan Bond Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Collaborative Multimedia Judy Dia17101Ul, Alan Bond, Beth Schenker, Debra Meier, Dana Twersky ABSTRACT Six ~atur~ hist~~ institutions contributed video and other images to produce a single multimedia exhibit about famous paleontology sites throughout the United States. In Mesozoic Monsters. Mammals and Magnolias. users can view videos of the original excavation of each of the sites and also play computer games relating to each location. This project provides a model for how collaboration among museums can reduce the cost of multimedia exhibits while improving quality and making them available to wider audiences. MULTIMEDIA PARTNERSHIP The small girl examines the bones of a mosasaur, a giant fossil reptile 20 times her size.
    [Show full text]