Comments on: A Closer Look at Ankylosaur Armor http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2010/05/a-closer-look-at-ankylosaur-armor/ Where Paleontology Meets Pop Culture Sat, 22 Dec 2012 16:48:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4 By: nick gardner http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2010/05/a-closer-look-at-ankylosaur-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-2038 nick gardner Fri, 21 May 2010 15:44:22 +0000 http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/?p=3245#comment-2038 here's a working link to the article... http://www.app.pan.pl/article/item/app20090103.html here’s a working link to the article…

http://www.app.pan.pl/article/item/app20090103.html

]]> By: nick gardner http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2010/05/a-closer-look-at-ankylosaur-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-2037 nick gardner Fri, 21 May 2010 15:28:46 +0000 http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/?p=3245#comment-2037 don't fret Brian. Whether polacanthids are monophyletic is a tricky question. Most phylogenetic analyses seem to recover them as a grade of basal ankylosaurids. Though honestly Carpenter et al. usually unite polacanthids based on postcranial characters that are sorely lacking in most of these analyses as well. And outside of the forms with good cranial representation, the rest are usually not incorporated. don’t fret Brian. Whether polacanthids are monophyletic is a tricky question. Most phylogenetic analyses seem to recover them as a grade of basal ankylosaurids. Though honestly Carpenter et al. usually unite polacanthids based on postcranial characters that are sorely lacking in most of these analyses as well. And outside of the forms with good cranial representation, the rest are usually not incorporated.

]]> By: Graham Peter King http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2010/05/a-closer-look-at-ankylosaur-armor/comment-page-1/#comment-2033 Graham Peter King Thu, 20 May 2010 15:18:03 +0000 http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/?p=3245#comment-2033 Hi, very interesting! Any such large bony outgrowths, being spectacular, can serve for species-identification, individual recognition and as markers of maturity and status. Are the structures similar or distinct in males and females - if indeed ankylosaur remains can be sexed with confidence? I know Protoceratops skulls differ morphologically between genders and also with growth-stages, juvenile to adult. The fragility of bony ornamentation in some species might not necessarily preclude their use in confrontational display or ceremonial fighting (rivalry over territory/a mate) - like the antlers of deer stags - or to deter attack by predators. I imagine a spike need not be terribly robust - just terribly sharp! - to serve as an effective deterrent to approaching closer. Bones in females might usefully serve as a store of calcium and other minerals mobilisable for deposition in egg-shells (I am supposing ankylosaur oviparity rather than viviparity - is this known?). So a female having well-developed bony outgrowths might be visibly indicating both her maturity and her capacity for prolific egg-laying. I am speculating, but it is fun to imagine. Sometimes one can think what evidences such attributes might have left if true, and maybe go check. Hi, very interesting!
Any such large bony outgrowths, being spectacular, can serve for species-identification, individual recognition and as markers of maturity and status. Are the structures similar or distinct in males and females – if indeed ankylosaur remains can be sexed with confidence? I know Protoceratops skulls differ morphologically between genders and also with growth-stages, juvenile to adult.

The fragility of bony ornamentation in some species might not necessarily preclude their use in confrontational display or ceremonial fighting (rivalry over territory/a mate) – like the antlers of deer stags – or to deter attack by predators. I imagine a spike need not be terribly robust – just terribly sharp! – to serve as an effective deterrent to approaching closer.

Bones in females might usefully serve as a store of calcium and other minerals mobilisable for deposition in egg-shells (I am supposing ankylosaur oviparity rather than viviparity – is this known?). So a female having well-developed bony outgrowths might be visibly indicating both her maturity and her capacity for prolific egg-laying.

I am speculating, but it is fun to imagine. Sometimes one can think what evidences such attributes might have left if true, and maybe go check.

]]>