New studies and constructing a dinosaur supertree
are showing that they -mostly- stopped evolving and just
maintained a status point for around fifty million years, while
other plants and animals including mammals took off and expanded
in diversity greatly.
The key focus was to see whether dinosaurs had been part of a
major phase of evolution on land - the Cretaceous Terrestrial
Revolution (between 125-80 million years ago) - when many new
groups of plants and animals expanded rapidly. During this time,
the flowering plants and social insects arose and became more and
more common. Many backboned animals also expanded to take
advantage of the new sources of food...ed.z.: Seems odd,
doesn't it? What could make natural selection just stop
working? Some weird genes that resist mutation became dominant?
Perhaps the mesh of animals and forces at play meant that the
status quo was the best adapted and most likely to survive. Its
got to imaginable that point is reachable in any system. Jason
Alternatively, could it be that the punctuation of the
equilibrium was too violent for evolution, so that genetic drift
was occurring, but no phenotypical signs are seen?
Aren't the dinosaurs that kept evolving called birds now? And maybe the rest were
stuck in local maxima (but not so local that they could get out
of it) for evolving the dinosaur form.
I always thought the explanation for the extinction of dinos a
little lacking. Why did the meteor kill off every single species
of dinos, but some mammals survived, some reptiles survived, some
amphibians, fish, cephalopods, etc, etc? I suppose birds could be
considered evolved dinos. I just seems a little weird to me that
not even one or two "classic" dinosaur species snuck
through while so many other, older fauna did. Any paleontologists
out there?
I just seems a little weird to me that not even one or two
"classic" dinosaur species snuck through while so many
other, older fauna did.
You mean, like the crocodiles, alligators, lizards, and snakes?
You are making the mistake of asking why none of the
"classic" dinosaur species survived, when the
definition of a "classic" dinosaur species is that
(ahem!) they didn't survive!
Why did Triconodonts (mammal subgroup) and all non-neornithes
(Hesperornithes, etc) die out at the end of the Cretaceous? It
ranges from difficult to impossible to tell why one sub-group
dies out or lives in mass extinctions. There is really nothing
special about the extinction of non-avian dinosaurs compared to
the extinction of any other group.
I suppose birds could be considered evolved dinos.
There is no suppose about it. In common use,
"dinosaur"; is used to mean "non-avian
dinosaur";. On the one hand, you have Jeholornis
prima, a bird capable of strong flight, but with a tail even
closer to a dromaeosaurids' tail than Archeopteryx.
On the other hand you have Sinosauropteryx, which was
first described as a bird, complete with simple down-like
feathers, but they soon realized it was a (non-avian) dinosaur
related to Compsognathus.
Then there is Rahonavis. Scientists can't decide
whether to label it "ave" or "dromaeosaurid".
For that matter, some farther-out theories suggest that
dromaeosaurids and troodontids should perhaps be considered Aves.
As you go from Theropods (including Carnosaurs, like Allosaurus,
and Coelurosaurs) to Coelurosaurs (some, perhaps even most, had
feathers of some kind) (Tyrannosaurs, Raptors, Oviraptors,
Compsognathids, Ornithomimids) to Maniraptora (Raptors,
Ornithomimids, Troodontids, Aves), there is increasingly little
difference between "bird" and "dinosaur".
I just seems a little weird to me that not even one or two
"classic" dinosaur species snuck through while so many
other, older fauna did. Any paleontologists out there?
Oldness has nothing to do with fitness. Non-avian dinos were not
fit by definition (they didn't survive), but why they where
not fit, while aves,crocodiles, and lizards were, is not clear.
Don't forget the extinction of the flying reptiles and the
marine mosasaurs and plesiosaurs, and many other groups at the
same time. And remember that although birds and crocodiles
didn't go extinct, individual species and genera of those
groups may have.
New studies and constructing a dinosaur supertree are showing
that they -mostly- stopped evolving and just maintained a status
point for around fifty million years,
I am not seeing anything in the article to suggest that dinos
mostly stopped evolving. It sounds to me like they just were not
diversifying as much as had previously been thought.
I think it is probably just they didn't change form. I
don't see how you can tell they didn't take advantage of
snakes or flowering plants, they just didn't adapt their
shape to exploit these. I'm guessing big herbivores
didn't need to do much to take advantage of flowering plants
except perhaps turn there head towards the shiny things slightly
- hmm tasty.
Sharks are another story. Ancient sharks were recognisably
sharks, possibly even 400 million years ago. Modern sharks
(often) have bigger brains, better sense of smell, smoother skin,
better teeth, Fortunately a lot of shark teeth and scales survive
in the fossil record so we know quite a bit about the changes in
teeth and skin. I'm guessing this isn't true for a lot of
"dinosaurs", so it maybe that dinosaurs just got better
at being the kind of dinosaurs they were, then the world changed
and being that kind of a dinosaur wasn't so good an idea.
Dinosaurs Stopped Evolving
New studies and constructing a dinosaur supertree are showing that they -mostly- stopped evolving and just maintained a status point for around fifty million years, while other plants and animals including mammals took off and expanded in diversity greatly.
The key focus was to see whether dinosaurs had been part of a major phase of evolution on land - the Cretaceous Terrestrial Revolution (between 125-80 million years ago) - when many new groups of plants and animals expanded rapidly. During this time, the flowering plants and social insects arose and became more and more common. Many backboned animals also expanded to take advantage of the new sources of food...ed.z.: Seems odd, doesn't it? What could make natural selection just stop working? Some weird genes that resist mutation became dominant?