Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!Make a forum zoo! |
| Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Extinct Animal Questions | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 26 2013, 10:24 PM (193,445 Views) | |
| Yi Qi | Nov 13 2014, 05:46 PM Post #736 |
![]() ![]()
|
Mammals were NEVER reptiles, their common ancestor with reptiles are as far back as primitive amniotes , synapsids were very different and evolved from a COMPLETELY different lineage. Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 13 2014, 06:57 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jules | Nov 13 2014, 06:21 PM Post #737 |
![]()
Mihi est imperare orbi universo
![]()
|
As far as I know synapsids were considered reptiles? |
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | Nov 13 2014, 06:55 PM Post #738 |
![]() ![]()
|
Maybe in the early 1920-30s, but we have a fairly good knowledge of these creatures and we know they split out from the main tetrapod line FAR before "reptiles" "Reptiles" and "birds" are horrible nonexisting terms anyway, the correct term would be Sauropsid see, the closest relatives between the "mammals" (Synapsida) and "reptiles" (Sauropsida) are basal amniotes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amniote |
![]() |
|
| Luca9108 | Nov 14 2014, 04:27 PM Post #739 |
![]()
Master of Dinosaurs
![]()
|
Question: Are these dinosaurs separate species? Torosaurus Nanotyrannus Dracorex Stygimoloch Anatotitan |
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | Nov 14 2014, 04:48 PM Post #740 |
![]() ![]()
|
Annatotitan annectens is now Edmontosaurus annectens, tough its still a separate species from E.regalis The pachycephalosaurs we don't know but they are probably different species, and there's substantial evidence of that according to Robert T. Bakker, tough we will only know the details once he shows us his juvenile pachycephalosaurus specimen Nannotyrannus we don't know Torosaurus is not triceratops, we have enough data to conclude they're different animals. Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 15 2014, 11:05 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Luca9108 | Nov 14 2014, 04:57 PM Post #741 |
![]()
Master of Dinosaurs
![]()
|
Thanks for answer. ( I heard that Nanotyrannus was a juveline Tyrannosaurus but I am not sure. ) Edited by Luca9108, Nov 14 2014, 04:57 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| stargatedalek | Nov 14 2014, 07:13 PM Post #742 |
|
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!
![]()
|
Austroraptor did a great job, but since a few of these are still somewhat subjective, I'd like to give my opinions also -torosaurus was covered, but to go into more detail the theory was debunked when fossils of juvenile torosaurus were found -nanotyrannus is almost certainly not tyrannosaurus, the fossils are inconsistent with the fossils of juvenile tyrannosaurus, it is possible, but the "common theory" is that it was separate -dracorex and stygimoloch are most likely not synonymous with pachycephalosaurus, however they are likely synonymous with each other -anatotitan was covered |
![]() |
|
| Swimming Spaghetti Monster | Nov 15 2014, 08:05 AM Post #743 |
![]()
|
What integument were the plesiosaurs covered in? |
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | Nov 15 2014, 11:07 AM Post #744 |
![]() ![]()
|
Most likely small, overlapping scales, as with other marine reptiles Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 15 2014, 11:16 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Swimming Spaghetti Monster | Nov 15 2014, 11:44 AM Post #745 |
![]()
|
Is there a possibility that ammonites were like cuttlefish, with shells covered in soft tissues? |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 15 2014, 02:56 PM Post #746 |
![]() ![]()
|
Unlikely IMO given the fact that the shells of most genera are more similar to those of nautiloids, but not impossible I suppose. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 15 2014, 10:37 PM Post #747 |
![]() ![]()
|
Sorry about the double post, but would it be better to give Masiakasaurus scales or feathers? |
![]() |
|
| Incinerox | Nov 15 2014, 10:49 PM Post #748 |
![]()
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti
![]()
|
Scales. The closest we have to noasaur integument comes from abelisaur skin (Carnotaurus is known from a near complete skin cast showing mosaic scales and rows of osteoderms) and Ceratosaurus dorsal scutes. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 15 2014, 11:16 PM Post #749 |
![]() ![]()
|
Thanks for the answer.
|
![]() |
|
| Yi Qi | Nov 15 2014, 11:32 PM Post #750 |
![]() ![]()
|
What DG said, the fact that everybody keeps giving them feathers for some bizarre reason annoys me to the highest degree, when we know these creatures were abelisaurs and likely to have not only scales, but also rows of osteoderms. the same goes for limusaurus and elaphrosaurus. |
![]() |
|
| 3 users reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic » |

FAQ
Search
Members
Rules
Staff PM Box
Downloads
Pointies
Groups













