MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4252568120 · doi:10.1093/auk/122.2.714

Feathered Dragons: Studies on the Transition from Dinosaurs to Birds

2005· article· en· W4252568120 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Auk · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
ThématiquePaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésZoologyGeographyBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Feathered Dragons: Studies on the Transition from Dinosaurs to Birds.—Philip J. Currie, Eva B. Koppelhus, Martin A. Shugar, and Joanna L. Wright, Eds. 2004. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. xiii + 361 pp. ISBN 0-253-34373-9. Cloth, $49.95.—The discovery in 1993, in Upper Cretaceous sediments in Montana, of a remarkably complete skeleton of a subadult birdlike dinosaur, Bambiraptor feinbergi (Burnham et al. 1997, 2000), prompted Martin Shugar to organize the Florida Symposium on Dinosaur-Bird Evolution, an international event held on 7 and 8 April 2000 in Fort Lauderdale. The guest of honor was John Ostrom, the Yale paleontologist whose work initiated the current resurgence—now in its fourth decade—of interest in the origin of birds. Bambiraptor feinbergi was on display at the meeting, along with some new fossils from China. Most of the papers in this volume were presented orally at that meeting. The book has a section of fanciful color plates of drawings of dinosaurs that suit the book's flamboyant title, but the text has a serious scientific intent. Even so, nearly every chapter repeats the mantra of the birds-are-dinosaurs movement, and the foreword assures the reader that, because the “level of controversy over bird origins has waned” (p. xii), attention can now turn to other issues, such as the evolution of feathers and flight. In general, the book reflects the heady enthusiasm of the many paleontologists and systematists in the 1990s who were interpreting the wonderful new fossil discoveries in Early Cretaceous deposits in China and elsewhere as increasing support for the view that birds evolved from certain maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs (troodontids and dromaeosaurs). After an introductory tribute by Robert Bakker to Edward Hitchcock's mid-19th-century studies of dinosaur footprints found in the Connecticut Valley redbeds, the 14 chapters that report original work are organized into three sections: two on the setting; six on osteology and ichnology (tracks); and six on eggs, nests, feathers, and flight. Dale Russell compares dinosaur assemblages of central Asia and North America, emphasizing the importance of the many specimens of well-preserved small birdlike dinosaurs found in the dune fields of Mongolia, a region that was isolated in the Late Cretaceous period. Most relevant for the subject of this book are the oviraptorosaurs (Oviraptor), troodontids (Saurornithoides), and dromaeosaurs (Velociraptor), plus two primitive “theropod-mimic” birds (Mononykus and Shuvuuia). Russell reminds readers that we do not know the biogeographic origin of birds, or theropods, or dinosaurs. In Chapter 2, Gregory Retallack argues that large-scale acidification was the most direct cause of the selective extinctions of animals and plants that occurred 65 million years ago, after the now-famous meteorite impact that marked the transition from the Cretaceous to the Tertiary period, taking with it all the dinosaurs, the enantiornithine birds, and many other taxa. The section on osteology and ichnology begins with David Burnham's formal description of the virtually complete skull and post-cranium of the holotype of Bambiraptor feinbergi, based on the individual bones; the description is supplemented with photographs of the skull and drawings of most of the bones. Additional study has suggested that this dromaeosaurid is less velociraptorine than stated here (Senter et al. 2004). The forelimb is very similar to that of Archaeopteryx, but there is no discussion of whether Bambiraptor may indeed have been a bird. The next three papers describe new details of specimens from Canada and Mongolia. Then Fernando Novas, without suggesting that Unenlagia might be a bird, argues that its ilium is even more birdlike than that of dromaeosaurids, and Joanna Wright reviews information about the birdlike features of dinosaur footprints. Overall, this section adds new information about the birdlike osteology of various maniraptorans. Section 3 begins with an important paper by Gerald Grellet-Tinner and Luis Chiappe that compares the microstructures of eggs and the nesting behaviors of turtles, crocodilians, dinosaurs, and birds. Like birds, troodontids and oviraptorids laid eggs at daily intervals in open nests (not covered by substrate). Like birds, they had asymmetrical eggs with at least two eggshell layers separated by an aprismatic delimitation. David Varricchio and Frankie Jackson add details to information about Troodon and argue that, because delayed incubation and brooding behavior must have synchronized the hatching of eggs, the body temperature of the adult must have at least temporarily surpassed that of the environment. The argument by Thomas Hopp and Mark Orsen in Chapter 11 that brooding behavior selected for the evolution of long flight feathers is supported only by some drawings of birds in unnatural poses. Contrary to Ostrom, Sankar Chatterjee and R. J. Templin consider the cursorial model for the origin of flight to be biomechanically untenable. They construct a thesis that involves the theropod origin of birds and the arboreal origin of flight and support it by putting the new Chinese fossils in an order that fits that scenario. The most ornithological paper in the book is the detailed analysis of the plumage of Archaeopteryx by Peter Wellnhofer, confirming that Archaeopteryx was a true bird. It had an especially avian ulnar abduction in the wrist, was adapted for powered and active flight, and—except for the feathered tail—had modern avian plumage in every detail. Caudipteryx, with its short forelimb and modern feathers, living at least 25 million years after Archaeopteryx, is more controversial. It has been called a dinosaur, but it has many characteristics of a flightless bird. Wellnhofer remarks that the “protofeathers” of several other fossil taxa from China are also present in pterosaurs and “it could be that these filamentous structures of the integument have nothing to do with protofeathers at all” (p. 294). Note also that ichthyosaur integumental fibers conform to dromaeosaur protofeathers (Lingham-Soliar 2003). The final chapter by Robert Bakker and Gary Bir is not ornithological. It attempts to characterize the predatory behavior of three genera of large predaceous dinosaurs from the distribution of their shed teeth at Como Bluff, Wyoming. Most authors in this book have taken the birds-are-dinosaurs paradigm as a given, dismissing alternatives in Kuhnian fashion, but ornithologists should be more cautious. They know that 35 families of modern birds include taxa that are flightless, and that flightless birds can get very large. At least one group of “dinosaurs,” the oviraptorosaurs, is now recorganized as flightless birds (Lü 2000, Maryanska et al. 2002). No wonder they have birdlike eggshells and brooding behavior! If several different groups of early birds evolved flight-lessness, deciphering the origin of birds from the fossil evidence is going to require more ornithological expertise and skepticism than is apparent in this book or several other recent books on this subject. Some of the papers here are not relevant to ornithology. Others may be more relevant to ornithology than their authors thought.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,620
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,255
Écart entre enseignants0,214 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle