Slashdot Mirror
Sexual Identification of A Rex Fossil
Rollie Hawk writes "The Tyrannosaurus rex has long been the darling of science fiction dinosaurs and has one of the most well-known skeletal designs among extinct creatures. But while even the most casual dinosaur enthusiast can identify the T. rex, until recently the sex of individual specimens was not discernable. Though dinosaurs are most known for their traits shared with modern reptiles, it is their kinship with birds that has finally revealed the sex of a T. rex fossil. To prepare for egg production, female birds develop a thick layer of medullary bone in their long bones, which acts as an extra source of eggshell calcium. According to Dr. Mary H. Schweitzer of North Carolina State University, the 'tyrant lizard king' appears to do the same thing. She explains that 'dinosaurs produced and shelled their eggs much more like modern birds than like modern crocodiles.'"
Damn. . .every program I hear on WBUR (NPR) has been showing up on slashdot three days later. . .
Wow. That's scary. A governing body to determine what is worth studying and what isn't?! The purpose of expanding knowledge is to expand knowledge.
No, we absolutely wouldn't be. The problem is that nobody knows what is "worthwhile" and what isn't. It's obvious in hindsight, for example, that studying aerodynamics to learn how to make a workable airplane was a productive application of science, but at the time many people thought it was a complete waste of time (i.e. how could anything heavier than air possibly fly?). If science had a "governing body" that ordered the Wright brothers (etc) to work on "something more worthwhile", would the airplane ever have been invented?
On a different topic: shouldn't this specimen properly be called a "T. Regina"?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Not certain on this, but I believe this current find (the ability to determine the gender of the T-Rex) is related to the soft tissue find. It is the same Doctor, as well as the same University that made the initial discovery of the soft tissue. Furthermore, the dino that had the soft tissue was MOR-1125, and the dino that was determined to be female was also MOR-1125.
If the new bone is also off-center, or is not uniformly distributed, it would also change the center of mass, which would also be fairly easy to detect.
Not sure what imaging techniques would work on fossilized bone, but since there may be organic matter inside the bone, then all you really need to do is image that and see what the gaps are. I don't know if any MRI techniques would be usable, such as something similar to that used on King Tut, but there's probably something that could pick out the organic matter.
Like you say, there may well be other characteristics you can pick out, provided you can definitely identify some males as well as definitely identifying some females. (You've got to know what traits are not common across groups, not just what traits any given group has.)
So, yeah, the situation isn't quite as bleak as is presented, although it will certainly require a lot of creative thought on the part of the paleantologists.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)