Slashdot Mirror
190 Million Year Old Dinosaur Embyro
leprasmurf writes "Sci Tech Today is reporting that scientists have cracked open a 190-million-year-old egg to reveal the oldest known dinosaur embryo. Examination of the fetal skeleton suggests the hatchling would have required parental care to survive. This would be the earliest evidence of nurturant behavior, more than 100 million years earlier than previous examples." The University of Toronto has a release about this as well. From the article: "According to Reisz, what makes this discovery particularly significant is the ability to put the embryos into a growth series and work out for the first time how these animals grew from a tiny, 15 centimetre embryo into a five metre adult. 'This has never been done for a dinosaur. Only Massospondylus is represented by embryos as well as by numerous articulated skeletons of juveniles and adults. The results have major implications for our understanding of how these animals grew and evolved,' he says."
What methods are used to accurately measure the age of these discovered items? I see wildly different estimates on similar things, depending on who's getting the grant to tell me about it.
Pah. This is old news.
no really...it is.
Prosauropoda or prosauropods were a group of early herbivorous dinosaurs that lived during the Late Triassic and early Jurassic periods. They were frequently the predominant herbivore in their environment, and quickly reached large size (6 to 10 meters long). All prosauropods had a long neck and small head, forelimbs shorter than the hindlimbs, and a very large thumb claw (inherited from the thecodontosaurs) for defense. Most were semi-bipedal, although at least one large form (Riojasaurus) was fully quadrupedal. They were originally thought to be the ancestors of the sauropods, but are now considered a parallel lineage.
The Prosauropoda were originally defined as the early, bipedal, Triassic ancestors of the great sauropod dinosaurs. More recently, cladistic analysis suggests that rather than being ancestral to sauropods, prosauropods were a sister clade. Recent studies of the genus Massospondylus reveal that the Prosauropoda is indeed monophyletic. This group is a sister group to the Sauropoda, not an ancestral group.
The problem however lies in what genera are considered prosauropods. More recently, on the basis of studies of early sauropodomorphs Adam Yates proposed a cladogram in which the primitive genera Saturnalia, Thecodontosaurus, and Efraasia (basically, a paraphyletic Thecodontosauridae) represent basal outgroups prior to the Prosauropod-Sauropod split. Anchisaurus (despite its classic "prosauropod" build) is now recognised as the most primitive sauropod. The melanorosaurs and blikanasaurs are very early members of the sauropod line.
How about that.
Does anyone have a screenshot?
</osnews>
Seriously though, a picture would be nice.
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
perfect for stem cell research.
Kinda wierd how this story goes hand in hand w/ today's big stem cell announcement ;)..
_Vishal www.squad9.com
...they have cracked the mystery of Dinosaur development.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Elephants grow from tiny embryos into huge animals, too...
Considering that modern birds are almost all nurturers of their young, it stands to reason that dinosaurs, the precursors to birds, would also have exhibited nurturing behaviors towards their hatchlings. On the other hand, reptiles, the other modern descendant of the dinosaurs by and large do not nurture their young, some, like the green sea turtle, lay their eggs in the sand and never see the babies again.
I wonder how much nurturing had a part in the evolution of birds and reptiles. Whether the nurturing behavior in early birdlike dinosaurs led to the modern birds of today. And whether the non-nurturing behavior of other dinosaurs led to the separate branch which is populated by modern-day reptiles.
But the question on everyone's mind is, how tasty are those embryos?
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
from the NY Times
you type in your question into the little searchbox, and out come 50 billion answers.
from http://www.caspercollege.edu/tate/faq_24.htm
"We can get an idea of how old dinosaur bones are relative to each other by using the principles of stratigraphy. Here's an example: The bones of Deinonychus are found in the Cloverly Formation. In another formation, the Thermopolis Shale, we find the bones of a different dinosaur, Nodosaurus. Whenever the two formations are found in the same area, the Thermopolis Shale is always on top of the Cloverly. The principle of superposition states that whenever one formation is found on top of the other, the one on top is the younger (you can see the same principle at work in your own bedroom - the shirt that you dropped on the floor just last night is going to be on top of the socks that you dropped on the floor last Tuesday morning.) So we know that Nodosaurus lived after Deinonychus."
Elephant ebryo and an elephant with an odd, second trunk. Where's this guy been today? =]
So how did these big lizards find dates? Did they have dino singles bars where the cool raptors could hook up with the sexy bar-pters?
Did they hop right into bed on the first night, or did the lady lizards play hard to get?
Were there geekosaurs that wore glasses, didn't bathe, and acted smugly towards "those muscleheaded breeders"?
http://www.news24.com/News24/Technology/News/0,,2- 13-1443_1745931,00.html
Why did they have to crack it open now? We don't have the neccessary technology to clone the embryos or even be able to save all the DNA information so that we can recreate the dinosaur.
They should have kept it for the future when we have better technology to create the dinosaur.
I bet they taste like chicken.
"This is a UNIX system! I know this!"
...they could find an effective cure to saurian Alzheimer's disease. Provided that some prehistoric government doesn't intervene in the name of so-called morality. Wait...where have I heard this before?
And apocalypse should have occurred about five years ago. Go figure.
Anyone else see the resemblance to Jurassic Park? Will I be able to visit an island populated by cloned dinosaurs in the near future?
Beware the Wrath of God!
9/11 Eyewitnesses to Explosive WTC Demolition 1 of 2
Even if scientists cannot extract the entire genetic code of dinosaurs from the blood samples, the scientists could make educated guesses. They then complete what, in their opinion, is the genetic code of a particular dinosaur. They then inject this code into a de-nuclearized egg of, say, a Komodo lizard to create a cloned embryo. Scientists can then use the embryonic fossilized bones to verify whether their guess is accurate. The scientists simply compare the fossilized bones with the bones of the developing embryo. If they are an exact match, then the scientists have likely cloned the genetic code of a particular dinosaur specimen.
How would you feel to be the guy (or gal) who opened the egg? "Err, Hi, I'm Bob. This egg is 190 million years old. And I'm going to crack it open now."
And then the embryo says; "Hey! Knock it off with all that cracking and the splitting. I'm trying to get some sleep in here. Say, you wouldn't happen to have some umbilical nutrients, or maybe a little left-over pizza, would you? Because I could use some anchovies."
... and then they built the supercollider.
Reach enlightenment by worshipping the Ori, or be destroyed.
Whatever methods they use, I am plainly too lazy and tired to try and find out. However once they do find out some great soul will surely inform us here.
As is it we are still trying to figure out whether man ever went to the moon.
There's always sufficient, but not always at the right place nor for the right folks.
Part of the problem is that there are really very few points of similarity. Dinosaurs were warm-blooded, had medullary bone and laid eggs individually. None of this is true for reptiles.
The other part of the problem is that the term "Dinosaur" originated with Victorian scientists and translates loosely to "Terrible Lizard". The idea stuck, even though the fossil record simply doesn't support the theory any more.
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)
But the answer to this part seems to be that mammals and reptiles evolved largely independently and not from one another.
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)
And apocalypse should have occurred about five years ago. Go figure.
Really? Cite a biblical reference that states this date!
I had the opportunity to actually take several courses with Dr. Reisz several years ago at UTM, including my first introduction to human anatomy and physiology course. At the time, I was certainly surprised to learn about the homology that musculoskeletal systems had across species, even those separated by millions of years of evolution.
I was also farily surprised to learn about some of the more optimal "solutions" that evolution came up with, including things such as the development of the cardiovascular systems ranging from say two-chambered hearts, to four-chambered hearts.
It's also very sensible to presume that quadrapeds eventually evolved into bipeds in some dinosaur species. Of course, all we needed was proof for that assumption, and that's what this discovery was all about.
Is it possible that the species found in the egg had congenital defects or was simply too small for its developmental age? Highly unlikely in my opinion. Too many other morphological factors involved.
"Really? Cite a biblical reference that states this date!"
We're sorry, but citing facts and giving proof is the realm of science and logic. For things related to the bible, please see our section on "blind faith", or "believing things with no proof".
Thank you.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
"I asked this guy, I said, 'Come on man, Dinosaur fossils. What's the deal?'
'Dinosaur fossils? God put those there to test our faith.'
'I think God put you here to test my faith, dude.
You believe that?'
'Uh huh.'
Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God might be fuckin' with our heads? Anyone have trouble sleeping restfully with that thought in their heads?
God's running around, burrying fossils: 'Hu hu ho. We will see who believes in me now, ha HA.
Im a prankster god. I am killing me. Ho ho ho ho.'
You know, you die, you go to St. Peter, 'Did you you believe in dinosaurs?"
"Well, you know, there was fossils everywhere.' [Bill makes sound effects with his mic] KOOM Aaaahhhh.
'What are you, an idiot? God was FUCKING with you! Giant flying lizards, you moron! That's one of God's easiest jokes!' 'It seemed so plausibleeeee! Ahhhhhhhh!' Bound for the lake of fire. . . .
While I appreciate your quiant traditions, supersitions, and, you know, I on the other hand am an evolved being who deals soley with the source of light which exists in all of us, in our own minds, no middle man required. [laughs]
But anyway, I appreciate your little games and shit, you putting on the tie and going to church, a de da de da. But you know there's a LIVING GOD WHO WILL TALK DIRECTLY TO YOU. Sorry, but not too many pages of the Bible that FORGOT TO MENTION DINOSAURS!"
For more.. See:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Hicks
I think this answers your question...
Rachel: You know that little bone that thing that died out a 100 million years ago we didn't know it had? Turns out, it does!
From the article: 'The third area, he said, is the most speculative. Some of the embryos were clearly ready to hatch, he said, but they have no teeth, "and that suggests to us that some form of parental care was required ... not just protecting but active feeding." '
Speculating on whether hatchlngs were precocial or altricial based on absence of teeth is quite a stretch.
Among birds, most birds that spend most of their time on the ground walking are born precocial (feathered, able to walk and feed minutes after hatching). Birds that spend most of their time in trees and flying are altricial (naked, unable to fly, walk, or feed themselves and hence need parental nurturing fore some time).
However, coupled with other clues from the article, the altricial speculation seems more credible: "...the proportions of the limbs, neck and head suggest that as a baby and young animal this species walked on four legs, but as an adult it was able to walk on two legs some of the time." And, "...Mr. Reisz and colleagues reported that the Massospondylus hatchling was born four-legged with a relatively short tail, a horizontally held neck, long forelimbs and a huge head. As the animal matured, the neck grew faster than the rest of the body, but the forelimbs and head grew more slowly. The end result was a two-legged animal that looked very different from the four-legged embryo. Mr. Reisz suggested that the change from four- to two-legged could be a matter of balance related to the development of the animal's neck."
The long neck suggests adult animals were browsers rather than grazers. As such, young clearly could not feed except on very low-growing shrubs. On the other hand, perhaps the young grazed during development and gradually adapted to browsing. If so, it further erodes the altricial speculation.
Altricial young usually lack an ability critical to survival (e.g. flight among birds, foraging/hunting among mamallian carnivores and omnivores such as bears and chimpanzees) that involves both post-natal development and learning by minicry of the parents.
Precocial young (common in most mammalian herbivores) have essential abilities (feeding, mobility--to feed, keep up with herd, escape predators) from birth often as an adaptation to allow "following the food." It therefore seems unlikely that an herbivorous species would bear altricial young because it would tie parents to a location during post-natal development, and the copious quantities of vegetation required by such large animals would deplete immediate-area resources rather quickly.
Lack of teeth does not preclude suckling, another trait common among precocial herbivores.
My vote therefore goes for precocial.
Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
unless of course that's banned by dino-law...
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
Homer: Hmmmmm, 190 million year old embryo Hmmm (gurgling sound)
to come along and contradict.)
They're all anti-media as far as that goes. They have "the book", you should learn "the book" by heart, but only to recite, not to interpret, that's a job for the priesthood.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Ths certainly isn't what I expected to see with a subject line like "Dating Methods" on /.
I was looking foward to an FAQ - The inept leading the blind.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
We're sorry, but citing facts and giving proof is the realm of science and logic. For things related to the bible, please see our section on "blind faith", or "believing things with no proof".
We're sorry, but for things related to having
a sense of humor, please see our section on
'sarcasm' or 'getting a clue'.
Smite thee with a clue stick.
Under "believing things with no proof", please see my article:
The Bible: A Geek's Guide to Bug-Smashing
"blind faith":
Circular Logic a.k.a. Why Religion Makes my Head Hurt
there were a LOT more "reasons" and holes. They keep falling. In another 100 years, I think that almost all will be gone.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Now, what is the barrier to take a cell of this thing and make a clone?
It's fortunate that this dinosaur embryo is Canadian. If it were found in the U.S, then GWB and Rick Santorum would have prevented cracking open the egg on moral grounds. Unless of course they suspected that there were weapons of mass destruction hidden in the egg, then morality is no longer a factor.