Predatory Dinosaurs Had Bird-like Pulmonary System

Knight-Dragon

Unhidden Dragon
Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 25, 2001
Messages
19,961
Location
Singapore
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/07/050719001803.htm

ATHENS, Ohio - What could the fierce dinosaur T. rex and a modern songbird such as the sparrow possibly have in common? Their pulmonary systems may have been more similar than scientists previously thought, according to new research from Ohio University and Harvard University.

Though some scientists have proposed that predatory dinosaurs had lungs similar to crocodiles and other reptiles, a new study published in this week's issue of the journal Nature suggests the ancient beasts boasted a much bigger, more complex system of air sacs similar to that in today's birds. The finding is one of several studies in recent years to paint a new, more avian-like portrait of meat-eaters such as T. rex: The creatures may have had feathers, incubated their eggs, grown quickly and perhaps even breathed like birds.

"What was once formally considered unique to birds was present in some form in the ancestors of birds," said Patrick O'Connor, an assistant professor of biomedical sciences at Ohio University's College of Osteopathic Medicine and lead author on the study, which was funded in part by the National Science Foundation.

O'Connor and collaborator Leon Claessens of Harvard University visited museums in New York, Berkeley, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, D.C., Berlin and London to examine the bones of ancient beasts, and also studied a 67-million-year-old dinosaur, Majungatholus atopus, that O'Connor had discovered in Madagascar as a graduate student in 1996. They compared the dinosaur skeletons with those of modern birds to draw comparisons of how the soft tissues in the dinosaurs may have been structured.

Birds long have fascinated biologists because of their unusual pulmonary system. Pulmonary air sacs prompt air to pass through the lungs twice during ventilation. This system also creates holes in the skeleton of birds, which has led to a popular notion that birds have "air in their bones," O'Connor said.

The new study, which examined how the air system invades the skeleton in areas such as the neck, chest and hips, finds similarities between the vertebral column of dinosaurs and birds that point to a common soft tissue system as the culprit. Though probably not identical to living birds, "it's nothing like the crocodile system as we know it," O'Connor said.

"The pulmonary system of meat-eating dinosaurs such as T. rex in fact shares many structural similarities with that of modern birds, which, from an engineering point of view, may possess the most efficient respiratory system of any living vertebrate inhabiting the land or sky," said Claessens, who received a Ph.D. from Harvard in organismic and evolutionary biology last month and will join the faculty at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass., this fall.

In birds, this special anatomical configuration increases the gas exchange potential within the lungs, boosting metabolism and creating warm-bloodedness. The researchers are quick to point out, however, that the new study doesn't clearly peg predatory dinosaurs as habitually warm-blooded animals. The creatures probably had a more complex strategy, falling somewhere between what scientists define as cold- and warm-blooded. It appears that these animals had the pulmonary machinery for enhanced gas exchange, O'Connor explained, which would have pushed them closer to being warm-blooded creatures.

Previous research that pointed to a more crocodilian-like pulmonary system was based on a study of two dinosaur skeletons encased in rock. O'Connor and Claessens have expanded on that research by studying a broader collection of dinosaur skeletal remains, and are the first to integrate both anatomical and functional studies of modern birds as models of how the ancient creatures' air sacs were structured.

The scientists are part of a reinvigorated movement of researchers who are examining dinosaur bones and comparing them with modern animals to learn more about the anatomy of these extinct beasts.

Additional funding for the research came from the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, the Jurassic Foundation and the S. & D. Welles Research Fund.
050719001803.jpg

The pulmonary air-sac systems of dinosaurs and birds exhibit striking similarities, including predicted regions air of sac integration into the skeleton. The air sacs act like bellows to move air through the rigid lungs. (Credit: Zina Deretsky, National Science Foundation)
 
interesting, how some people manage to publish what others already published about 5 years ago, if not longer. :rolleyes: This is scienti9fic theft at its best - the fact that theropods and most probably all sauropodomorphs had highly evolved lungs with air sacs and unidirectional flow has been taken as a given for about 5 years at the very least by the paleontological community.

MeteorPunch: you have no idea!
The pulmonary system of meat-eating dinosaurs such as T. rex in fact shares many structural similarities with that of modern birds,

actually, they are FUNCTIONALLY identical. As identical as say two cars from different manufacturers - yes they look a bit different, but both drive on 4 wheel with an internal combustion engine, a steering whell, 2 seperate seats in front and a 3-seater bench in the back etc etc etc.


If you look closely at a crocodile lung, btw, you can already see that the vascularisation and the distribution of 'bubble' size is indicative of an ability to use unidiractional flow. So the entire setup is far more ancestral than people make believe (especially the churches).
 
MeteorPunch said:
how can they know how the pulmanary systems functions when all we have are bones?

Bones are quite sufficient, thank you! :)

Why do you doubt that? Have you ever even TRIED deducing the functional mechanisms of a lung from a skeleton? If not - how do you know it doesn't work?
Spoiler :
[hint: it works fine because bones are adapted together with the surrounding tissues, thus each tissue (including bone) influences others - and from that you can gain a bunch of information about stuff that is missing].
 
There''s a lot of creatures in nature that defy the "laws." I don't think it's safe to assume anything.
 
MeteorPunch said:
There''s a lot of creatures in nature that defy the "laws." I don't think it's safe to assume anything.


erhm, show me one - just a SINGLE one


:lol:
 
I don't know exactly how to answer my own statement. It was a blanket statement meaning that there is a lot of animal behaviour and biology that is difficult or impossible to explain.

Anyway, if from species to species differences exist in bone to circulatory systems, it would seem possible for differences to exist between dinosaur and bird, so it's a big assumption to say they are the same.
 
MeteorPunch said:
I don't know exactly how to answer my own statement. It was a blanket statement meaning that there is a lot of animal behaviour and biology that is difficult or impossible to explain.
aha!
Anyway, if from species to species differences exist in bone to circulatory systems, it would seem possible for differences to exist between dinosaur and bird, so it's a big assumption to say they are the same.

May I suggest you study the issue before you make blanket statements dismissing expert opinins?

The differences are, as I explained, comparable to those between different brands of sedans between non-avian theropods and avian theropods, but are like the differences between a truck and a F1 car between e.g. hadrosaurids, crocodiles, turtles and threopods. Thus, very high similarity is a reliable indicator that the non-preserved parts were also highly similar - and functioned highly similar.
 
So basically what you're saying is that dinosaur bones are so similar to birds' bones that we can safely assume that their pulmonary systems are similar (Because pulmonary systems are similar between similar-boned species)?

That would seem to be a logical conclusion. :hmm:




...but still it is an assumption. :p
 
MeteorPunch said:
So basically what you're saying is that dinosaur bones are so similar to birds' bones that we can safely assume that their pulmonary systems are similar (Because pulmonary systems are similar between similar-boned species)?

That would seem to be a logical conclusion. :hmm:

smart guy :D



...but still it is an assumption. :p
actually, ALL is an assumption - unless you can bring me a living non-avian theropod.

but you also assume that if you plug in an applicance there will be electrons flowing when you turn it on - have you ever seen one?


:rolleyes:

the length people go to discredit science ('it is just an assumption' meaning 'I don't want it to be true' or I do not like the implications so I'll claim it is doubtfull) is shocking! :eek:
 
carlosMM said:
the length people go to discredit science is shocking! :eek:
For the record, I'm not trying to disprove science. I think what you said is logical, and probably true. It's just not common knowledge that pulmonary systems and bone structure are related.

Another question then, which was raised in the article: wouldn't there be differences because or if dino's were cold-blooded?
 
MeteorPunch said:
For the record, I'm not trying to disprove science. I think what you said is logical, and probably true. It's just not common knowledge that pulmonary systems and bone structure are related.
sorry, my rant wasn't directed at you - it is just that I have heard that sentence, with the same insistence, so often from young earth creatinists - people who refuse to ever check on things themselves and instead believe their preachers... :rolleyes:

Another question then, which was raised in the article: wouldn't there be differences because or if dino's were cold-blooded?

All dinosaurs, most probably even the last common ancestor of crocodyliomorphs and dinsoaurs (and pterosaurs, btw) were warmblooded. Ther eis no discussion possible, as they all show significant adaptation to warmbloodedness. A highly developed lung (and those of crocs are underjudged in the oft-quoted studies from around 1900) is a strong indication for a high metabolism. So this fits very nicely with all the other lines of evidence.
 
MeteorPunch said:
Where did they find a highly developed lung? Bones again? :D

complex air sac system in and around the bones, rib articulations for complex swinging motion that allows decoupling breathing from walking, extant bracket approach (least common denominator of extant relatives, if they have not independently arrived at the same construction, which will show in details, is good indicator of ancestral status).
Wuite sufficient evidence.
 
MeteorPunch said:
Bones are pretty useful. :goodjob:

you'd be surprised ;)

one thing to remember: bones are HEAVY -and the only place to really attach something so it doesn't fall to the floor - thus bones tend to NOT have an ounce of material that isn't needed (which tells an awefull lot about functional mechanics) and tend to show forms and attachment sites that indicate what the other stuff look like. And bones are living tissue, formed under stress and strain, so the actual use of the bones, be it weight bearing, be it prey holding, be it tissue attachment, will show on the bone even if it is deficient (i.e. mal-healed breaks). And that tells a lot about behaviour!
 
Back
Top Bottom