Suddenly we have plausible fossil evidence for the gargoyle cum
Chupacabra. My reason for not considering such an evolutionary path
other than extending the bat lineage was zero fossil evidence. That
just disappeared and we now have a convincing start point.
We have even retrieved reports in which this creature ha been
eyeballed. That it is part of the pterosaur lineage solves all sorts
of difficulties. Even the fur evidence conforms nicely.
Of interest is the second sketch which explains wing handling.
We already knew that there is evidence of extant pterosaurs who hunt
at night and avoid us. The large ones are able to span the globe and
have been spotted in North America.
They also represent the best and likeliest explanation for cattle
mutilation deaths.
Was there really a
vampire who fed on dinosaur blood?
Prepare to be
confronted with something scarier (and cuter) than Jurassic
Park's raptors. In the mid to late Jurassic, the world was full of
furry, flying vampire pterosaurs who fed on dino blood.
The Jeholopterus was
a small pterosaur who was found in Northeastern China. Though
originally identified as an insect-eater, an odd mystery about the
animal eventually led one researcher to suggest the creature was
actually feeding on the blood of nearby sauropods. Let's take a look
at the discovery of Jeholopterus, and what spurred great debate
over whether it was a blood-sucker.
The top image is
artist Maija Karala's interpretation of Jeholopterus.
Soaring over China in
the Jurassic
Researchers at the
Chinese Academy of Sciences published the journal article A
nearly complete articulated rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur with
exceptionally well-preserved wing membranes and "hairs"
from Inner Mongolia, Northeast China. The paper recorded the
discovery of a new pterosaur,Jeholopterus ninchengensis.
The researchers named
the pterosaur for the area of its discovery, Ningcheng County of
Inner Mongolia. The wingspan ofJeholopterus is a little less
than three feet and the pterosaur likely weighed in around five to
ten pounds - a little smaller than the average Barn Owl. Several
fibers of "hair" are seen among the wings and body in the
specimen, along with imprints from a large amount of soft tissue. The
skull of the fossil is crushed, limiting interpretation of the head.
The authors
placed Jeholopterus within the Anurognathidae group – a
group of small pterosaurs known for feeding on insects.
But Jeholopterus, unlike most pterosaurs, does not have a long
beak. This absence played into speculation
about Jeholopterus' interactions with dinosaurs.
The Vampire Theory
In the 2003
article The Chinese vampire and other overlooked pterosaur
ptreasures published in the peer-reviewed Journal of
Vertebrate Paleontology, David Peters observed a couple of
unusual features in Jeholopterus separating it from the
average Jurassic pterosaur.
Peters is not a
practicing archaeologist, but an art director and natural history
writer with several peer reviewed journal articles under his belt.
Peters did his work using a scanned and enlarged image of
the Jeholopterus fossil uncovered by the researchers at the
Chinese Academy of Sciences. Using imaging techniques and Photoshop,
Peters created tracings of theJeholopterus specimen in order to
elaborate on the soft tissue features of the pterosaur and the skull,
as the one in the fossil is crushed. It is important to note Peters
did not examine the fossil itself, only images of the fossil.
In this analysis,
Peters reconstructed the skull, observing elongated teeth
akin to like pliers, a fortified palate able Jeholopterus to
deliver a swift blow and powerful blow, a possible mechanism by which
the teeth could be locked into place after a strike. Additionally,
Peters observed a horse-like tail possibly used to swat away small
insects.
The pterosaur seemed
to have the ability to deliver a strong blow, plus it had fangs —
and a method to lock the fangs into another animal after striking.
All these features led Peters to suggest Jeholopterus latched
onto the backs of sauropods and lapped up blood from fang wounds.
Peters doesn't offer any reasons for vampiric behavior — he simply
offers it as a physiological possibility.
Backlash from the
Paleontology Community
Not all
paleontologists are fans of Peters' methods. Christopher
Bennett, a Professor at Fort Hays State University, assails Peters'
conclusions in the article Pterosaur Science or Pterosaur
Fantasy? Bennett points out that several fellow paleontologists
are unable to independently repeat the imaging techniques leading to
evidence for vampirism.
Additionally, Bennet
notes several paleontologists are uncomfortable with Peters'
separation from the fossils themselves, as Peters performs most of
his work without observing the fossils in person. The inability for
other paleontologists to reproduce Peters' findings using the same
techniques calls the vampirism into question.
Can we Prove
That Jeholopterus Slurped Vital Fluids?
Honestly, without a
living Jeholopterus to observe, we really cannot be sure of
its unique attributes. That said, I would certainly feel more
comfortable about accepting the vampireJeholopterus view if a
number of other interested parties reproduced Peters' results.
What is interesting in
this situation is the use of non-traditional imaging techniques by
someone outside of the world of traditional paleontology to inform
the world of academia, regardless of widespread acceptance. Think of
it as citizen science on an extreme level - David Peters is making
important contributions, even if he's succeeding only in rattling the
cage of the academic mainstream.
No comments:
Post a Comment