|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Nov 4, 2015 9:11:48 GMT 5
dangerousminds.net/comments/how_johnny_cash_was_nearly_killed_by_an_ostrich_in_19819:30 It's quite clear that ratites can inflict severe injury with their kicks, though not to the extent sensational new's outlets would have you believe. Ornithomimds almost certainly defended themselves in a similar manner and dromeosaurs probably also did so as well, but what about other theropods, specifically large ones? I'm not talking about giant's like tyrannosaurus or gigantosaurus since they were liable to fall and break their ribs if they tried it, but could a ceratosaurus-sized or maybe even allosaurus-sized theropod make effective use of kicks in a fight?
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Nov 4, 2015 17:14:32 GMT 5
I think even large theropods can make use of them when dealing with smaller, lower-to-the-ground creatures (e.g. an Acrocanthosaurus against Utahraptor) or anything that ends up on the appropriate level to be kicked (e.g. a theropod lowers its face down, only to get kicked), although anything above that level is obviously too out of reach.
Actually, there are some Tyrannosaurus specimens with facial pathologies that were proposed to have been caused by the pedal claws of conspecifics (I posted it in the theropod non-locomotory limb function thread and discussed it a bit on its validity). And IF they indeed lowered their faces down for some reason, I can honestly see this notion being the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 4, 2015 17:52:53 GMT 5
^There are activity-related pathologies in Allosaurus metatarsals that indicate a raptorial use of the hind limbs (as also posted in the thread mentioned above), though whether it was primarily for kicking or for grappling I’m not sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Nov 4, 2015 22:00:54 GMT 5
Hmm. I like tyrannosaurus but I have a hard time believing it could maintain its balance with just one leg. I think it's more likely that one of the trex's ended up on its back and was defending itself like a grounded bird of prey.
Then again, I think I might have a tendency to underestimate the proportional strength of large animals, so I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Nov 5, 2015 1:00:20 GMT 5
It didn't need to maintain its balance for a long time (thus leaving greater risk of losing balance) to make one swift kick/attack.
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Mar 5, 2016 8:39:28 GMT 5
I've been meaning to vent this out. People usually tend to imagine theropods as having sharp tipped, conical pedal claws as the bone cores suggest (at least for those that were non-retractable, i.e. most theropod pedal claws). I've also tended to imagine them this way, as not only do the bone cores have this shape, but it at least looks to me as if theropod footprints seem to indicate such a claw morphology in life. Likewise, there does seem to be some evidence in the form of puncture hole pathologies that the keratin sheaths likely conformed to the shape of the bone core (e.g. the Tyrannosaurus specimens with pedal claw related puncture wounds I mentioned earlier; I can't see how they could have been created if they weren't pointed).
Yet there are some reconstructions that restore default theropod pedal claws as worn and blunt, kind of as if they had hooves or the feet of ornithopods. I can see the reasoning behind this (indeed, look at extant terrestrial birds for example; the foot claws are blunt and worn in life through constant contact with the ground), but the aforementioned facts made me doubt this. Would someone like to weigh in their opinion on this?
Do note though that it probably doesn't really matter too much in any case; even modern ratites with claws that seem worn can nonetheless deliver some really nasty damage (examples shown in the OP).
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Mar 5, 2016 15:53:16 GMT 5
I guess ratite-like claws would solve most contradictions (constant contact with the ground, but still able to create some pathologies). Also, there are carnivorans with non-retractable claws (like bears) that can nonetheless inflict some damage (but they are of course not as sharp or effective as retractable ones). I really believe some middle ground between retractable and utterly blunt "herbivore claws" should solve the dilemma.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Mar 5, 2016 16:35:48 GMT 5
Not all ratite claws are necessarily that blunt actually, where they are used as weapons frequently they are downright dagger-shaped:  Of course they aren’t razor sharp, but sufficient to be described as pretty pointed. In those that are blunt, the bone core seems to reflect that shape too (looking at emu or ostrich feet, those claws that are blunt also have a flat, relatively straight phalanx). That’s because they aren’t predators, and their claws didn’t primarily evolve as weapons or means of controlling prey. On the other hand, look at another primarily terrestrial bird, the seriema:  That’s what I call raptorial, and I think its probably a better analogue for non-avian theropods in that regard. And as you noted, footprints with preserved claw marks support the presence of raptorial claws in theropods, or at least that they weren’t hoof-like. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Mar 7, 2016 8:14:16 GMT 5
How do you think the seriema manages to keep its pedal claws sharp-tipped in lieu of retractability?
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Mar 7, 2016 18:18:29 GMT 5
^The second digit’s claw is apparently carried off the ground and is used for dismembering prey.
Not sure what they do with the other claws, they are clearly still reasonably pointed, though probably not as much as the sickle-claw, which is an analogue of the similar claw found in dromaeosaurs (in fact its a shame I couldn’t find more detailed descriptions, I suspect they could provide intriguing insignt into dromaeosaur claw function).
Perhaps animals whose pedal unguals retain a predatory purpose just don’t put as much stress on them during locomotion as animals without such a function? And since locomotion is a constant factor, the natural growth of the keratin sheathes may sufficiently counteract the abrasion that does occur.
|
|
Cross
Junior Member
The biggest geek this side of the galaxy. Avatar is Dakotaraptor steini from Saurian.
Posts: 266 
|
Post by Cross on Mar 16, 2016 8:02:18 GMT 5
So would a dromaeosaurid be capable of performing a leaping forward kick like a ratite or a galliform? Dromaeosaurids seem to have very powerful femoral and tibial musculature which seems to indicate proportionately powerful hind-limbs.
Say in an anachronistic scenario where a felid were to perform a forward lunging/pounce to the front of the dromaeosaur (from the dromaeosaur's cranial/anterior perspective), would a dromaeosaur be able to jump upwards and perform a simple forward kick like an ostrich or a cassowary?
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Mar 16, 2016 15:26:20 GMT 5
The scenario is anatomically possible, but I don't see a dromaeosaurid preferring such a ninja-like response to instinctually replying to such an attack (by trying to dodge), unless the dromaeosaur has experience with such a technique.
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on May 9, 2016 6:17:14 GMT 5
Okay, so...I have a theory.
I've recently looked into The Dinosaur Heresies and according to it, tyrannosaurid foot claws were reduced compared to those of other theropods. Greg Paul echoed this statement in Predatory Dinosaurs of the World by saying that they were "greatly reduced" and that the only theropods with foot claws like theirs were the ornithomimids*, another family of highly cursorial theropods. Bakker stated that since the foot claws were reduced, so were the tendons and muscles that supported them, reducing weight at the foot and allowing the tyrannosaurs to be fleeter-footed.
I then figured that the same reduction of foot mass (from smaller claws and supporting tendons) that allowed for faster speed would also have allowed for faster, more rapid kicks. This would have been among the cursorial adaptations that made these animals both faster and have quicker limb strikes. And contrary to Bakker's deduction that tyrannosaurs would thus have "given up the attack function of...the hind...foot", I think that, if anything, the faster kicking speed would be beneficial for their use as weapons, or at least in regards to lashing out with them.
So with distal limb segments and feet that are lightened, more gracile, and don't need as much force behind them; proximal limb muscles that were anyway enormously powerful; and pointed claws (even if they're apparently blunter than those of other theropods) that would have been large in absolute terms in larger taxa, well...you end up with something that's really not to be trifled with.
Any thoughts on this?
Edit: tyrannosaurid hind foot claws do not look reduced compared to those of other theropods at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on May 9, 2016 13:42:48 GMT 5
If they were cursorial, I'd say they rather relied on few long steps than many small ones, with the former being less advantageous for a kicker than the latter.
|
|
Deathadder
Junior Member
aspiring paleontologist. theropod enthusiast.
Posts: 240
|
Post by Deathadder on May 9, 2016 15:14:03 GMT 5
How strong would a theropod kick even be?
|
|
