Dinosaur feathers found preserved in amber

Today we have flying lizards, flying snakes. They don't have feathers.
However, we find feathers and assume they belong to a dinosaur.

Please substitute the word "pig" for dinosaur.

When pigs fly.

Originally posted by warsight
The idea of dino's changed so much in my life time. they where cold blooded slow lizards to very large active birds. makes me wonder what they really looked like though of a plucked turkey and the feathered one look so different

Again, this is what I am talking about. Complete misinformation.

No paleontologist believes that all dinosaurs were large active birds.

As posted earlier by Nic, only about 20 theropod specimens discovered so far had feathers, and it didn't even cover their whole body it typically is in only a few limited places, examples : head , neck, etc. Only a few rare examples have majority cover in feathers (within theropoda suborder), and that's still debatable. (Raptors and Deinonychus are known as theropods, and were mostly feather covered very likely).

Nic ... you said no one was saying that but it's clear that many, many people believe this without doing any research.

I blame the media, it's a 'fad' now-a-days to depict most dinosaurs as 100% feathered, and it's 100% inaccurate.

Originally posted by Jim Scott
Today we have flying lizards, flying snakes. They don't have feathers.
However, we find feathers and assume they belong to a dinosaur.

Correct.

However I want to point out that there are clear examples of transitional reptile - to - bird fossils.

Please review the last few pages of this thread, and read the article in the OP in depth.

The few species that did have feathers (in the theropod suborder) it was limited and only a few feathers that were actually present. Most theropod species had no feathers at all, at least according to all of the evidence I have reviewed.

Originally posted by warsight
The idea of dino's changed so much in my life time. they where cold blooded slow lizards to very large active birds. makes me wonder what they really looked like though of a plucked turkey and the feathered one look so different

I couldn't agree with you more. When I was growing up, all dinosaurs were green skinned and looked like lizards.

Today, paleontologists are rethinking what dinosaurs looked like. They now have color, either for camouflage, warning displays or for mating. This apples to not only feathered dinosaurs. Below are some examples taken mostly from National Geographic:

Another tidbit, the "raptor" in Jurassic Park was entirely inaccurate because it was not a velociraptor at all.

It was actually Deinonychus.

Also check out the Velociraptor wiki for comparison.

Velociraptor are well-known for their role as vicious and cunning killers in the 1990 novel Jurassic Park by Michael Crichton and its 1993 film adaptation, directed by Steven Spielberg, in which they served as the main antagonists. The "raptors" portrayed in Jurassic Park were modeled after a larger relative, Deinonychus, which Gregory Paul at the time called Velociraptor antirrhopus.[3] The paleontologists in the film and the novel excavate a so-called Velociraptor skeleton in Montana, far from the central Asian range of Velociraptor but well within the range of Deinonychus. A character in Crichton's novel also states that "…Deinonychus is now considered one of the velociraptors", indicating that Crichton used Paul's taxonomy, though the "raptors" in the novel are referred to as V. mongoliensis.

Maniraptora

Maniraptora ("hand snatchers") is a clade of coelurosaurian dinosaurs which includes the birds and the dinosaurs that were more closely related to them than to Ornithomimus velox. It contains the major subgroups Avialae, Deinonychosauria, Oviraptorosauria and Therizinosauria. Ornitholestes and the Alvarezsauroidea are also often included. Together with the next closest sister group, the Ornithomimosauria, Maniraptora comprises the more inclusive clade Maniraptoriformes. Maniraptorans first appear in the fossil record during the Jurassic Period (see Eshanosaurus), and are regarded as surviving today as about 10,000 species of living birds.

reply to post by Nicolas Flamel


I don't know when you grew up, but when I was a kid in the 1980's (I am 30 now), I had all kinds of expensive color books on dinosaurs with tons of very detailed drawings.

They were all colored differently, etc.

And I remember specifically that Archaeopteryx was shown being fully feathered as is depicted today, 25 or so years later.

The wiki even states that this specimen was known as being feathered since over 100 years ago.

Since the late 19th century, it has been generally accepted by palaeontologists, and celebrated in lay reference works, as being the oldest known bird (more precisely, a close relative of the direct ancestor of modern birds), although there have been occasional dissenters in the research community.

The dissent is over the linage rather than the fact it was feathered.

Here is a new species discovered which could be a transitional example between typical theropods and the more bird-like types such as Archaeopterix.
Xiaotingia

Xiaotingia is an extinct genus of Archaeopteryx-like theropod dinosaur from early Late Jurassic deposits of western Liaoning, China.

A cladistic analysis by Xu et al. showed that Xiaotingia formed a clade with Archaeopteryx, the Dromaeosauridae and the Troodontidae to the exclusion of other forms traditionally seen as birds.

A "clade" is a family linage or family tree.

reply to post by muzzleflash


One thing I haven't discussed yet is the evolution of feathers themselves. Even feathered dinosaurs may not have had "modern" feathers. Feathers evolved too, probably starting for protection from physical or weather damage and evolving into modern feathers:



Link

reply to post by muzzleflash


Yep, I'm a little older. I got a bag full of dinosaurs all the same green color.

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

One thing I haven't discussed yet is the evolution of feathers themselves. Even feathered dinosaurs may not have had "modern" feathers. Feathers evolved too, probably starting for protection from physical or weather damage and evolving into modern feathers:

Link

Good post.

I will add to your link with another one.

Protofeathers and feather diversity - Oxford Journals

Oh and also, here is another interesting example of the transition, the Sinocalliopteryx

Like many other theropods of the Yixian Formation, Sinocalliopteryx was preserved with "protofeathers," simple filamentous integument (structures covering the skin), very similar to that found in Sinosauropteryx. The integument of Sinocalliopteryx differ in length across the body, with the longest protofeathers covering the hips, base of the tail, and back of the thighs. These longest protofeathers measured up to 10 centimeters (4 in) in length. Interestingly, protofeathers were also found on the metatarsus (upper part of the foot)

And this interesting specimen Huaxiagnathus is about half to two-thirds covered in proto-feathers.

Interesting how many of these examples originate from Asia.

All of these examples are typically from the late Jurassic to throughout the Cretaceous periods (the later half of the overall Mesozoic era).
Mesozoic Era

Very interesting reading there. Thought I'd just toss it in since that's what I am reading, lol.

With Archaeopteryx having fully "evolved" feathers, protofeathers seems to be something different than the precursor. I think they're making claims that don't line up with what we're actually seeing.

And then sadly (or happily, whichever way you want to look at it), the Cenozoic era ushered in a new paradigm due to the mass extinction events.

The Cenozoic Era ( /ˌsɛnəˈzoʊ.ɨk/ or /ˌsiːnəˈzoʊ.ɨk/; also Cænozoic or Cainozoic; meaning "new life", from Greek καινός kainos "new", and ζωή zoe "life") is the current and most recent of the three Phanerozoic geological eras and covers the period from 65.5 mya to the present. It is marked by the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event at the end of the Cretaceous that saw the demise of the last non-avian dinosaurs and the end of the Mesozoic Era. The Cenozoic Era is ongoing.

The Cenozoic era began as the Cretaceous period ended.(Which is the end of the Mesozoic era).
As pointed out above, the C-T extinction event was the end of all the non-feathered dinosaurs.

*Unless of course reports of Loch Ness, Champ, Mokele, etc, are true than a few breeding populations would have to have survived. This is highly possible as seen in the example of Coelacanths of which there are surviving examples to this day.*

Coelacanths ( /ˈsiːləkænθ/, adaptation of Modern Latin Cœlacanthus "hollow spine", from Greek κοῖλ-ος koilos "hollow" + ἄκανθ-α akantha "spine", referring to the hollow caudal fin rays of the first fossil specimen described and named by Agassiz in 1839[1]) are members of an order of fish that includes the oldest living lineage of Sarcopterygii (lobe-finned fish + tetrapods) known to date.

Coelacanths were thought to have gone extinct in the Late Cretaceous, but were rediscovered in 1938 off the coast of South Africa.[2] Latimeria chalumnae and the Latimeria menadoensis are the only two living coelacanth species and are found along the coastlines of the Indian Ocean.[3] The coelacanth has been nicknamed a “living fossil”, because its fossils were found long before the actual discovery of a live specimen.[1] The coelacanth is thought to have first evolved approximately 400 million years ago.[4]

It was thought to have went extinct around the C-T extinction event at the end of the Cretaceous era, however we know this isn't true these days.

400 million years ago is labeled as part of the Paleozoic Era, which directly precedes the Mesozoic.
To be precise this would be during the Devonian period within the Paleozoic Era.

Originally posted by addygrace
With Archaeopteryx having fully "evolved" feathers, protofeathers seems to be something different than the precursor. I think they're making claims that don't line up with what we're actually seeing.

Not all dinosaurs evolved feathers for flying. Some retained less advanced feathers because they didn't fly and were still successful without them. Some were covered with what some call "fuzz".

Originally posted by addygrace
With Archaeopteryx having fully "evolved" feathers, protofeathers seems to be something different than the precursor. I think they're making claims that don't line up with what we're actually seeing.

That is currently in dispute, as was pointed out earlier actually, it would have been easy to miss though so I will go find the links again and repost them.

I will edit this post in a minute to update it with the link. Brb.

Got the link, it's from a Very recent LA Times article.

Archaeopteryx dispute

The new report, authored by Xing Xu, a paleontologist at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing, and colleagues, described the anatomy of a newly found fossil dubbed Xiaotingia zhengi, a two-pound creature with feathers, sharp claws, fewer than 10 teeth and a small shallow snout like Archaeopteryx. It may have lived in northeastern China's Liaoning province during the late Jurassic period, the authors reported online Wednesday in the journal Nature.

Here is the link for Xiaotingia zhengi.

It is very interesting.

The famous winged and feathered fossil Archaeopteryx has been knocked off its perch as the oldest known bird, according to new research. Instead, it was most likely a dinosaur.

It was "bird-like".

reply to post by muzzleflash

Protofeathers and feather diversity - Oxford Journals

Interesting article. It makes me wonder why some dinosaurs kept scales. But then again if they weren't selected against, scales would have been just fine for them.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Yeah, I read about this. Xing Xu is trying to claim the fossil he found may be the earliest animal on the bird lineage. He is getting some resistance from other paleontologists. The dust should settle in a decade or so

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Protofeathers and feather diversity - Oxford Journals

Interesting article. It makes me wonder why some dinosaurs kept scales. But then again if they weren't selected against, scales would have been just fine for them.

The diversity of creatures in the past makes the present look dull indeed. Of course we have incredibly diversity today but if we think of hundreds of millions of years of time, we will be looking at potentially billions of separate species, and we have only seen 1% of the species that existed back then.

I can't imagine what lies in store for us with the next discoveries that we will see over the next few decades, it's really exiting I must admit!


Although it was discovered a few years before I was born, I remember how amazed and delighted I was to find out about the famous "Supersaurus" . It is commonly called the Ultrasauros, not to be confused with the Asian find called "Ultrasaurus". Ultrasaurus wiki

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Yeah, I read about this. Xing Xu is trying to claim the fossil he found may be the earliest animal on the bird lineage. He is getting some resistance from other paleontologists. The dust should settle in a decade or so

By then we will probably find something that predates both of them and blows all of our assumptions out of the water.

And I gotta tell you, I love having my assumptions crushed, I think I have become addicted to it. (I am an ATS addict as well because this place tends to crush assumptions hehe).

One more little fun tidbit before I get working (I really should be working right now! haha).

Possibly (?) the largest dinosaur ever, Amphicoelias.
But there is a major problem with this particular example.

Amphicoelias ( /ˌæmfɨˈsiːliəs/, meaning 'biconcave', from the Greek αμφι, amphi: "on both sides", and κοιλος, koilos: "hollow, concave") is a genus of herbivorous sauropod dinosaur that includes what may be the largest dinosaur ever discovered, A. fragillimus. Based on surviving descriptions of a single fossil bone, A. fragillimus may have been the longest known vertebrate at 40 to 60 metres (130 to 200 ft) in length, and may have had a mass of up to 122 metric tons (135 short tons). However, because the only fossil remains were lost at some point after being studied and described in the 1870s, evidence survives only in drawings and field notes. Amphicoelias is present in stratigraphic zone 6 of the Morrison Formation.[1]

Gah! I hate losing things, especially one of the most valuable dinosaur finds ever!
Hope they find another specimen sometime, especially a full skeleton.

Up to 200ft tall? Awesome to the max!

Sorry for the slight off-topic there, just thought it would be cool to share with anyone reading this far.

The gigantic bones attributed to A. fragillimus have often been ignored in summaries of the largest dinosaurs partly because, according to various subsequent reports, the whereabouts of both the vertebra and the femur are unknown, and all attempts to locate them have failed.[8][10] Carpenter, in 2006, presented a possible scenario for the disappearance of the A. fragillimus specimens. As Cope noted in his description, the neural arch bone material was very fragile, and techniques to harden and preserve fossil bone had not yet been invented (Cope's rival, paleontologist O.C. Marsh, was the first to use such chemicals, in the early 1880s). Carpenter observed that the fossil bones known from the A. fragillimus quarry would have been preserved in deeply weathered mudstone, which tends to crumble easily and fragment into small, irregular cubes. Therefore, the bone may have crumbled badly and been discarded by Cope soon after he illustrated it in rear view for his paper (Carpenter suggested that this may explain why Cope drew the vertebra in only one view, rather than from multiple angles as he did for his other discoveries).

course, in his case, the feathers were part of his riding harness.

Originally posted by spw184
LETS GET THEIR DNA AND CLONE THEM

I don't know about that. We have plenty of species already on the planet that are vanishing daily. Why recreate these when we don't really give that much of a crap about the ones we already have?