#non-neornithine dinosaurs

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

Is there a word for the extinct dinosaurs (the ones who are not birds)?

bold of you to assume any dinosaurs are not birds

if you want to talk about dinosaurs that were around in the Mesozoic, say Mesozoic Dinosaurs

if you want to talk about "classical" dinosaurs, say Nonavian Dinosaurs

if you want to talk about the dinosaurs that did not make it through to the Cenozoic, say Non-Neornithine Dinosaurs

[noddytheornithopod]

Top six subjects you know nothing about

(From here) 

Okay, this is an interesting one. I’ll define this as stuff that sounds interesting but have little to no knowledge on, just so we’re all clear, and not something like a subject I’m not into but know enough about.

Music composition - love seeing how music is written but I know nothing about it. IDK if it’s something I’d want to do, but it would be great to see how everything works.

Leftist theory - my attention span can’t be bothered to read the theory of so many old dead people, even if I’d like to. I know basics, but if we’re encouraged to read it obviously there’s gotta be more to it I still don’t know lol.

Non-Western history - I would love to learn more about less recent history outside Western society. Like, the whole world is way bigger than just Western society, and it would be great to know more than just scattered facts. Like, before the 20th century and ESPECIALLY pre-colonial times, my knowledge gets spottier the further back you go.

Non-English media - again, something I’d like to know more about but have little knowledge on. I originally put down non-Western, but like even European stuff I don’t have as much familiarity with. Seeing animation from Eastern Bloc Europe for example was fascinating (”The Hand” is a great short film, if you like Steven Universe you’ll definitely see how it’s an influence), and of course my fascination with Danganronpa makes me curious to know more non-Anglo stuff, Japanese, Asian or otherwise. Of course I only know English so it would have to be translated media for me, but still seeing stuff beyond that is something I’d love to do one day.

Modern birds - for tetrapods, I find it weird how birds caught my attention the least unless they really stood out, which is ironic given they’re, y’know, the only living dinosaurs. Like, there ARE some groups I have some knowledge about, but it’s usually because there’s something exceptional or unusual about them (eg intelligence in corvids, ratites and how they’re more basal, a couple island birds, etc). It’s a shame, because there’s thousands of species, I think at least twice as many as mammals last I heard. For some weird reason, it’s easier to read about neornithines when they’re extinct though (though again it’s usually because it’s a more exceptional group or species).

Fish - I’m gonna pull another one of these and say that like birds, even if there are a few standout fish I know about, there’s so much diversity in species yet I know very little. Of course, “fish” is pretty much just a term for any non-tetrapod vertebrate, but the point still stands, there’s so many groups I know nothing about yet seem fascinating nonetheless. I know a bit more about sharks and sarcopterygians (and of course any standout extinct groups and species, eg placoderms, Xiphactinus, Rhizodonts, etc), but even there there’s pretty big gaps in my knowledge. Anyway, you’re lucky I only thought of these last two otherwise this whole list would be animal groups. :P

[jurassicsunsets]

any idea from which specific dinosaurs modern birds came to be?

Yes. Birds are neornithines, euornithines, ornithothoracens, pygostylians, avebrevicaudans, euavialans, avialans, averaptorans, paravians, pennaraptors, maniraptors, maniraptoriforms, tyrannoraptors, coelurosaurs, avetheropods, orionodens, tetenurans, averostrans, neotheropods, theropods, and saurischians. Their closest non-avialan relatives are dromaeosaurs and troodontids.

[albertonykus]

Would endothermic sauropods overheat? I know Holtz has mentioned big mammals in warm climates as evidence that they wouldn't, but Prothero (2013) notes that most sauropods were far larger than any terrestrial mammal.

To my knowledge no one has done a really up to date study modeling this with all the relevant parameters, so it’s not really something we can say with much certainty. (I know Scott Hartman is doing some research of this nature with Triassic animals, which I talked to him about at the last two SVPs. It’s very interesting!)

That being said, it’s important to remember when considering the physiology of extinct animals that not all endotherms are the same. All endothermy means is the ability to generate one’s body heat internally. Most birds maintain body temperatures higher than ours, whereas xenarthrans maintain lower body temperatures. Additionally, there are animals that are only endothermic some of the time, such as tegus. What goes for mammals may not have been true for non-neornithine dinosaurs, if the latter were endothermic (which they probably to some extent were).

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

The talk about dinosaurs being maybe kosher made me imagine the entire town getting invited to the world's largest BBQ outside a synagogue and getting a pulled sauropod sandwich

I mean, if Non-Neornithine dinosaurs had made it to the present day, who knows what the kosher laws would be like in terms of clean and unclean animals. They're all based on the food the early Israelites had access to at the time, after all.

Then again, Elephants aren't kosher, so probably not?

Giraffes are, though... hmm...

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

I'm VERY new to learning about dinosaurs so please forgive me for probably not using the correct terminology (I couldn't find the post you made/reblogged that clarified which worda to use when), but IRT the previous Halloween anon, do you have any spooky facts about extinct, non-avian dinosaurs? (Idk the right terms to get more specific but I'm thinking of the kind people generally think of when they think "dinosaurs" that have been popularized in media, like Jurassic Park-style dinos.) Birds/living dinos are super cool but I'm personally really interested in the older kind- I believe I got "antiquarian" for your taste in dinos uquiz, haha.

The problem with the Extremely Dead is that we don't know much about them

I know tons of facts about Non-Avialan dinosaurs. Tons. None that I would call "spooky".

Frankly, isn't the fact that they are so dead their bones have been transformed into rocks spooky enough?

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

I know it's such a highly popular dinosaur but are they any interesting facts about the Tyrannosaurus Rex that isn't well known? I still love the Rexes wishing more dinosaur media treated it in the same way nature documentaries treat modern carnivores as animals just trying to surive and not just ripping up every living thing they encounter.

T. rex is actually one of the best studied (non-neornithine) dinosaurs ever, period. In fact, writing all the interesting facts we know about it is... more work than I particularly want to do right now, lol.

some things off the top of my head:

it wasn't built for moving fast in terms of miles per hour or whatever, but they were built for extreme cursoriality in other ways. Essentially, T. rex and its relatives were built for turning, quickly, on a dime. And they moved faster than the herbivores they were chasing. So these were animals built for short, surprise attacks on their prey. And ballet dancing

T. rex had the best sense of smell... ever. Like, ever ever. And its eyesight and hearing were good too. It had a fairly large brain for where it is in the dinosaur family tree, as well. Essentially, this was a dinosaur built to take in as much sensory info as possible, to pinpoint prey as quickly as possible.

T. rex aged kind of like people! IE, the process of going from infant -> sexually and skeletally mature adult takes about the same amount of time, with similar stages happening at similar times. So, T. rex had an awkward teenage phase! They were tall, but very skinny and lanky, and many researchers think that different ages of Tyrannosaurus filled different niches, with bigger rexes eating larger prey and the teens eating smaller faster dinosaurs.

That said, there's lots of evidence for familial groups and social life in Tyrannosaurs, based on fossilization patterns and footprint records. So it's very likely they took care of their young, and hunted in groups.

did they have feathers? no idea. they're big enough to have lost them for thermoregulation like many other dinosaurs did. they are in a group that have some big feathered animals, though, like Yutyrannus. Maybe babies had feathers and adults lost them. Maybe adults kept them some places and not others. We do know that there are parts of the Tyrannosaurus adult body that had scales. Beyond that - whether feathers were present too, or not - we don't know.

it was not skeletally sexually dimorphic. however, we do know that some tyrannosaurs were female because the fossilized when they were in the process of making eggs. during this process, dinosaurs - including living birds - deposit extra tissue in their bones called medullary bone. This tissue stores calcium to make eggshells from later. It's only present in actively ovulating female dinosaurs. So, we know some of our fossils were making eggs when they died!

the arms were small, yeah, but they were VERY strong. these weren't vestigial organs, yet, though their shortness was mainly due to the strengthening of the neck muscles. T. rex interacted with the world primarily with its head and jaws. The arms would have been helpful with holding on during mating, or possibly for display.

it wasn't a scavenger. it was an opportunist. No predators today avoid easy meals - life is all about minimizing energy spent to get more energy. But obligate scavengers tend to be flying organisms, ones that can cover huge distances, in order to find enough carrion. T. rex was definitely a predator, and had to hunt occasionally, but wouldn't turn up its nose at an easy meal.

T. rex lived all over western north america, right at the end of the age of dinosaurs. It was one of the most successful nonavian dinosaurs, ever, and would probably not have gone extinct so quickly if there hadn't been an asteroid.

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

Fossil Novembirb 2: The Survivors

The End-Cretaceous Extinction was one of the most devastating - and tragic - events on our planet.

In the blink of an eye, the world changed from a thriving biosphere to a decimated one. The asteroid caused worldwide wildfires, tsunamis, and the dramatic release of particles into the air that blocked out the sun.

Nothing over 25 kg could survive, because they had nowhere to hide from the devastation. Anything under that limit had to have somewhere to hide - water or burrowing worked best - and something to eat, which was easier said than done. When the plants can't eat, nothing can.

And yet, life survived - not just life, but dinosaurs themselves!

Conflicto, by @otussketching

In fact, one of the first fossils we have from the Cenozoic is Conflicto, a Presbyornithid - like "Styginetta" and Teviornis yesterday! - from Antarctica

Why these dinosaurs, and no others?

They had beaks, which would have helped them to access available food sources such as seeds and spores (plant material in a protective casing)

They did not live in trees, but usually near or with water - perfect places to hide

They were powerful fliers, allowing them to escape the flames and whatever else they needed to

Other than that? Random chance.

Much of the evolution of life on this planet is down to Sheer Dumb Luck

Tsidiiyazhi by Sean Murtha

What happened next was truly remarkable: an adaptive radiation of dinosaurs the likes of which is rarely seen

With all of those newly opened niches, Neornithines adapted quickly, so quickly we can't actually figure out how different major groups of Neoavians - aka, most birds - actually relate to one another.

After all, there was just *so much* free real estate!

Qianshanornis by @alphynix

In fact, many of these dinosaurs evolved right back into niches that their ancestors had famously lived in - penguins show up so quickly that we're giving marine birds their own day, replacing the now-lost Hesperornithines; Tsidiiyazhi and others quickly replaced the empty tree-bird niches left behind by the lost Enantiornithines; and raptors show up quickly too, already reminiscent of the lost Dromaeosaurs.

Qianshanornis, a mysterious raptor from China, had sickle claws just like its lost bretheren! In fact, it looks like it might be a Cariamiform, a group of dinosaurs including living Seriemas and the extinct Terror Birds, which often have sickle claws like Dromaeosaurs did!

Don't fix what isn't broken, I guess!

Australornis by @thewoodparable

Non-Neoavians diversified too, with fowl doing just fine across the boundary - Presbyornithids like Conflicto, as well as mysterious forms like Australornis.

Palaeognaths remain weirdly absent, but don't worry - the earilest ones will show up before the Paleocene epoch is done!

The Cenozoic begins with the Paleogene Period, which has the first epoch of the Paleocene - this was a climatic quagmire, with frequent fluctuations at the beginning before a dramatic rise in temperatures at the end. This climate confusion would affect bird evolution greatly - and lead to the diversification of many kinds, some of which we still have today!

Sources:

Ksepka, D. T., T. A. Stidham, T. E. Williamson. 2017. Early Paleocene landbird supports rapid phylogenetic and morphological diversification of crown birds after the K-PG mass extinction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 114 (30): 8047 - 8052.

Mayr, 2022. Paleogene Fossil Birds, 2nd Edition. Springer Cham.

Mayr, 2017. Avian Evolution: The Fossil Record of Birds and its Paleobiological Significance (TOPA Topics in Paleobiology). Wiley Blackwell.

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

DMM ROUND THREE MASTER POST

Ornithischians:

Changmiania vs Bisticeratops

Jakapil vs Spicomellus

Sauropodomorphs:

Mbiresaurus vs Kholumalumo

Bajadasaurus vs Australotitan

Non-neornithine Theropods:

Berthasaura vs Maip

Ambopteryx vs Caihong

Neornithes (Birds):

Vorombe vs Annakacygna

Cryptogyps vs Heracles

REBLOG! SHARE! DEBATE!

IT'S DINOSAUR MARCH MADNESS!!!

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

Let's look at this with a handful of dinosaurs:

Microraptor

Anchiornis

Vegavis

Titanis

Secretarybird

"Nonavi(la)an Dinosaur": Includes Microraptor. Does not include the rest.

"Non-Neornithine Dinosaur": Includes Microraptor and Anchiornis.

"Mesozoic Dinosaur": Includes Microraptor, Anchiornis, and Vegavis

"Extinct Dinosaur": Includes Microraptor, Anchiornis, Vegavis, and Titanis

"Living Dinosaur": Includes Secretarybird

"Neornithine Dinosaur": Includes Vegavis, Titanis, and Secretarybird

"Cenozoic Dinosaur": Includes Titanis and Secretarybird

"Avia(la)n Dinosaur": Includes Anchiornis, Vegavis, Titanis, Secretarybird

"Dinosaur that looks like a bird": literally all five of them

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

Are geese (and other long neck birds) related to brontosauruses? Please say yes

All modern birds (Neornithines) are equally related to Non-Neornithine dinosaurs

but, geese and long necked birds have long necks similar to sauropods, in that they increase the vertebral count and have true long necks

meanwhile, giraffes don't actually have long necks

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

its like dinosaur march madness but quicker!

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

So would non avian dinosaurs if alive still, be studied under herpetology or ornithology?? Also isn't ornithology just a type of herpetology since birds are reptiles ?? Sorry this is so stupid idk who else to ask

Well that’s the question right

All these fields were invented before we knew about phylogenetic relationships or even evolution

And they are mammal biased - we grouped amphibians and nonavian reptiles because they were cold blooded, even though turns out mammals and reptiles are equally close to amphibians (ie not that close)

In a world where non-Neornithine dinosaurs persisted, our conception of EVERYTHING would be different

So these groups would have been defined differently to begin with

Like, the right answer is Ornithology… but who knows?

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

DMM ROUND FOUR MASTERPOST

ORNITHISCHIAN FINAL MATCHUP:

Changmiania vs Jakapil

SAUROPODOMORPH FINAL MATCHUP:

Kholumolumo vs Bajadasaurus

NON-NEORNITHINE THEROPOD FINAL MATCHUP:

Berthasaura vs Caihong

NEORNITHINE FINAL MATCHUP:

Vorombe vs Heracles

REBLOG! SHARE! DEBATE!

IT'S DINOSAUR MARCH MADNESS!

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

All the "birds are dinosaurs" deniers got me thinking:

Is there a specific word to refer to dinosaurs as common non scientific perception defines them??? Like, everything I can think of is either too specific (ie 'jurassic period dinosaurs') or just. "Extinct/prehistorical dinosaurs" or something like that, and that's just... eh. "Extinct" is at least kinda funny because it includes ivory billed woodpeckers but not pileated woodpeckers lol

Sometimes when I speak about dinosaurs to friends and stuff (and what that one person who was like "I want to see a dinosaur and it makes me sad that I can't!" person was probably getting at) I want to specifically refer to the sorts of species that are old enough to be fossils, you know? Including the old avian dinosaurs! :)

Apologies if you've answered this sort of ask before! But since I don't know the word I cannot search your blog for it lol. Thank you in advance, I love seeing you on my dash and learning things!

so there's a few different things you could mean depending on the situation.

here's the thing:

what's a bird, to you?

if you want the smallest group you can pick, ie the clade that consists of all the birds of today and nothing else, then you mean

"non-neornithine dinosaur"

aka

dinosaurs that aren't in Neornithes, which is that smallest possible group

so if you want to say "nonavian dinosaur" (aka, a dinosaur that isn't a "bird") you have to know what you're saying

bc there is also "nonavialan dinosaur", that is often just "nonavian dinosaur", aka the group of dinosaurs that have traditionally been considered as such exclusive of things that sometimes got put with birds instead

aka it includes Velociraptor but not Archaeopteryx

but the difference between the two is honestly miniscule at this point and things jump around a lot. many scientists do not think that's how we should define bird versus "classical dinosaur"

hence non-neornithine, aka neornithes being just the dinosaurs that survived the end-cretaceous extinction (most likely don't worry about it) and into the cenozoic, and non-neornithine dinosaurs being all that went extinct

being the most exact term for what you're looking for

you also could just go simple and do "classical dinosaurs"

but most often you'll see "nonavian dinosaur" which usually means, in practical parlance, non-neornithine dinosaur, or maybe non-avialan. sometimes non-pygostylian if they want to be contrarian, even non-maniraptor(iform?) if they want to be hipster

it's a fun time

what is a bird, indeed

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

So next year's DMM is going to be Permian Madness, which we've promised for literally ages

I'm just a curious bean who wants to get a feel for whether these other ideas have support?

So here are some other "dinosaur" (I recognize permian march madness will not have a single dinosaur) march madness ideas I have. Remember I'm just looking for interest, so vote for whatever you're curious about, not necessarily what you'd like to "win" or what have you since there are no winners here, only losers

(ie things that get voted very little probably won't happen)

yeah I probably can come up with more that's why I need y'all to help me narrow it down

also we ARE open to more period-madnesses a la triassic and permian, that's just a whole other question