non avian dinosaur

Been thinking about middleschool ocs…..

Stella the “corviraptor” was part of a successful successful experiment to reverse engineer different birds into to non avian dinosaurs
But some of the the test subjects escape, including Stella, who is introduced to a local flock of crows by a single crow she met in her outdoor pen. However, not all is well when some of the escaped dinos turn up mysteriously dead, and a strange and terrifying creature begins haunting her dreams……

typewryter  asked:

Unrelated, I've been meaning to ask you a while: what the devil is a "synapsid"?

Synapsids are a diverse group of critters that, before the age of dinosaurs, were  the dominant land vertebrate for a while

This group include Dimetrodon, which is what my ‘sona thing is.

Synapsids however arnt extinct and are  alive and well. A group of them lived into the Mesozoic period and later not only survived the mass extinction that killed non avian dinosaurs, but thrived after….

(TLDR they are a group of vertebrates that includes mammals and their extinct relatives. Despite their reptilian appearance Dimetrodon is actually more closely related to humans then they are to any “reptile” alive today)

anonymous asked:

What is more likely to have survived the KT event in Antarctica: a non-avian dinosaur or an enantiornithe?

I don’t think we currently have any evidence of enantiornitheans in Antarctica. Although they are known from pretty much the entire rest of the world, so they probably were present there and we just haven’t found any fossils yet.

As for which could have made it through the extinction event? Enantiornitheans would probably be the better option, being birdy enough to potentially survive in the same way that a few of their avian relatives did. (Assuming avian-birds survived for reasons other than just pure luck, of course.)

But since the Cretaceous Antarctic (and southeast Australian) fauna was already well-adapted to surviving long periods of dark and cold during the polar winters, it would be the most likely place for non-avian dinosaurs to persist into the Cenozoic. This is actually a real hypothesis proposed at least as far back as 1993.

So, basically, if we’re already speculating… why not both?

Important research

Of the 55 Neopets species there are:

-30 mammals

-8 reptiles/reptilian creatures (including dragons and non avian dinosaurs)

-3 birds

-2 reptilian/mammal hybrids (skeiths and zafaras)

-2 bird-mammal hybrids

-2 amphibians

-2 fish

-2 Insects

-1 fruit

-3 miscellaneous (grundos, kikos, jubjubs)

Hi I would like to draw your attention to Cryolophosaurus

Cryolophosaurus is my favorite dinosaur (if that wasn’t obvious enough), and while I don’t necessarily expect it to win, I think it could be neat to have it get somewhere in the voting process.

-Name means “Cold crested lizard”

-Nicknamed “Elvissaurus” for it’s cool crest

-Yeah look at that neat crest honestly, it was probably used for display

-From Antarctica, the first non-avian theropod discovered from Antarctica and the second dinosaur fossil discovered there overall

-The first non-avian dinosaur actually named from Antarctica (it was named before the first dinosaur fossil discovered there, Antarctopelta, was)

-It’s jaw shape indicates it may have fed on fish

-From the early Jurassic

-One of the largest theropods of its time 


-A friend

Dino-killing asteroid could have thrust Earth into 2 years of darkness

Light-absorbing soot in the atmosphere had the potential to block photosynthesis

Tremendous amounts of soot, lofted into the air from global wildfires following a massive asteroid strike 66 million years ago, would have plunged Earth into darkness for nearly two years, new research finds.

This would have shut down photosynthesis, drastically cooled the planet, and contributed to the mass extinction that marked the end of the age of dinosaurs.

These new details about how the climate could have dramatically changed following the impact of a 10-kilometer-wide asteroid will be published Aug. 21 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The study, led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) with support from NASA and the University of Colorado Boulder, used a world-class computer model to paint a rich picture of how Earth’s conditions might have looked at the end of the Cretaceous Period, information that paleobiologists may be able to use to better understand why some species died, especially in the oceans, while others survived.

Scientists estimate that more than three-quarters of all species on Earth, including all non-avian dinosaurs, disappeared at the boundary of the Cretaceous-Paleogene periods, an event known as the K-Pg extinction. Evidence shows that the extinction occurred at the same time that a large asteroid hit Earth in what is now the Yucatán Peninsula. The collision would have triggered earthquakes, tsunamis, and even volcanic eruptions.

Scientists also calculate that the force of the impact would have launched vaporized rock high above Earth’s surface, where it would have condensed into small particles known as spherules. As the spherules fell back to Earth, they would have been heated by friction to temperatures high enough to spark global fires and broil Earth’s surface. A thin layer of spherules can be found worldwide in the geologic record.

“The extinction of many of the large animals on land could have been caused by the immediate aftermath of the impact, but animals that lived in the oceans or those that could burrow underground or slip underwater temporarily could have survived,” said NCAR scientist Charles Bardeen, who led the study. “Our study picks up the story after the initial effects – after the earthquakes and the tsunamis and the broiling.

We wanted to look at the long-term consequences of the amount of soot we think was created and what those consequences might have meant for the animals that were left.”

Other study co-authors are Rolando Garcia and Andrew Conley, both NCAR scientists, and Owen “Brian” Toon, a researcher at the University of Colorado Boulder.

A world without photosynthesis

In past studies, researchers have estimated the amount of soot that might have been produced by global wildfires by measuring soot deposits still preserved in the geologic record. For the new study, Bardeen and his colleagues used the NCAR-based Community Earth System Model (CESM) to simulate the effect of the soot on global climate going forward.

They used the most recent estimates of the amount of fine soot found in the layer of rock left after the impact (15,000 million tons), as well as larger and smaller amounts, to quantify the climate’s sensitivity to more or less extensive fires.

In the simulations, soot heated by the Sun was lofted higher and higher into the atmosphere, eventually forming a global barrier that blocked the vast majority of sunlight from reaching Earth’s surface. “At first it would have been about as dark as a moonlit night,” Toon said.

While the skies would have gradually brightened, photosynthesis would have been impossible for more than a year and a half, according to the simulations. Because many of the plants on land would have already been incinerated in the fires, the darkness would likely have had its greatest impact on phytoplankton, which underpin the ocean food chain.

The loss of these tiny organisms would have had a ripple effect through the ocean, eventually devastating many species of marine life.
The research team also found that photosynthesis would have been temporarily blocked even at much lower levels of soot. For example, in a simulation using only 5,000 million tons of soot – about a third of the best estimate from measurements – photosynthesis would still have been impossible for an entire year.

In the simulations, the loss of sunlight caused a steep decline in average temperatures at Earth’s surface, with a drop of 50 degrees Fahrenheit (28 degrees Celsius) over land and 20 degrees Fahrenheit (11 degrees Celsius) over the oceans.

While Earth’s surface cooled in the study scenarios, the atmosphere higher up in the stratosphere actually became much warmer as the soot absorbed light from the Sun. The warmer temperatures caused ozone destruction and allowed for large quantities of water vapor to be stored in the upper atmosphere. The water vapor then chemically reacted in the stratosphere to produce hydrogen compounds that led to further ozone destruction. The resulting ozone loss would have allowed damaging doses of ultraviolet light to reach Earth’s surface after the soot cleared.

The large reservoir of water in the upper atmosphere formed in the simulations also caused the layer of sunlight-blocking soot to be removed abruptly after lingering for years, a finding that surprised the research team. As the soot began to settle out of the stratosphere, the air began to cool. This cooling, in turn, caused water vapor to condense into ice particles, which washed even more soot out of the atmosphere. As a result of this feedback loop – cooling causing precipitation that caused more cooling – the thinning soot layer disappeared in just a few months.

Challenging the model

While the scientists think the new study gives a robust picture of how large injections of soot into the atmosphere can affect the climate, they also caution that the study has limitations.

For example, the simulations were run in a model of modern-day Earth, not a model representing what Earth looked like during the Cretaceous Period, when the continents were in slightly different locations. The atmosphere 66 million years ago also contained somewhat different concentrations of gases, including higher levels of carbon dioxide.

Additionally, the simulations did not try to account for volcanic eruptions or sulfur released from the Earth’s crust at the site of the asteroid impact, which would have resulted in an increase in light-reflecting sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere.

The study also challenged the limits of the computer model’s atmospheric component, known as the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM).

“An asteroid collision is a very large perturbation – not something you would normally see when modeling future climate scenarios,” Bardeen said. “So the model was not designed to handle this and, as we went along, we had to adjust the model so it could handle some of the event’s impacts, such as warming of the stratosphere by over 200 degrees Celsius.”

These improvements to WACCM could be useful for other types of studies, including modeling a “nuclear winter” scenario. Like global wildfires millions of years ago, the explosion of nuclear weapons could also inject large amounts of soot into the atmosphere, which could lead to a temporary global cooling.

“The amount of soot created by nuclear warfare would be much less than we saw during the K-Pg extinction,” Bardeen said. “But the soot would still alter the climate in similar ways, cooling the surface and heating the upper atmosphere, with potentially devastating effects.”

anonymous asked:

Explain everything scientifically wrong with the myth dinosaurs had brains the size of walnuts and were thus stupid, go!

Well, lots of dinosaurs do have brains the size of walnuts, and smaller - not all, of course, but you can’t exactly fit a human-sized brain in a robin’s skull. I’m sure lots of people are aware of the idea of a brain-to-body-size ratio being a somewhat better (although still very rough) indicator of intelligence, and while it’s true that by the standards of many of today’s mammals and songbirds most non-avian dinosaurs weren’t composing symphonies, many seem to have been more intelligent than other animals of the time.

Another complicating factor, of course, is that our judgement is clouded by a human-centric view of “absolute intelligence”. That is, that different species (and individuals within a species) have different types of intelligence. Just like being a physics whiz doesn’t necessarily make you a brilliant painter and vice versa, animals are good at different areas.

There’s an example I read in “Gifts of the Crow” (a great book, by the way!) that goes like this: If you put food in the bottom of a plastic tube and present it to a dog, it will gnaw on the tube for a while, realise it’s unreachable, and get distracted. Give the same tube to a crow and it will make a tool to get the food out – but on the flip side, a crow can’t memorise and repeat as many commands as a dog can, and can’t figure out teamwork challenges that are child’s play to a chimpanzee. It seems weird to us that an animal can be so brilliant in some respects and so incapable in others, but the fact is that animals develop intelligence based on what they actually need. A crow doesn’t need to work in a team, and a dog doesn’t need to make tools. Just like a Stegosaurus didn’t need to figure out how to hunt prey.

Yutyrannus huali, the Beautiful Feathered Tyrant!

The largest known non-avian dinosaur with undeniable evidence for feathers, and a distant cousin to T. rex! It had an early type of feathers, however, so if you were to come across it in life, it’d probably feel like your pet cat!

My friend said that this was the best drawing I’ve ever done :D I hope you guys like it too!!!

anonymous asked:

What is you opinion of Safari LTD's line of feathered non-avian dinosaur toys?

I like them a lot! There’s some room to grow though

The coloration if off from what we know now but the Psittacosaurus is still quite excellent 

A FEATHERED COELOPHYSIS?! YAS Very good, no accuracy complaints really

Very good, shaggy arms, great Duck Satan

HOLY FUCK yes good 

… *sigh* I appreciate that they’re feathered, and that Microraptor is accurately colored, but the hands

The feathers should extend to the first finger on both (so no fingers should be totally scaly) and frankly I’d like to see fewer palms in raptors (not that the hands showing on the inside is impossible, but it’s become a meme when there isn’t evidence for it, it could just have easily been totally feathered on the inside as well). 

So overall a solid A- score

Edit: Also as far as I could see none of them have pronated hands which might bump the score to an A O_O

i agree with every single wonderful point about what makes birds cool in that ‘modern birds are cooler than non-avian dinosaurs’ post but it also hurts my heart at what a huge oversimplification of just how weird and goddamn diverse nonavian dinosaurs are. like modern birds are amazing in all the ways that post lists and in the diverse ways they’ve managed to use their specialized talents to fill niches but at the same time the mesozoic era was a time when dinosaurs were playing the game that mammals currently are now with regards to filling almost every kind of ecological niche available to terrestrial vertebrates under the sun and they got bizarre and fantastically varied and goddamn absolutely fascinating. Some of them possessed physical features and adaptations that have never been seen before or after in animals and to see them written off as ‘big boring alligator guys’ even lightheartedly kind makes me sad. its like saying that whales are so interesting as a group that all other mammals are boring by comparison, idk.


When Pachycephalosaurus skulls were first discovered, its dome was thought to be a dinosaur kneecap. We now know that non-avian dinosaurs lacked kneecaps altogether.

Pachycephalosaurus is closely related to Dracorex hogwartsia (The Dragon King of Hogwarts), but just how closely is a point of debate among paleontologists. Some believe the two species may actually be one and the same.


State Museum of Natural History, Karlsruhe, Germany - Part 1

I was so glad, that friends of mine invited me to visit with them the museum in Karlsruhe, which I had not seen before. Here, we are in the Atrium where some models of feathered, non-avian dinosaurs are housed alongside with a large Quetzalcoatlus model flying ahead of you.

Here’s Leptoceratops gracilis, which really isn’t very gracile and is actually rather thickset and ugly in comparison to other ceratopsians. I mean look at it.

Cool thing about Leptoceratops, though, is that they were some of the last (non-avian) dinosaurs, living alongside all the old favourites like Triceratops, Tyrannosaurus, and Ankylosaurus. For a small ceratopsian with such a ‘primitive’ body plan, that’s rather unusual.

Still ugly though.

anonymous asked:

I've been following you a while but I'm still a bit unclear about cladistics and birds being dinosaurs. I understand that birds evolved from non-avian theropod dinosaurs, but why does that not make birds simply decedents of dinosaurs? And what is dinosaur? Is it a class?

Of course! So the thing is, cladistics is a way of classifying living things that focuses on common ancestry. One (admittedly imperfect) way of looking at it is like a tree - the trunk splits into limbs and branches and leaves, but they’re all part of the same tree; one limb doesn’t just become a new tree once it gets big enough.

So for instance, “dinosaur” is defined as being the most recent common ancestor of Triceratops, T. rex, and Diplodocus (i.e. the first dinosaur, that every other dinosaur evolved from), and everything that evolved from that species. Birds evolved from other dinosaurs, who evolved from that first dinosaur - so birds are themselves dinosaurs.

As for “classes” - taxonomists don’t really use names like “class”, “order”, or “family” anymore. Those are human terms, invented before we knew about natural selection. They were just invented for bookkeeping.

Real life isn’t so cut and dry, and you can’t make everything fit into the same boxes. So we call all of those taxa “clades”, and call it a day.


Hey Guys,

So, starting August 9th of this year, I will be beginning non-neornithean Avialans (so, Mesozoic Birds). I didn’t do them back when I was doing theropods for the first time and I’ll have no other Dinosaurs (apart from new taxa, which will trickle in as we have time) to do. 

Starting January 10, 2018, I’ll begin “modern” birds (aka, Neornithes). Almost all of them are from the Cenozoic. 

This will be the content of the main posts - apart from new taxa & updated old posts & throwbacks - for the rest of this blog’s existence. 

Though I know that this isn’t a surprise for anyone, given how much I have stated that birds are dinosaurs, and that I plan on doing every dinosaur, I still know there will be people who protest this switch in blog content. Just know that this really isn’t a switch; I’ve already covered many animals that would probably have been called birds if alive today (such as Velociraptor). Indeed, looking at birds (both living and extinct) educates us a lot about the group Dinosauria proper, and helps us to understand their biology and evolution in new and exciting ways. Plus, very few Dinosaur encyclopedias contain even Mesozoic birds, much less Cenozoic/extant ones. I’m hoping to fill that gap. 

There will still be non-avian content (like stated above, throwback posts, newly discovered dinosaurs, and updated posts); also of course, Dinosaur March Madness, Community Events like Pride Month & Dinoween, and Pterosaur Ptuesday. Non-avian content will still be here, don’t you worry. 

So, this is an announcement - not a warning, because honestly, I think that doing birds is going to be really exciting. Extinct birds are ridiculously under-discussed and amazingly fascinating, and it’s going to be great to talk about them and teach you all about them - and extant birds are obviously amazing too (plus, photographs!!! and more complete life histories!!!) 

To people who don’t like birds: never fear! There will still be non-avian dinosaurs for you to enjoy 

To people who like birds: get PUMPED 

To people who don’t know: Let me show you how awesome birds can be :D 

Thank you, and wish me luck. My prelim is tomorrow and I’m internally screaming. 

~ Meig

anonymous asked:

Top 5 animals! (Individuals or species)

1. Guinea pigs.  Obviously.  They’re the best animal.

2. Dogs.  Kind of an obvious choice, but I’m really amazed how much emotional communication they’re capable of carrying on with humans, and how intuitive it is for both sides.  You can say “let’s get excited!” to a dog and it can say “I am very excited!” back and the two of you will understand each other perfectly.  I love that.

3. Lamellibrachia, deep-sea tube worms that live on sulfur vents and live 250 years.  Nothing about them is fathomable to me.  Everything I think of as part of being a living animal - moving, thinking, sensing, eating - they don’t do in any way that I could understand.  But they are living animals, and the sheer amount of difference is fascinating.

4. Rats.  Tenacious, clever, fearless, adaptable, unstoppable little forces of nature when they’re wild.  Not always for the good, but you have to admire their abilities.  And when they’re pets they’re just sweet little cuties.

5. Non-avian dinosaurs.  They had a whole other world happening, right in the place where we live now, and we only get these fascinating, tantalizing glimpses of it.