Dinosaur Brains Flight-Ready Long Before They Took To the Air 49
An anonymous reader writes "Dinosaurs evolved the brain power for flight long before they took to the air, new evidence presented in the journal Nature suggests. Contrary to the cliche, a 'bird brain' describes a relatively enlarged brain with the capacity required for flight. However, based on high-resolution X-ray computed tomographic (CT) scans, researchers found that at least a few non-avian dinosaurs had brains as large or larger than Archaeopteryx, one of the earliest known birds, indicating that some dinosaurs already suspected of flight capability would have had the neurological tools to do so."
Re: (Score:3)
This article does seem like it counter evolution the way it was stated.
What was more accurate was the brains were doing something else that would allow for an easy migration to flight.
Such as our thumb, our ancient Monkey like relieves had thumbs, like us, however they didn't use tools, they used them to help with climbing. As we evolved further we found the tools that we had for climbing came in rather handy for tools too.
Evolution has a lot of random elements, and it isn't survival of the fittest per say
Paywalled. (Score:2)
Does the article discuss (or does anybody more familiar with today's dinosaurs, not the ones that they thought existed back when I was a kid, most of which seem to have been revised or eliminated, know) if the 'flight-capable' cranial capacities occurred in dinosaurs that, while not capable of flying, had enough pseudo-wing structure available that assorted flight-like stabilization and assisted locomotion strategies would be available, or is the conclusion that correlation between inferred brain structure
Re:Paywalled - So left guessing... (Score:2)
Does the article discuss (or does anybody more familiar with today's dinosaurs, not the ones that they thought existed back when I was a kid, most of which seem to have been revised or eliminated, know) if the 'flight-capable' cranial capacities occurred in dinosaurs that, while not capable of flying, had enough pseudo-wing structure available that assorted flight-like stabilization and assisted locomotion strategies would be available, or is the conclusion that correlation between inferred brain structure and flight capabilities is surprisingly weak?
Surprisingly weak is my guess. (This seems generally true of so many theories pushed into the mainstream press these days). Phrenology revisited.
Flight may well have been preceded by centuries of hopping around in tree tops or cliff sides, and gliding down (like "flying" squirrels) [onionstatic.com] thereby selecting for those capable of developing mental models of 3D space, and processing not necessary for ground animals. That life style would also favor those animals with lighter bodies, flattened tails and grasping claws.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly what I was thinking. Is a flying squirrel similarly adapted today?
Or is this supposedly flight enhanced brain just the ability to visualize and process one's movements in a 3d space significantly larger than one's own body size?
If so, it might be nothing more than the ability to conceive/visualize converging trajectories beyond the immediate reach of teeth and claws. Typical predator pursuit behavior, in other words.
big brains needed for hunting (Score:2)
i bet hunting other animals to kill and eat them requires bigger brains than simply standing around and eating grass or leaves. i mean not like the vegesaurians want to be killed and eaten
Re: (Score:3)
Low hanging fruit. Low hanging fruit.
Anyway, I'm not sure picking up a tray of beef at the grocery store takes any more or less brain power than picking up a box of lentils.
Re: (Score:2)
Low hanging fruit. Low hanging fruit.
Anyway, I'm not sure picking up a tray of beef at the grocery store takes any more or less brain power than picking up a box of lentils.
True, but catching and harvesting the steer takes a tad more brain power than happening upon a lentil. Even the packaging takes more imagination.
Historically, an animal chasing bigger animals with pointy sticks would seem less likely to be preyed upon than an animal squatting stationary in a lentil patch.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, naturally, but most people aren't farmers or hunter gatherers anymore. Less than 1% of the population is involved with food production, and even a lowly vegan can in theory be a cattleman.
Re:big brains needed for hunting (Score:4, Funny)
Re:big brains needed for hunting (Score:5, Interesting)
"How much intelligence do you need to sneak up on a leaf?"
To sneak up on a leaf? Not much. To avoid getting eaten by a lion while you're sneaking up on a leaf? Quite a bit more apparently.
The African buffalo is reportedly rather more intelligent than you might suspect. There are numerous reports of communication, team work and even engaging in vindictive group behaviour like pursuing lions and killing lion cubs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know. I can't ask the grass, zooplankton, krill, or any of the large number of bacteria that spread through being eaten.
Re: (Score:1)
The most intelligent marine mammals (orca, bottlenose dolphin, sperm whale) are predators though. The top primates (humans, chimpanzees) are omnivores.
Re: (Score:2)
Memes confused you have
-Dr Spock, Planet Druidia
Dupe (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Chalk it up to small brain size.
What's brain size got to do with it? (Score:2)
Hummingbird brains are tiny yet they're probably the best acrobatic flyers the bird world has. Geese have much larger brains but they're as dumb as hell compared to the highly intelligent crow family.
It's probably brain to body size. (Score:5, Informative)
The Neanderthals had bigger brains than us (and so does elephants), but our brains are larger compared to our bodies.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you need a certain amount of motor-control brain, and the more muscle you have, the more mass you need for motor control. That's why it is not impressive that a giraffe has a bigger brain than a rhesus monkey. Or, similarly, that a human has 4-5 times less brain mass than an elephant.
Re: (Score:2)
I sincerely hope English is a second language to you, because you really suck at it. I stay out of Spanish language forums because I'd look as stupid on one as you do here.
Why are grammar nazis always so rude?
So (Score:3)
The brains allowed them to stand in long lines waiting for their genitals to be groped, and then subject to horrible service and food?
Re: (Score:2)
The brains allowed them to stand in long lines waiting for their genitals to be groped, and then subject to horrible service and food?
They were smart enough to fly under their own power, thus avoiding the above.
Re: (Score:2)
The brains allowed them to stand in long lines waiting for their genitals to be groped, and then subject to horrible service and food?
No, you're thinking McDonald's.
Re:The Archaeopteryx is not a bird... (Score:5, Informative)
And yes, the Archaeopteryx is not a bird, but an extremely close relative to the first bird. The paraves include the aviales, which are "the birds".
This *sounds* like pretty flimsy reasoning (Score:4, Insightful)
researchers found that at least a few non-avian dinosaurs had brains as large or larger than Archaeopteryx, one of the earliest known birds, indicating that some dinosaurs already suspected of flight capability would have had the neurological tools to do so.
So if something has a brain bigger than something that we know can fly, it could probably learn to fly too if you stuck wings on it? T. Rex brains were larger than humans', but I wouldn't fancy one's chances at beating me at Streetfighter II.
In the interests of balance and reason, I should say that I'm going to assume we're missing out on some key facts thanks to some dumbed-down reporting, not because the researchers aren't doing proper science.
This *sounds* like pretty flimsy science. (Score:1)
A lot of science is like that. The most tenuous of threads.
That's because they came from dragons! (Score:1)
Duh? (Score:1)
Umm... yes? I bet that things that fly need to be capible of flight before they can fly. Is this an article to weed out the illogical among us or something?
Dinosaur couldn't fly (Score:2)
I seem to remember being taught there weren't any flying dinosaurs.
Pterodactyl, Pteranodon, etc, weren't dinosaurs, they were reptiles.
Never studied it intensely, so it could be a matter of details though.
Re: (Score:3)
I seem to remember being taught there weren't any flying dinosaurs. Pterodactyl, Pteranodon, etc, weren't dinosaurs, they were reptiles.
Never studied it intensely, so it could be a matter of details though.
There were flying dinosaurs. In fact, there still are flying dinosaurs. The ones that still exist are commonly referred to as "birds". They are theropods.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "reptile" class is a pretty crappy one... it's basically just a catch all for vertebrates that aren't something else. For example, crocodiles are more closely related to birds than they are to snakes or lizards. All of the aforementioned along with dinosaurs are more closely related to each other than they are to turtles (though this is coming under increased scrutiny - there are calls to move turtles back to diapsida).
Basically, our groups are a little crap, confused and vague, and dividing species
Size isn't everything... (Score:1)
Just look at crows. Pound for pound they're some of the smartest and most capable animals around. Total grey matter is nice... but having light, efficient cognitive processes is critical for staying in the air on a tight weight budget.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)