Superoceras

It's been a while...

2012-03-06T17:45:00.001-05:00

... have a placoderm.

Bothriolepis sp., a freshwater Devonian antiarch placoderm. Man, check out those pec(toral fin)s.

I've been working on a few other projects recently, so blogging has not been so much happening. Nothing major or life changing, but enough to keep me occupied. Needless to say, once everything else I have going on is finished up, I should have a lot more content to share, so look forward to that. I mean, if you want. If not, well no more fish for you.

The Great Backyard Bird Count 2012

2012-02-15T00:00:00.000-05:00

Are you ready for some birding? If you love watching avian dinosaurs as much as I do, and you love citizen science, why not participate in the Great Backyard Bird Count (GBBC)? I know I'm going to. All you have to do is sit and watch birds, record which ones you see, and send that data to the Cornell Lab of Ornithology / the Audubon Society / Bird Studies Canada so that they can compile it and see the big picture about what kinds of birds are out there, where they are hanging out for winter, and how many of them are around. When I say participation is both fun and easy, I totally mean it. Find out for yourself, and participate in the GBBC when it begins this Friday, February 17, 2012.

It's here!

2012-02-12T21:10:00.000-05:00

It's the moment you've all been waiting for. The Feathered Dinosaur Gallery has been posted to ART Evolved: Life's Time Capsule, and it is quite impressive. People love theropods, I suppose. Especially the feathered ones. I can't say I blame them. The presence of feathers in non-avian dinosaur groups provides another line of evidence to support the fact that living birds are dinosaurs. When I was a kid growing up, I never would have imagined we'd have so many wonderfully preserved fossils showing filamentous integumentary structures on the bodies of non-avian animals. Once again, we are not only provided an example of evolution at work, but we also see that new information can be added to an existing body of knowledge, and our scientific understanding can change. I can't imagine a more appropriate gallery for Darwin Week, so thanks to the crew over at ART Evolved for putting it together, and to everyone who submitted. It looks great!

My humble submission to an excellent "Time Capsule". Dave and his buddy play a dangerous game!

Happy Darwin Day!

2012-02-12T19:28:00.000-05:00

On this day, 203 years ago, Charles Robert Darwin was born. And his brilliant theory is more important today than it has ever been. Evolution; descent with modification; whatever you call it, the idea that species change throughout time, and are all descended from a common ancestor, is one that connects us to the rest of the living world. This is a connection that I've always appreciated, yet there are many out there that refuse to accept it. I've often heard people say "evolution is only a theory", which means they believe it's nothing more than a guess. And if they believe it to be a guess, it's just as likely as any other guess. But in science, a theory is so much more than a guess. It's a body of knowledge, obtained through repeatable observations, that can be used to describe some aspect of Universe to to the best of our ability. Is a scientific theory subject to change? If course it is. As new information is gathered, it can be incorporated into a growing body of knowledge. But the underlying principles stay the same. In this case, species do change over time. They are not fixed. Through the processes of natural selection, mutation, genetic drift, and others, species do change throughout time. If a trait is advantageous, it is passed on to the next generation. If it is not, it gets removed from the population. New species are born, others go extinct. Evolution is more than just a guess. It is a fact. And I think Darwin Day is a great time to explore this fact in greater detail. A good place to start is at the PBS Evolution website. Learn about all facets of this theory, from how Darwin began to formulate it over 150 years ago, to the mechanisms that make it possible. This NOVA program is one of the best on the subject I've seen, and the website has a lot of other interactive features for teachers, students, and the general public. Happy Darwin Day, and enjoy!

Saurolophus Skin Suggests Speciation

2012-02-06T22:15:00.000-05:00

A long, long time ago, I wrote a post about dinosaur integument color, and talked about "Dakota" the Edmontosaurus. She, like her cousin "Leonardo" the Brachylophosaurus, is an exceptionally preserved dinosaur "mummy". While most body fossil remains are made up of the hard parts of an animal (in the case of dinosaurs, it is generally their bones), these two hadrosaurines have lots of preserved soft tissue material. Specifically mineralized skin and muscles. Which is pretty cool, if you ask me. From preserved skin and muscle, we can get a much better picture of what an animal would have looked like in life. Don't get me wrong, we can tell a lot from the bones. But the more information we have the better; every little bit helps.

The holotype of Saurolophus osborni (AMNH 5220). Panel mount photographed by Barnum Brown in 1913. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

And now we're able to get a better picture of another hadrosaurine genus, Saurolophus. In a paper recently published in PLoS One, Phil R. Bell has collected loads of data on skin impressions from two different species of Saurolophus: S. osborni from Canada and S. angustirostris from Mongolia. These two animals have been clearly established as distinct, separate species by their osteological remains. But Bell has shown, rather effectively I think, that the skin impressions collected from multiple specimens are also distinct enough to be able to differentiate the two species on the basis of their integument alone. That's even cooler.

In order to compare the skin impressions on the two Saurolophus species, Bell had to first establish a terminology that could be used to describe the various types of scales present. That terminology is, briefly, as follows: there are 'basement scales' which serve as a backdrop to 'feature-scales', the larger more distinct scales. 'Interstitial-tissues' lie between the scales, and allow the skin its flexibility. There are 'midline feature-scales' that run down the backs of the animals, and 'polygonal scales' which are, as you may have guessed, polygonal in nature and can be either 'basement' or 'feature'. On the other hand, 'pebbly scales' (also known as 'pebbles') are the smallest type of scales, and always form the 'basement'. There are asymmetrical 'shell scales', circular ' shield scales', and 'irregular scales' with no clear geometric proportions. Bell looked at skin impressions containing these types of integument from the skull and mandible, the forlimbs and hindlimbs, the tail, and the main body of the animals. And based on the location of these scales on the body, their anatomical direction (in relation to the axial midline of the animal), and the scale shape and pattern, he was able to establish a scale morphology that can actually be used to show taxonomic differences between these two very closely related dinosaur species. Did I mention how cool this is?

Figure 1. Hadrosaur scale morphology showing (A) polygonal basement scales, shield feature-scales, and interstitial-tissues on S. angustirostris, (B) pebbles on S. angustirostris, (C) irregular, radially oriented basement scales on Edmontosaurus annectens, and (D) shell basement scales on S. angustirostris, with a 1 cm scale bar. Image from Bell, 2012.

This is the first time that dinosaur integument has been used to show a distinction between species. And Bell's analysis not only shows difference in skin texture across the body, and between the different species. The patterning and arrangement of integumentary structures can also be used as a potential source to infer additional information on dinosaur color. This is most evident in the tails of the animals, where S. osborni exhibits a mottled integument, and S. angustirostris exhibits a banded pattern. So in essence, he took integument from various locations on two different species of Saurolophus...

Figure 12. Regions of skin impressions (light grey) currently known from (A) S. osborni and (B) S. angustirostris. Image from Bell, 2012.

... and was able to provide enough evidence to produce a pretty impressive, most accurate-to-date reconstruction of of the same two animals.

Figure 13. Soft tissue reconstructions of Saurolophus based on skin impressions from (A) S. osborni and (B) S. angustirostris. Illustration by L. Xing and Y. Liu, from Bell, 2012.

Cool. Cool, cool, cool. There is nothing else to say. This is great research, and can be applied to other skin impressions, both from other hadrosaurs, and possible dinosaurs at large. I cant' wait to see what new studies come out of this one.

References
Bell, P. R. 2012. Standardied Terminology and Potential Taxonomic Utility for Hadrosaurid Skin Impressions: A Case Study for Saurolophus from Canada and Mongolia. PLoS ONE 7(2): e31295. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031295

Feathered dinosaurs; no excuses!

2012-01-31T09:08:00.001-05:00

From ART Evolved: Life's Time Capsule.

Good news, everyone! The crew over at ART Evolved have extended the deadline for submissions to their February "time capsule" to this coming Saturday, February 4, 2012. That gives everyone a few more more days to work on their pieces for the Feathered Dinosaur Gallery. I certainly know I can use the extra time, and I'm looking forward to seeing what you all come up with!

Draw A Dinosaur Day 2012!

2012-01-30T20:27:00.002-05:00

Monday speed sketch of "Dave" for "DADD".

You may know him as NGMC 91, the feathered dromaeosaurid from the Yixian Formation of Early Cretaceous Liaoning, China. But "Dave" works just fine for me. You just may see him pop up here again in the next few days.

Virtual Birding Roundup (Part 3)

2012-01-30T12:00:00.000-05:00

Alright, boys and girls. I started this little endeavor a month ago. It's time to bring it all together, once and for all. So far in our virtual birding roundup, we've spent the last two parts talking about various families within the order Passerformes. Which makes sense considering that there are over 100 different passerine families, and they contain more than half of all known bird species (Mayr, 1946). For the most part, the relationships between these families were traditionally defined by morphological characters, and were believed to be fairly well understood. But recently, more and more molecular analysis has begun to show a different phylogeny; one that we still don't have a full picture of. And that's where the next bird from our quiz comes in.

Regulus calendula

Bird #11 was another tricky one, and was one of the two birds that I had never previously seen in my backyard. But Susan was able to correctly identify it as a ruby-crowned kinglet, despite the fact that there is no visible indication of the rufous crown in this image. Perhaps the white wing bars and eye ring gave it away. But identifying a bird is only half of my objective here. The other half involves figuring out how it's related to other birds, and this one is tricky. All kinglets are placed within the genus Regulus in the family Regulidae, situated in the order Passerformes. But what is their relationship to other passerines? That part is not as clear. Their resemblance to Old World warblers traditionally placed them within Sylvioidea, despite them having their own family status (Monroe, 1992). And while regulids are more closely related to the sylvioid superfamily (and the passeroid, certhioid, and muscicapoid superfamilies), than to others within Passerida, they cannot be directly linked to any one superfamily given the current data (Harshman, 2008). That being said, their place on our growing cladogram is not as certain as the other birds we've seen so far. Regulidae either lies within Sylvioidea as a sister group to the Paridae, or is part of a soft polytomy with Sylvioidea and the "Turdidae + Sittidae + Passeroidea" clade. This uncertain relationship is indicated by the dashed lines, representing both of the potential phylogenies.

Melanerpes carolinus (female)

And that does it for the Passerformes from the quiz. But there are still three birds left. And if they aren't passerines, then what are they? Let's jump back to bird #8. This lovely lady is a red-bellied woodpecker. It's hard to tell from this shot, but the red on her nape does not extend to the bill like in the males of this species. It's also difficult to see the rosy belly that gives this bird its name. I'm not sure if this is the same female I saw last year or not. But I know she loves the suet I put out just as much if it isn't. She loves it so much in fact, that she doesn't let a whole lot of other birds near it when she comes around. Which is unfortunate for the next bird in the roundup.

Picoides pubescens (male)

Bird #9 is another woodpecker, but is it a downy or a hairy? Most people who guessed were confident that it was a downy woodpecker, and they are correct. But it can be pretty hard to tell. Particularly in a photo where there is nothing to use as a scale reference. Hairy woodpeckers are larger than downy woodpeckers. Their bills are also longer. But this guy was small, and had a pretty short bill, so I'm confident it is a downy, and also that it is a male. The red patch on the back of the head is a dead giveaway for the latter. Downy woodpeckers are the smallest species of woodpecker found in North America, but this guy didn't seem to bothered by that. For a while, he refused to approach my suet cage while the above mentioned red-bellied was feeding. But he eventually got tired of waiting, and as he moved in, the red-bellied seemed to be bothered by him, and she moved on. Good work, little guy.

But regardless of who intimidates who, these two birds are still very close. At least on our cladogram. They are each others closest relatives. All woodpeckers are united in the family Picidae. And picids are pretty cool. They have extremely strong, sharp, long bills that they use to drill into tree trunks with and sticky bristled tongues that help them extract invertebrates from underneath the bark. They also use their bills to "drum" to one another as a means of communication. They have smaller brains that are oriented differently than the brains of other birds as an adaptation to the amount of stress they put on them as they peck away (Gibson, 2006). They also have feathers covering their nostrils and nictitating membranes that cover their eyes, both as means of protecting sensitive orifices from splintering wood (Schwab, 2002). But as awesome as they are, many picids are also, unfortunately, threatened or endangered. They rely heavily on the trees where they nest and search for food, and habitat loss and fragmentation means a loss of woodpeckers as well. Not cool.

Picids are members of the order Piciformes, which includes not only woodpeckers, but also honeyguides, barbets, toucans, puffbirds, and jacamars. Most of them have zygodactyly arrangement of digits on their feet, where two toes face forward, and two toes face backwards. This arrangement of digits is common in arboreal birds, because it allows them to cling to tree trunks better than the average avian. Piciformes are also unique in that they do not have downy feathers at any point during their life (with the exception of the jacamars). On our cladogram, Piciformes is a sister group to Passerformes, and together they combine to form an informally named group of "land birds". Although informally named, the clade is supported by morphological evidence.

Zenaida macroura carolinensis (male and female)

Phew! That's a lot of birds so far, and we've nearly reached the end of our roundup. So who is left? It's bird #12, the mourning dove. The mourning dove (also known as the Carolina pigeon or turtledove) is one of the most widespread birds in North America. This is probably because they breed like crazy, and a monogamous pair can have up to 12 offspring a year. That's a lot of mouths to feed, but it's no reason to mourn. They actually get their name from the calls they make, which I guess to some sound like someone who is mourning. The wooo-OOO, ooo, ooo call is made by both males and females, but if you've ever startled one of these guys and heard it fly away, you may have caught an earful of something else. It kind of sounds like a whistle, but the bird isn't calling out in alarm. That is actually a sound produced by the wings during takeoff. Perhaps this auditory signal warns others of approaching danger, or is just a way of saying "goodbye" to neighboring birds. Either way, it's pretty cool in my book.

The mourning dove is a member of the family Columbidae, which is a monophyletic grouping of pigeons and doves. And Columbidae falls within the order Columbiformes, which is comprised of Columbidae and Raphinae, the extinct, flightless birds of the Mascarene Islands (that's right, there was more than one giant flightless "pigeon" that humans drove into extinction). Interestingly enough, the mourning dove is also the most widely hunted game bird in the United States. There must be something about the way columbiformes taste. Regardless, the mourning dove is the outgroup taxon in our cladogram, and Columbiformes is a sister group to the "land bird" clade within Neoaves (all "modern" birds with the exception of paleognaths and the "fowl").

So throwing it on the "tree" we finally have a pretty complete picture of the phylogenetic relationships of the birds that visited my backyard on that warm December day. It was a great way to close out 2011, and I hope you all have enjoyed starting out 2012 with both my avian antics, and this new format. I'm not gonna lie, I thought it was pretty legit. And I think I'll keep it up with any additional birds that I happen to snap a photo of. More quizzes? Just building on the tree? I don't know, what do you think? I'll need a clever name too. But I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. Right now I have a few other projects to finish up before the month is over, so I'll talk to you all in February!

References

Gibson, L. 2006. Woodpecker pecking: how woodpeckers avoid brain injury. Journal of Zoology 270, 462-465.

Harshman, J. 2008. "Land Birds". Retreived 29 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/%27Land_Birds%27/26410 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Harshman, J. 2008. "Passerida". Retreived 24 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/http://tolweb.org/Passerida/29223 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Harshman, J. 2008. "Piciformes. Woodpeckers and relatives". Retreived 29 January 2012 fromhttp://tolweb.org/Piciformes/26411 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Mayr, E. 1946. The Number of Species of Birds. The Auk 63 (1), 64-69.

Mindell, D. P., Bwoen, J. W., & Harshman, J. 2008. "Neoaves". Retreived 29 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/Neoaves/26305 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Monroe, B. F. 1992. The New DNA-DNA avian classification: What's it all about? British Birds 85 (2), 53-61

(no author listed). 2007. "Columbiformes. Columbidae. Pigeons and Doves". Retreived 29 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/Columbiformes/26404 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

(no author listed). 2008. "Picidae. Woodpeckers". Retreived 29 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/Picidae/26423 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Schwab, I. 2002. Cure for a headache. British Journal of Opthalmology 86, 843.

Happy "Capitalsaurus" Day

2012-01-28T00:00:00.000-05:00

When most people think of the District of Columbia, they think of politicians, monuments, and busy city streets. But underneath the modern sprawl lies the remains of plants and animals that lived millions of years ago. And sometimes, we are lucky enough to find them. That's exactly what happened with "Capitalsaurus".

The "Capitalsaurus" discovery site, located in Garfield Park at the 100^th block of F Street, SE, and named "Capitalsaurus Court" on January 28, 2000. Photo by Nicholas Clark from Wikimedia Commons.

In January 1898, the centrum of a caudal vertebra from a theropod dinosaur was discovered by J. K. Murphy underneath the streets of the district during an excavation for a sewer line. It was presumably recovered from the Arundel Formation, which made it Aptian in age. This Early Cretaceous fossil (USNM 3049) was given to the Smithsonian Institution, where it remains today.

Although only a fragment of the animal was found, it was still described as its own species and given the name Creosaurus potens by Lull in 1911. This name is more than likely invalid, which means that the name "Capitalsaurus" really has no basis, as it has never been used in the technical literature. Despite this fact, "Capitalsaurus" was still named the official dinosaur of the District of Columbia, and January 28 was designated "Capitalsaurus"Day in 2001 by Mayor Anthony Williams.

Regardless of the taxonomic standing of this particular specimen, I'm certainly not going to pass up an opportunity to celebrate a paleontological holiday, so happy "Capitalsaurus" Day, everyone!

References
Lull, R. S. 1911. Maryland Geological Survey Stratigraphic Series: Lower Cretaceous; 173-178.

Virtual Birding Roundup (Part 2)

2012-01-25T10:00:00.000-05:00

After a pretty positive response to "Part 1", I headed out of town and the roundup got interrupted. Now Jenn Hall (who did a pretty great job of guessing honestly in my original post) would tell me to put some pants on and stop apologizing. And I'm not gonna lie, that's pretty sound advice. So technically I'm not going to apologize. And I am going to wear pants. But I am also going to get this roundup going again. If I'm not mistaken, we left off with the Passeroidea, the monophyletic grouping of "sparrow-like" birds. Where should we go from here?

Sitta carolinensis carolinensis

I'm going to jump back to the quiz and take a look at bird #6, which everyone correctly identified as a white-breasted nuthatch. Of the nine subspecies of this bird, this particular one has the palest back and cap, and can be found in the old growth forests of the Eastern United States. Even from a distance, they can often be easily recognized; particularly if you seem them heading down the trunk of a tree headfirst. There is no mistaking this bird for any other as it surveys the bark for the insects that make up part of its diet. The nuthatches are all lumped together in the family Sittidae, which contains only the genus Sitta. That's a pretty exclusive group of birds!

Turdis migratorius migratorius (male)

Next lets jump to a different avian family and talk about bird #7, who was also positively identified by all as the American robin. The dark head indicates that this particular bird is a male, and a rather tenacious one at that. I watched this fellow dig for worms for quite some time before he moved onto the next yard. Despite being called robins, they are actually a type of thrush and belong to the family Turdidae. This family lies within the superfamily Muscicapoidea, which is a sister group to Certhioidea. The Certhioidea is the superfamily in which you can find the nuthatches. So in terms of familial relationships, the robin and the nuthatch are more closely related to each other than they are to any other birds in the quiz. There is no technical name for this "Turdidae + Sittidae" clade, but it is pretty well supported.

This "Turdidae + Sittidae" clade forms a sister group to the Passeroidea within the order Passerformes so our cladogram grows a little more to incorporate all we know about the identified birds so far.

Baeolophus bicolor

Passerformes, however, is a very large order of "perching birds", so it's no wonder that there were a few more passerines in the quiz. One of the last two was bird #1, the tufted titmouse. I've always found this particular bird to be a handsome one, and was pleased to see not one, but two feeding together on that warm December day. Their grey crown and rusty flanks are easily noticed, and although flighty at times, this particular pair were the only two birds that allowed me to sit right next to the feeder as I photographed them. They almost seemed as interested in me as I was in them.

Poecile atricapillus

The last passerine in the quiz was bird #3 and like the previous three mentioned, it was also identified by as all a black-capped chickadee. At first I wasn't sure about this one. It easily could have been a Carolina chickadee, as the two different species are nearly indistinguishable from one another. At least physically. Fortunately, I got to hear them singing to one another, and the familiar "chick-a-dee-dee-dee" call was slow and low-pitched, indicating that they were in fact black-capped and not Carolina chickadees. Both the titmouse and the chickadee belong to the family Paridae, so like the nuthatch and the robin, they are more closely related to one another than they are to any other birds in the quiz.

Paridae is nested within the superfamily Sylvioidea, which forms a sister group to the previously established "Turdidae + Sittidae + Passeroidea" clade. And all of these clades can be united within Passerformes. But we've still got a few birds to go, and I'll finish up with the remaining third in the next part of the roundup. I hope you'll stick around for it.

References
Harshman, J. 2006. "Certhioidea". Retreived 24 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/http://tolweb.org/Certhioidea/67306 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/
Harshman, J. 2006. "Muscicapoidea"". Retreived 24 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/http://tolweb.org/Muscicapoidea/67307 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/
Harshman, J. 2006. "Passerida". Retreived 24 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/http://tolweb.org/Passerida/29223 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/
Harshman, J. 2006. "Sylvoidea". Retreived 24 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/http://tolweb.org/Sylvioidea/67276 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/
Mindell, D. P., Bwoen, J. W., & Harshman, J. 2006. "Passeroidea". Retreived 24 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/http://tolweb.org/Passeroidea/67278 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Four Critters

2012-01-23T22:00:00.000-05:00

A little over a week ago, I posted a ridiculously low quality image of the Spring Run at Florida's Blue Spring State Park, and told you all there were four critters in it. As ambiguous as it was, I swear, they are actually there. Take another look. Here is the huge version that hangs off the page. Click it for a cleaner view.

So, did you see the critters? In case you missed them, here they are.

To the left (in blue), we have the great blue heron preening itself. Towards the center of the photo (in orange), we have a group of coastal cooters catching some rays. Up on the bank to the right (in green), we have a very well hidden American alligator. And all throughout the blue waters, right beneath the surface (in black) we have a number of Florida manatees.

Ardea herodias

Pseudemys concinna floridana

Alligator mississippiensis

Trichechus manatus latriosstris

I was truly amazed at the amount of biodiversity present at Blue Spring State Park. The manatees that spend the winter months in the spring are the big attraction for many, but I was pleased to have encounters with a number of other plants and animals. I'll be sure to talk about some of them very soon!

Winter Migration

2012-01-14T19:25:00.001-05:00

Like many of my avian cousins, I've migrated south this winter. As you may already know (if you follow me on Twitter) I'm currently in Florida at Blue Spring State Park, accompanying a group of University of Maryland students on their Alternative Break trip. As soon as we got to the park, I immediately started taking photos, and when I get home and have a more reliable internet connection, I'll be sure to upload a bunch of them.

But for now, I'll leave you with this. There are four critters hiding somewhere in the photo. Can you find them?

Virtual Birding Roundup (Part 1)

2012-01-06T22:50:00.000-05:00

Time to talk birds, specifically the ones I posted photos of in my "end of year bird quiz" . To spice things up a bit, instead of just listing as each species and writing about it a little, I'm going to throw them all onto an ever expanding cladogram. Hopefully this way both the readers and myself will be able to learn a little about the individual animals themselves, and their relationships to one another. Ornithology is certainly not an area of specialization for me. But birding is one of the "outdoor" activities I engage in most often. This is primarily because it can be done anywhere, even the comfort of your own home. So I think this will be a fun little project and I'm excited to be able to share it with you all. But a word of warning: apparently a lot of the traditional bird groupings are not supported by molecular data, and many of their true relationships have yet to be resolved. So I'll be doing my best to show true monophyletic groupings and relationships. But if you know something I don't, please let me know. That being said, let's dig right in and start with the birds from my quiz! Read no further if you'd like to give it a shot before I start naming names.

Carduelis tristis tristis (winter male)

I'm going to go ahead and start with bird #10, because it seems to have been one of the birds that was recognized the least. But congratulations to Albertonykus for his correct guess of American goldfinch! The reason this particular specimen may have confounded some of my readers is because after their molt each autumn, this species lose the bright, yellow feathers and take on a less vibrant coat of buff and olive tones. This is in fact a male American goldfinch in his winter plumage.

Carpodacus mexicanus (male at left & female at right)

There was one other finch among the birds, and everyone that guessed seemed to know its name. It was #5, the house finch. As I've mentioned before, the house finch is not native to this part of the country, but its populations have spread from the American southwest and Mexico in the last several decades after being introduced to the east coast over 50 years ago. I know its wishful thinking, but I like to imagine that the ginger male (on the left) is one of the boys that was fledged from my porch last spring, and he's stopped by for a visit with his new girlfriend (on the right). Both the American goldfinch and the house finch are nested within Fringilidae, the true finches. And with that, we have our first branch on the avian family tree.

Cardinalis cardinalis (male)

Expanding our relationships a little further, our next bird is #2, the northern cardinal. Males of this species are extremely territorial, which leads me to believe that the male I see in my yard, normally accompanied by a female, is the same male that I've been seeing in my yard for quite some time now. Most of the cardinals I'm used to forage for dropped seed on the ground, but this one has no problem sitting at the feeder and securing a space for his mate right beside him. The northern cardinal is a member of the family Cardinalidae, and Cardinalidae and the previously mentioned Fringilidae are united within a strongly supported group of "nine-primaried oscines". This group of songbirds has, as you may have guessed, nine visible primary feathers on each wing (with a smaller, hidden tenth primary). So we can add them to the cladogram as well.

Passer domesticus domesticus (female at top & male at bottom)

And last but not least (for the time being) we have #4, the house sparrow. Of all of the small brownish birds that I've seen hopping around in Edmonston, 99% have got to be house sparrows. They also tend to eat 99% of the seed I put out. Which is unfortunate, because they are an introduced species that have outcompeted a lot of the local songbirds. As much as I like all birds, if anyone has an effective, passive method of keeping their numbers down, I'd love to hear from you. Like all "true" or "Old World" sparrows, the house sparrow (which I believe to belong to the subspecies P. d. domesticus) belongs to the family Passeridae. This family is a sister group to the "nine-primaried oscines", all of which can be united within the superfamily Passeroidea.

Passeroidea consists of seed-eating, hostly herbivorous "sparrow-like" birds with a global distribution. But it is a monophyletic grouping that is supported by molecular data. So once again, our cladogram grows. For now we've got a part of the picture. Stay tuned for more in the coming days!

References

Harshman, J. 2006. "Nine-primed oscines". Retreived 06 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/%27Nine-primaried_oscines%27/67287/2006.08.02 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Mindell, D. P., Bwoen, J. W., & Harshman, J. 2006. "Passeroidea". Retreived 06 January 2012 from http://tolweb.org/Passeroidea/67278/2006.08.02 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/

Happy National Bird Day!

2012-01-05T20:30:00.000-05:00

I finished 2011 with a post on birding, and figure starting 2012 in a similar fashion is not a bad way to go. Unfortunately, my yard was not full of wonderful native birds when I got home. In fact, when I got in today, I was greeted with this sight:

Not cool, man.

After seeing over a dozen native species in my yard the other day, I was saddened to see my feeder occupied by a flock of invasive house sparrows and a particularly bold eastern gray squirrel. Now of course, the squirrel is native. But I have a separate feeder just for him and his kin, and that generally keeps them away from my bird feeders. For shame, you rouge rodent!

But no more negativity; it's National Bird Day! I'll step up my efforts to bring native birds back into my neighborhood, and celebrate by revealing the identities of my "end of year bird quiz" birds over the next couple of posts. Happy National Bird Day, everyone!

One Last Day of Birding for 2011

2011-12-31T22:20:00.000-05:00

Despite the fact that we've reached the end of December, it has been quite pleasant here in Edmonston, Maryland. The last few days have seen temperatures over 12 °C, which is a welcome treat considering some of the colder weather we had a few weeks back. It was great to get outside and do some yard work without having to put on layers. It was also great letting my terrapin back out into her pond for a few hours a day (as she normally spends her winter months in an indoor tank). But the last few days have also been great for birding. It may have nothing to do with the weather at all, but in the span of about 45 minutes today, I saw a greater variety of birds in my yard than I sometimes do all season long, two species of which were a first for me in my "new" home. But why tell you about it when I could just show you? In fact, how about an end of the year bird quiz? Leave your guesses in the comments section!

Huzzah, virtual birding! So many avian dinosaurs in one sitting. What a great way to close out 2011! Posting here was a bit more scarce this year than it was in 2010, but I also had a lot of other things going on, so I guess I'm ok with it. I'm looking forward to using the start of 2012 as a jumping off point to restructure things on the blog, in my academic life, and just in general. But that all starts tomorrow. For now, happy New year, everyone!

For more end of the year posts, roundups, and reflections, check out the following blogs (and let me know if I forgot to include anyone):

Clever Girl - Best of 2011
Dinosaur Tracking - The Greatest Dinosaur Hits of 2011
The Forgotten Archosaurs - The Year in Crocs
The Loom - 2011: A Letter from the Loom
Love in the Time of Chasmosaurus - My First LITC Year: a retrospective and look forward
The Natural Capital - Greatest Hits of 2011
Not Exactly Rocket Science - A round-up of the year
The Open Source Paleontologist - New Fossil Species of 2011- A PLoS ONE Retrospective
Paleoexhibit - 2011 in Paleontology
Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week - Happy New Year!
The Theropod Database Blog - Happy New Year! The Database is updated!

May your Cephalopodmas be gibbous and bright!

2011-12-22T10:32:00.000-05:00

And by bright, of course I mean bioluminescent and chromatophoric! Here's a tentacular "gift" for you all!

I realize it's not much to look at now, but it's just one piece of a much larger project that I've been working on for a while (and hope to complete soon). Anyway, if there was ever a day to post it to the blog, Cephalopodmas would be that day. So here's to the cephalopods and the teuthologists who study them. From the tiniest tainoceratid, to the largest lepidoteuthid, happy Cephalopodmas to all, and to all an inky night!

Get out the map!

2011-12-19T11:53:00.001-05:00

This is a map of the United States of America I have hanging in my office. Why am I taking a photo of it and posting it to the blog? Good question, and I have a pretty good answer: Blogger FINALLY has a mobile application for your smart phone. Which means that wherever I am in United States, as long as I have mobile service, I can post photos and text to the blog. So when I can't get my thoughts out in 140 characters or less, this is going to be a great alternative.

Gasoline? Where we're going we don't need gasoline.

2011-12-09T14:45:00.000-05:00

If you've spent some time here at Superoceras, you may have realized that in addition to being interested in science and natural history, people might consider me a "geek" for a lot of other reasons. I certainly do fall into more than one geek subgroup, that's for sure. So when two of my geeky interests intersect, I'm all for shouting from the rooftops about it. But I don't have a 30 ft ladder which I would need to access said roof, so I'm going to use the blog instead. Here it goes: The DeLorean DMC-12 is coming back, and this sucker's (all) electrical!

Pictured above: the greatest car ever. Image uploaded to Wikipedia by Grenex.

Great Scott! Now, I've seen a DeLorean that generates electricity using plutonium to power a nuclear reaction. And I've seen that same DeLorean converted to use garbage to produce energy from a fusion generator. But this particular DeLorean still required a tank of gas to power its internal combustion engine. Kudos to the DeLorean Motor Company for planning to begin production an all-electric version of this iconic vehicle in 2013. I wonder if you can get 1.21 gigawatts off a full charge?

I'm used to seeing the DeLorean mashed up with various other geeky interests of mine. But the collaboration of the DeLorean Motor Company and electric car start-up Epic Electric Vehicle is truly heavy. Time to start saving those pennies!

Coffee!

2011-12-01T09:30:00.000-05:00

It's Thursday morning. The weekend is almost here. Please enjoy this educational film about "the fuel of the modern world" while I go make myself a cup. It's coffee time!

"My Life as a Turkey", a real Thanksgiving treat.

2011-11-24T00:00:00.000-05:00

If you've been around Superoceras for Thanksgiving the last two years, you already know that a staple component of the traditional meal of the day includes a rather aggressive avian dinosaur: Meleagris gallopavo, the domesticated descendants of the wild turkey. For such a common North American bird, I know surprisingly little about its day to day habits, and what it's really like to be a turkey in the United States today. Well thank goodness for Nature, the Emmy award winning PBS television series that this Thanksgiving season, brings us "My Life as a Turkey", the story of Joe Hutto and the group of wild turkeys that he raised from egg to adulthood. The episode can be watched in its entirety at the Nature website, but I figured I'd leave a trailer here as a little treat for everyone. Happy Thanksgiving!

Watch My Life as a Turkey - Preview on PBS. See more from NATURE.

A film about our HOME.

2011-11-09T10:50:00.000-05:00

(So I know I did the same thing last year, but please bear with me as I try and get everything sorted out after my week at SVP so that I can finish up tmy "daily posts from the field". I'm glad I was able to get up three considering how busy the days are, and the lack of free Wi-Fi in the rooms. They will come soon, but someone recently sent me this, and I feel like putting it up is pretty important, so here it goes.)

Depending on who you ask, the human population on the planet currently numbers somewhere between 6.973 billion (U. S. Census Beureau) and 7 billion (United nations Population Fund). That is a lot of people, and sometimes, I don't think we consider the impact a population like that can have on the planet. Even those of us that do are guilty of contributing to that impact in one way or another. Many have suggested that we have now reached a critical point in human history; one where we understand what may be before us, and have to act in order to preserve our shared future. The film HOME does this in a way that is hard to not take seriously.

Yann Arthus-Bertrand has done an amazing job of putting together stunning high-definition visuals and a thought provoking narrative (voice-over provided by Glenn Close) in a film that I think everyone should see. It's a little over 1.5 hours, but if you're hear reading this now, I'm sure you're the kind of person who will want to find the time to watch it. I can't embed the video here, but click this link or any of the ones that follow it, and you'll be taken to the page on YouTube where you can watch the film in its entirety. It's free, so share and enjoy!

SVP 2011 (Epilogue): Leaving Las Vegas

2011-11-06T23:30:00.000-05:00

Giant pumpkins at the Bellagio Conservatory and Botanical Gardens.

What a week! I'm always astounded by how quickly it all goes by. Unfortunately, I had to skip out on the final poster session to go to an early dinner before catching a show. Which also means that I missed out on the first half of the annual Awards Ceremony. But congratulations to all of this years award winners! You can check out a full list at the SVP website, but I want to briefly mention the winners of my favorite award, the John J. Lanzendorf PaloeArt Prize. I'm always eager to see which pieces are selected from all of the incredible entries. I can't imagine having to select just one from each category: scientific illustration, 2-dimensional art, 3-dimensional art, and the new National Geographic digital modeling and animation. And the awards go to...

Scientific Illustration - Jeffrey W. Martz, for his piece "Skeletal reconstruction of the Late Triassic pseudosuchian archosaur Revueltosaurus callenderi".

2-Dimensional Art - Jason E. Brougham, for his piece "Mononykus olecranus, Nemegt Formation Mongolia".

3-Dimensional Art - John A. Gurche, for his piece "Sts 5".

National Geographic Digital Modeling and Animation - Evan Boucher, for his animation "Digital Paleoart: Reconstruction and Restoration from Laser-Scanned Fossils".

As always, the pieces were all fantastic, and I'm sure all of the other submissions that didn't bring home the prize were as well. So again, congratulations all around!

The Paris Las Vegas Hotel and Casino.

After the Awards Ceremony is the After-Hours Party, and as usual, paleo-shenanigans ensued. Despite being warned, I think my girlfriend was still taken aback by the whole affair.. This was her first time at an SVP after party, and as anyone who has been to SVP knows, it can be a bit intense. I was even called "the Pat Boone of paleontology" by a former SVP president whose name will not be mentioned. I'm not sure why, and I'm also not sure it was a compliment, even though I think it was meant to be. But I was pleased a former SVP president was talking to me, so I'll take it!

A view of the Nevada desert from Paris.

After a long night of celebrating, I curled up under my dinosaur quilt and tried to rest up for the journey home. I don't know if I'll ever head back to Las Vegas or not. Don't get me wrong, I had a great time while I was there. I mean, how often do you get to visit a city, in a hotel/casino, in another city, in a desert? Where else in the world can you look out your window and see the Eiffel Tower and the Spring Mountains at the same time? It's a one of a kind place, and this was a one of a kind SVP. And perhaps it was a one of a kind trip.

I'm still looking forward to next year's meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, and hope to see some of you there. Keep following @SVP_vertpaleo for tweets about upcoming meetings, and vertebrate paleontology in general. And thank you to everyone who made this year's SVP so memorable, and also to those who followed the journey here at Superoceras. Your patience knows no bounds!

SVP 2011 (Day 4, Part II): Crocodylomorphs in the Casino

2011-11-05T17:00:00.000-04:00

Or "crocodylomorphs in the convention center", if you prefer. I love alliteration, don't you?

Here it is, one last afternoon of talks. I planted myself firmly in Technical Session XVIII for this year's round of "croc" talks. And the crurotarsan branch of the archosaur family tree was just as well represented as their sister clade had been this morning. By the end of the session, three new crocodylomorphs were described, and some old misconceptions were (hopefully) dispelled.

A Cuban crocodile, Crocodylus rhombifer, basking at the National Zooloigical Park's Reptile Discovery Center.

As for the three new taxa, the first was a basal crocodylomorph from the Late Jurassic of Patagonia that helps shed light on the transformation between typical basal archosaurian skulls and the more derived skulls of crocodyliforms (Pol et al., 2011). Phylogenetic analysis shows that his new taxa is more closely related to the Crocodyliformes than it is to Sphenosuchia, suggesting that the "crocodyliform braincase" evolved before the origin of Crocodyliformes, and before the other skull modifications of the group. The second new taxa was described in a talk by Dr. Casey Holliday and based on work he co-authored with Nick Gardner (who gave a talk on the cranial anatomy of Youngina capensis on Wednesday) on a new, giant crocodilian (nicknamed "shield croc") from the Late Cretaceous of Morocco (2011). "Shield croc" is known from very distinct cranial remains that appear to exhibit some type of ornamentation. Examining other fossil taxa and the behavior of living crocodylians has let Holloway to suggest that these ornaments, combined with the presence of deep vascular grooves in the bone, are indicative of a unique display structure and/or thermoregulatory device that is not seen in other crocodyliformes. The third new taxa was a basal Miocene caimanine from Panama that leads researchers to believe that the Caimaninae originated in the New World Tropics where they can still be found today, rather than outside of the tropics as previous fossil evidence had suggested (Hastings et al., 2011).

A of Alligator mississippiensis waiting for feeding time at the Nashville Zoo at Grassmere.

Hearing about new fossil taxa is great, but what about the living crocodylomorphs, represented by the Order Crocodylia: the modern crocodiles, alligators, caimans, and gharial? These animals are often thought to be relics of a bygone age; animals that have gone unchanged for tens of thousands of years, referred to as "living fossils". If you haven't heard already, I'm not a huge fan of this terminology. It misleads people into believing that the long, broad snout of a living crocodylian are standard for all crocodylians, past and present. Modern forms appear to be generalists in form and behavior, that arose unchanged from generalist ancestors. In reality, modern crocodylians are not generalists at all. Their ancestors weren't generalists either, and luckily Dr. Chris Brochu was around to tell us why. According to their recent analysis of morphological data sets, the "generalized" skull shape of extant crocodylians is not an ancestral standard, but rather, independently evolved at least five times within the group from ancestral forms that were actually more specialized (2011). Which means that ancestral crocodylians looked nothing like their modern counterparts. They probably resembled small bodied alligatoroids, not the giant crocs we are familiar with today. The group's diversity has just been reduced to a point where we assume the living species are representative of the whole. It's actually a little silly to assume that in the first place, because if you look at all of Crocodylomorpha, it's easy to see that diversity is one of the things that clade does best.

Alligator sp. attempts to make a meal out of a pair of Tapirus polkensis at the Eastern Tennessee State University Natural History Museum & Gray Fossil Site (sorry mammal people).

Do these findings, and all of the others presented in these final talks, help dispel the myth of the crocodylian "living fossil"? I sure hope so. But regardless, it was still a great session. My apologies to anyone who wanted to hear about talks on marine mammals and "ungulates", as I did not make it to either of the other closing technical sessions. But that does not mean that I don't find desmostylians and perissodactyls interesting. In fact, I think they're swell (even if my photo of the tapirs above does seem to indicate even more bias towards crocodylians). Next year I'll get to them, I swear.

The enigmatic, "ancient parodox" of a desmostylian, Palaeoparadoxia tabatai, photographed at the American Museum of Natural History.

Referenced Talks

Technical Session XVIII. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, from 1:45-4:15PM.

Brochu, C., Turner, A., Allen, F., Wilberg, E. 2011. The myth of the living fossil: Basal crown group relationships, reversing polarities, and restoraation of the ancestral crocodylian. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Wednesday, 02 November, 2011, at 2:45PM.

Gardner, N., Bhullar, B., Holliday, C., & O'Keefe, R. 2011. Cranial anatomy in the basal diapsid Youngina capensis and its relevance to higher radiations of Permo-Triassic Neodiapsida. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Wednesday, 02 November, 2011, at 2:30PM.

Hastings, A., Bloch, J., Rincon, A., MacFadden, B., & Jaramillo, C. 2011. New Primative caimanine (Crocodylia, Alligatoridae) from the Miocene of Panama. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, at 2:30PM.

Holiday, C., & Gardner, N. 2011. A new eusuchian crocodyliform with novel cranial integument and the origin of crocodylia. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, at 2:00PM.

Pol, D., Rauhut, O., Lecuona, A., & Leardi, J. 2011. A new basal crocodylomorph from the Late Jurassic of Patagonia and its implications for the evolution of the crocodyliform braincase. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, at 1:45PM.

SVP 2011 (Day 4, Part I): Dinosaurs in the Desert

2011-11-05T12:30:00.000-04:00

Eat it up, Interwebs.

What can I say? I like dinosaurs. Big dinosaurs, small dinosaurs, dinosaurs of all shapes and sizes. I know that there are fossil mammals and fish to consider. And they are really cool too. But seriously, look at this kid. He's so happy about the stegosaur on his sweatshirt. If it wasn't for dinosaurs, he probably wouldn't know a thing about fossil mammals and fish. So it would be cruel to deny him his dinosaur talks on the last day of SVP, wouldn't it? Darn right it would. So that means a morning spent in Technical Session XIV, listening to all of the theropod talks. And there were some really good ones this year.

Back in July I wrote about a paper by Xu, You, Du, and Han (2011) that described the new paravian, Xiantingia zheng, and what its discovery meant for the relationships of the "first bird", Archaeopteryx, to other dinosaur groups. Well today I caught another talk, presented by Xing Xu (2011), on the same subject. He proposed a new eumaniraptoran phylogeny where oviraptorosaurs are more closely allied with avialans, and Archaeopteryx is more closely allied with the deinonychosaurs. I'm still not quite convinced that this phylogeny is the one that is going to stick, but the hypothesis is interesting, to say the least. Regardless of how cladogram actually turns out, it is very cool to know that Archaeopteryx (or at least an isolated feather that has been associated with Archaeopteryx) had black upper primary covert feathers (Carney et al., 2011).

The still unnamed Hell Creek caenagnathid oviraptorosaur, in front of a life restoration by Walters and Kissinger. This is a section of the Hell Creek mural (which won the Lanzendorf award for two-dimensional paleoart at last year's SVP meeting) at the "Dinosaurs in Their Time" exhibit at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History.

Amongst a bunch of other really good talks, there was one in particular that stands out for me. This is because I had been waiting to see it since I read through the abstract book. Dr. Matt Lamanna of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History was set to talk about the undescribed Hell Creek caenagnathid oviraptorosaur. You probably know the one I'm talking about. Triebold Paleontology Inc. makes a beautiful cast of this guy from the three preserved partial skeletons they excavated. Scott Hartman has also done a fantastic skeletal reconstruction of the critter. This oviraptorosaur holds the superlatives of most complete North American oviraptorosaur, most complete caenagnathid discovered to date, second largest caenagnathid known, and possible youngest oviraptorosaur, having lived right up until the end of the Cretaceous. But it still hasn't been assigned to a known taxa, or given its own name. When I read the abstract, I was certain that this theropod would no longer be an unknown as of 11:45AM today. But, tragedy; still no name! At least the specimen was finally described.

By 12:15PM, the last dinosaur talk had ended, and there was only one afternoon session left. Lucky for me, the only thing I love > dinosaurs is crocodylomorphs, and the last session is all croc talks. I can already tell it's going to be a good afternoon.

Referenced

Xu, X., You, H., Du, K., and Han, F. 2011. An Archaeopteryx-like theropod from China and the origin of Avialae. Nature 475: 465-470.doi:10.1038/nature10288

Referenced Talks

Technical Session XIV. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, from 8:00AM-12:15PM.

Carney, R., Vinther, J., Shawkey, M., D'Alba, L., & Ackerman, J. 2011. Black feather color in Archaeopteryx. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Thursday, 03 November, 2011, at 1:45PM.

Lamanna, M., Sues, H., Schachner, E., Lysin, T. 2011. A new caenagnathid oviraptorosaur (Theropoda: Maniraptora) from the Upper Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) Hell Creek Formation of the western United States. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, at 11:45AM.

Xu, X., Sullivan, C., Zhang, F., & O'Connor, J. 2011. A new eumaniraptoran phylogeny and its implications for avialan origins. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Saturday, 05 November, 2011, at 11:30AM.

SVP 2011 (Day 3): Nerds in Nevada

2011-11-04T23:30:00.000-04:00

First and foremost, trust me when I say that I don't mean "nerd" in a derogatory sense. In fact, it's quite the contrary! There has never been a better time to be a "nerd", "dork", or "geek", especially among a group of people like this:

"Elvisaurus" and the rest of the "Rock Vegas" gang at the SVP 29th Annual Auction.

Viva "Rock Vegas" indeed! We were all having a hard time trying to figure out what the theme would be for this year's auction, and I don't think anyone saw this coming. But more on the auction later. For now, lets talk about talks.
Symposium 4 on "Vertebrate Diversity Patterns and Sampling Bias" had very little bias when it came to the vertebrate groups covered in the talks. Many different lineages were represented: therapsids, pterosaurs, early tetrapods, dinosaurs, "fishes", and mammals all made an appearance, although I can't say I saw talks on all of the above. I was drawn into Technical Session IX, which hosted talks on sauropsids of all shapes and sizes. F. Robin O'Keefe presented the work he co-authored with Luis Chiappe (in a paper published in Science last August) on Polycotylus latippinus, a plesiosaur that not only swam through the Western Interior Seaway of North America, but also gave birth to live young in those very waters during the Late Cretaceous period. Many paleontologists had hypothesized that viviparity was a likely method of birthing for plesiosaurs, but this particular specimen yeilded the first definitive evidence.

The polycotylid plesiosaur Dolichorhynchops, photographed at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History.

Of course, Polycotylus was not the only viviparous lepidosauromorph talked about in the morning sessions. The Early Cretaceous squamate Yabeinosaurus tenuis, also made an appearance. The discovery of a female specimen with embryos in her abdomen showed that live birth in squamates evolved in at least one species around 30 million years earlier than previously known. Yuan Wang and Susan Evans had published on this specimen last summer (in the journal Naturwissenschaften), just as O'Keefe and Chiappe had with their plesiosaur, but seeing the talks at SVP was still a real treat. There is still a lot to be learned from a 15 minute talk, even if you've seen the papers before. That's one of the great things I enjoy the most about attending the meetings. It doesn't have to be new research being presented for the first time in order for it to be informative.

A life sized model of the sauropod Astrodon johnstoni, the Maryland state dinosaur, on display at the Maryland Science Center. If you've ever seen this guy in person, you know that is not a smile on his face.

After the 2nd Annual Paleo-Terps lunch (by the way, does anyone have photos from that?) it was off to talks in Technical Session XI, which was dominated by the largest living land animals of all time, the sauropod dinosaurs. After a quick run through of the poster session, it was off to dinner at the Bellagio before returning to the SVP 29th Annual Auction. I was disappointed to hear that I missed out on Jenn Hall's dinobird painting at the silent auction, but I was thrilled with the beautiful dinosaur quilt I got at the live auction. It features James Gurney's Cretaceous scene from the 1997 "The World of Dinosaurs" stamp series on a truly amazing hand stitched quilt commissioned by Laura English, and crafted by Carol Bietz and Angie Stuart. The photo of the quilt I tweeted really doesn't do it justice, and I'll take some proper ones soon. But in the event that any of the above mentioned ever come across this page, I have but one thing to say: thankyouthankyouthankyou! I really love it.

Referenced Talks

Symposium 4: Vertebrate Diversity Patterns and Sampling Bias. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Friday, 04 November, 2011, from 8:00AM-12:15PM.

Technical Session XI. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Friday, 04 November, 2011, from 1:45PM-4:15PM.

Evans, S., & Wang, Y. 2011. The early Cretaceous lizard Yabeinosaurus: Insights from new specimens. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Friday, 04 November, 2011, at 10:45AM.

O'Keefe, F., & Chiappe, L. 2011, Viviparity and cetacean-like life history in a Mesozoic marine plesiosaur (Reptilia: Sauropterygia). Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Friday, 04 November, 2011, at 9:00AM.

SVP 2011 (Day 2): Students in the "Silver State"

2011-11-03T23:30:00.000-04:00

The second day of SVP is usually a good one, for two reasons. First, the morning starts off with the Romer Prize Session talks, where original predoctoral student research is selected for presentation because of its scientific value and the high quality of the written abstract. While there were only six talks in the session this year, I think the competition is still going to be tough, and I can't wait to see who will be taking home the prize.

The second reason day two is usually a good one is because of the Student Roundtable Forum and Reprint Exchange. It's always a great chance for students to network and talk with professionals in the field of paleontology on a wide variety of subjects. This year was no exception, and I'd like to thank all of the individuals who lent their time and talents to helping all of the students and post-docs. I'd also like to thank everyone that donated their reprint collections to the exchange. I noticed it took everyone a lot longer to move through the line this year, which indicated to me that there were a lot of good papers and journals out there, and students were having a hard time choosing.

Dr. John Merck talks to a group of enthralled students about graduate school opportunities at the Student Roundtable Forum.

Another big part of the evening is the student raffel. The SVP Student and Post-doctoral Liaison Committee spends the first two days of the conference trying to sell as many raffel tickets as they can, raising money for the Vertebrate Paleontology Education and Research Fund. With each ticket purchased, a student has the chance to win a year long, donated memberships to SVP. A lot of these tickets are purchased by individuals who are not students, but generously donate their tickets to students so that everyone can have a chance at the free memberships. But thanks to the exceptional generosity of some of the professors, researchers, and professional paleontologists in the crowd, this year we were able to give away 13 donated memberships instead of the planned two, as well as a ton of other door prizes! All in all, SVP students were able to raise over $1600 for the Education and Research Fund, and over $400 for the Japan Fossil Recovery Program. Thank you to everyone that bought a ticket, made a donation, or came to support the evenings events. None of it would be possible without you. And if you would like to make an additional donation to either, follow the links embedded in their names above (I am still working to obtain a link for the Japan Fossil Recovery Program, but as soon as I have it, I will add it above).

I managed to squeeze in a few talks during the day, but I'll spare you my long winded breakdowns. Especially since the official SVP Twitter feed has been doing a great job of breaking them down in 140 characters or less. You can follow them @SVP_vertpaleo, and look for the hashtag #2011SVP to see what everyone is saying about this year's annual meeting.

Referenced Talks

Romer Prize Session. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Thursday, 03 November, 2011, from 8:00-9:30AM.

SVP 2011 (Day 1): Vertebrates in Vegas

2011-11-02T23:30:00.000-04:00

A model of Rhabdoderma elegans, an extinct coelacanth, swimming through a Permian reef at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History.

There's nothing like starting your morning with a hearty does of vertebrate paleontology. After the opening remarks, the first day of talks began. I opted to spend some of my earliest time slots in talks on some of the earliest vertebrates during a symposium on fim and limb evolution. The evolution of paired pectoral and pelvic fins in early vertebrates was a huge innovation. It would eventually lead to the development of the tetrapod limb, which would be modified time and time again in different vertebrate lineages. Looking at the arm of a human, the wing of a bird, and the flipper of a whale, one might not immediately see the similarities. But if you look a little closer, you can see that they all have their roots in the paired lobe fins of a common sarcopterygian ancestor. I'm not the most sentimental individual, but as I sat in those talks, and sit here now typing this with my extremely dexterous manual digits, I can't help but think about that ancestor, and pay my respects to all of the fins and limbs that came before mine. Those early pioneers helped make the vertebrates one of the most successful groups of animals on the planet.

Skeletal reconstruction of the labyrinthodont Acanthostega gunnari, one of the earliest limbed vertebrates, on display at the American Museum of natural History.

And when it comes to successful vertebrates, there is no group more famous than the dinosaurs. They were the dominant form of life on the planet for over 160 million years, and one lineage survived the mass extinction event 65.5 million years ago and is represented by myriad forms today. There were some dinosaur talks during the first technical session, one of which is sure to sadden more than a few individuals who are still hoping to be able to resurrect a non-avian dinosaur from recovered soft tissues, proteins, or DNA. Using new "metagenomic" techniques, researchers have been able to identify all the DNA in a sample of proposed dinosaur soft tissues, and have discovered that the majority of it is, in fact, not dinosaurian (Salzberg et al. 2011). The presence of bacterial, plant, and fungal DNA seems to suggest that there is a very small chance that any of the soft tissues previously recovered are actually from a dinosaur. And the chordate DNA found in the sample is likely the result of sediment leaching, as more of it was mammalian than avian. That being said, they did find some chicken DNA in there as well, posing the question as to whether it belonged to a modern bird and was also present as a result of leaching, or whether it is the original dinosaurian molecules, preserved for millions of years. I think the odds of it belonging to a modern neognathan are pretty strong given the evidence, but a reevaluation of the soft tissue work done in previous years, and future research, may still yield indisputable non-avian dinosaur proteins. One can only hope!

If you're looking for dinosaur DNA, Gallus gallus may be your ~~only~~ best source. A silver laced Wyandotte, photographed at the Nashville Zoo at Grassmere.

More afternoon talks and a some really great posters preceded a fantastic welcome reception with a gorgeous view of the city after dark. I was happy to catch up with some old friends, and be able to meet some of the people I interact with online in person. All and all, I think things are off to a great start, and I'm looking forward to the rest of the week!

Referenced Talks

Symposium 1: To Fins, limbs, wings and back again. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Wednesday, 02 November, 2011, from 8:00AM-12:15PM.

Salzberg, S., Novak, B., Poinar, H., andKaye, T., and MacCoss, M. 2011. DNA, dinosaurs, and metagenomics: A new tool for mass identification of DNA from fossil bone. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Wednesday, 02 November, 2011, at 9:15AM.

SVP 2010 (Prologue): Paleontology in Paris

2011-11-02T18:00:00.000-04:00

It may have taken most of the day to get here, but the girlfriend and I arrived at the hotel Paris in the late afternoon on Tuesday. After settling in our room and hitting up the registration table, we set out to the Las Vegas strip to get our bearings. I'm sad to report that our wanderings and the distractions of the city caused me to miss the media workshop that the SVP Media Liaison Committee sponsored. But I'm happy to report that, almost immediately, we encountered our first dinosaur of the trip!

Fulica americana, the American coot, in front of a prominent Las Vegas casino and hotel. I'm remiss to say that I had to travel all the way to Nevada to see my first coot in the "wild".

If you're still one of those people that doesn't accept that birds like the one above are in dinosaurs, perhaps you should have attended the talk by Jack Horner last night (which Brian Switek of Laelaps dissects over at Dinosaur Tracking). He spoke about dinosaurs and the proofs of evolution, and while the talk was, as per his admission, meant for a more generalized public (as opposed to a room full of paleontologists), he still brought home some very important points. Whether or not any paleontologist in the room is going to agree with one another on certain aspects of the science of paleontology (species designation, anagenesis v. cladogenesis, etc.), there is one thing that (most) do agree on: evolution.

There is no argument over the idea that generation after generation, traits accumulate in a lineage of organisms, that over time, result in the "birth" of new organisms. And we can see this idea proven in a number of ways. Selective breeding of domesticated animals results in these very changes, over relatively short spans of time. The presence of vestigial body parts shows that, at one point, an organisms ancestors must have had those body parts, and they were reduced over time with each generation. The rock record shows a real succession of living beings over massive spans of time. Modern genetics allows us to learn things that the rock record never could. We can now tell, with little doubt, how closely related living organisms are by looking at their genomes. And maybe one day, we'll be able to do the same thing with extinct animals. So like it or not, the evidence for evolution is there. And as Horner put it, if you can prove otherwise, you'll easily become the most famous person in the world, ever. Good luck with that.

Stay tuned for more from SVP all week. I managed to find the free Wi-Fi. Huzzah!

Referenced Talks

Horner, J. 2011. Dinosaurs and the proofs of evolution. Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Tuesday, 01 November, 2011, at 7:30PM.

A Reminder...

2011-10-18T10:32:00.001-04:00

SVP 2011 is just two weeks out! Am I ready to hit the road and head to fabulous Las Vegas, Nevada? Absolutely not! But with the abstract book and itinerary builder finally available, that should change soon. If you haven't registered yet, and you're looking for something to do November 2-5, why not swing by the Paris Las Vegas and register for the meeting on site? There will be tons of talks, great posters, and some awesome field trips to attend. Perhaps you want to visit the Berlin-Ichthyosaur State Park, home of the Shonisaurus popularis, Nevada's state fossil? SVP has got you covered. But don't expect to run into any prehistoric, self-portrait creating, highly predatory, super-intelligent cephalopods while you are there. This is a vertebrate paleontology meeting, after all*.

Regardless, it's sure to be a great meeting, and I'm looking forward to visiting Nevada for the first time, and meeting up with all my fellow paleo-people. I also plan on tweeting (look for the #2011SVP hashtag) and blogging as much as possible, so long as interweb access is available (but I'm still working that bit out). So be on the lookout in the coming weeks for as much SVP 2011 info as the annual meeting embargo policy will allow!

(*Also, because the chances of prehistoric, self-portrait creating, highly predatory, super-intelligent cephalopods having ever existed are slim to none.)

Two years of Superoceras

2011-10-15T21:38:00.005-04:00

I know that things around here have been pretty quiet lately. But I'm not quite ready to throw in the towel just yet. In fact, as I begin my third year of blogging, I'm excited by all the possibilities before me, personally, professionally, and academically. A lot has changed for me over the last year, but the one thing that hasn't is my love of the natural world, and sharing that love with others. So with that, thank you all for another year. I'm looking forward to the next.

A school of Cooperoceras, colored by my girlfriend's first grade students for National Fossil Day, and presented to me on the second anniversary of the blog.

Happy National Fossil Day!

2011-10-12T00:00:00.000-04:00

Another year has past, and with it, we've seen a number of paleontological discoveries. I don't know about you, but I'm in the mood to celebrate! And what better day than the second annual National Fossil Day™ to do just that! I'm a huge fan of this year's mosasaur/ammonite logo, and of this year's local activities, both in Maryland and the District of Columbia. I highly encourage all of you to find something to do in your area, as both the American Geological Institute and the National Park Service have gone to great lengths to make sure there are tons of events going on across the country both today, and this week. Can't make it to a National Fossil Day event? Maybe an activity at home or school is a better option for you. The kickoff event begins today on the National Mall at 10:00AM, but regardless of where you are or what you're doing, be sure to take a moment to explore, learn about, and protect our nations prehistoric heritage.

"National Fossil Day" is a trademark of the National Park Service and is intended to promote public awareness and stewardship of fossils, as well as to foster a greater appreciation of their scientific and educational value.

Run, Cryolophosaurus, Run!

2011-10-03T15:45:00.000-04:00

Per the directions over at Don't Mess with Dinosaurs, I am very excited to share the following video with you.

"Cryolophosaurus Running Test Animation", by Brian Engh of DinosaursReanimated, from YouTube.

Having only seen this video and a few of the rough storyboard images, I'm very excited to see how the "Dinosaurs Reanimated" project evolves. Be sure to follow all the developments (and give feedback if you have any) over at the Dinosaurs Reanimated Production Blog.

More Maryland Dinosaurs

2011-09-27T09:30:00.000-04:00

Another day, another dinosaur. At least that is how it seems here in Maryland. On September 10 at Dinosaur Park in Laurel, amateur paleontologist Dave Hacker discovered a bone fragment that had been weathered out of the sediment by the heavy rains we've been having in the area. With the help of Steve Jabo of the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, the bone fragment was removed from the iron rich Muirkirk Deposit of the Arundel Formation. When first exposed, everyone hoped that they were looking at a complete limb bone, but as it was prepped out, they discovered it was only a fragment, and are now speculating that it is a sauropod claw. Here's a little video on the find from the local 10:00PM news last night (I cringed a ~~little~~ lot when they referred to Astrodon as a dinosaur that looks like a "Brontosaurus"), which conveniently aired after the two hour season premier of another program about dinosaurs. Coincidence? I think not.

What Kind of Dinosaurs Lived in the DC Area?: MyFoxDC.com

Dino Run

2011-09-20T11:50:00.000-04:00

Dino Run logo, from PixelJAM.

The last couple weeks have seen a lot of talk in the dino-blogosphere about Dinosaur Revolution and Planet Dinosaur, so as it stands, I've stayed out of the discussion. But I'm all for dinosaur distractions, so I thought I'd throw this little gem into the mix for those of you looking for a great way to procrastinate. Follow the link, put on your running hat, and check out PixelJAM's Dino Run! It's a fast paced race against extinction that any dino fan is sure to love.

Ahoy, Paleo Pirates!

2011-09-19T21:00:00.000-04:00

As some of ye' may know, today is International Talk Like A Pirate Day. For buccaneers, privateers, proletarian outlaws, an' Pastafarians alike, today is a day of celbratin' for any an' all who call themselves pirate. So if ye' haven't yet done your duty, avast! Get yerself a tankard of rum, put on yer finest hat, an' hoist the colors!

The jolly roger of the original Paleo Pirates, a work in progress for far too long. If you can deduce the five animals depicted here (in spite of my crude representations), perhaps you have what it takes to join the crew.

Introducing a new "backyard dinosaur", Propanoplosaurus marylandicus.

2011-09-14T17:00:00.000-04:00

It has been entirely too long since I've blogged here at Superoceras. Shame on me. But if there is one thing that will get me back in front of the computer screen to write, it's baby ankylosaurs. I mean, come on, look at how cute this little fella is.

Figure 4 from Stanford et al. 2011, showing two stereo photographs (top) and a drawing (bottom) of the dorsum of the head of USNM 540686.

In a paper published in the current issue of the Journal of Paleontology, Ray Stanford of the Mesozoic Track Project and David Weishampel and Valerie Deleon of the Center of Functional Anatomy and Evolution at John Hopkins University, introduce us to Propanoplosaurus marylandicus, the "lizard that predates the completely armored lizard, collected in Maryland". That's right folks, Maryland. While better known for another armored sauropsid, Maryland is now the proud homestate of the first (diagnostic) nodosaurid fossil and the first dinosaur hatchling discovered on the eastern seaboard. That's pretty cool, if I do say so myself.

This specimen, while not consisting of any actual body parts of the baby nodosaurid, is preserved as partial casts and partial molds of the animal, making it a particularly interesting body fossil. It was discovered in association with a series of dinosaur footprints, attributed to the same type of animal, that were found in the Lower Cretaceous Patuexnt Formation. This formation is the oldest stratigraphic unit exposed in the Atlantic Coastal Plain of Maryland, and has yielded more than just the baby and footprints. From it, paleontologists have been able to recover enough material to reconstruct the Mesozoic ecosystem in which this hatchling nodosaurid lived, and in which the footprints were left. All right here"in our backyard" (more on that later).

The fossil nodosaur holotype (left) and USNM 540685, a nodosaur footprint (right), both found by Ray Stanford, and on exhibit at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History.

Some have apparently questioned the legitimacy of this find, suggesting that USNM 540686 is actually a pseudofossil -an inorganically created marking, impression or deposit left on or in a mineral that resembles a once living thing -and not the mold/cast of an actual animal left behind after it drowned. But the authors of the paper are confident that they are looking at the real deal; so confident in fact, they assigned the critter to its own, new genus. As Brian Switek pointed out over in his post at Dinosaur Tracking, this is something that paleontologists try not to do so much nowadays, because it is hard to determine which juvenile (or hatchling in this case) skeleton will grow up to become which adult skeleton. But considering the fact that there is only one other ankylosaur known from that time and location, it's only known from the teeth it left behind, and it has been suggested that it is a nomen dubium, I think little Propanoplosaurus is safe in its name, for the time being.

Perhaps one day we'll be able to determine what a Propanoplosaurus looked like as a fully grown individual. Or maybe, it will turn out to be a different, already described dinosaur, and we'll have to abandon this new genus. But until the Arundel Clay starts churning out more specimens, we'll have to settle for the flora and fauna we already know from this period in Earth history. As I mentioned above, I'll get to that in a future post. Consider this my easing back into blogging, and a teaser for more to come. And rest assured, it will be up before another month slips by me.

References

Stanford, R., Weishampel. D. B., & Deleon, V. B. 2011. The First Hatchling Dinosaur Reported from the Eastern United States: Propanoplosaurus marylandicus (Dinosauria: Ankylosauria) from the Early Cretaceous of Maryland, U.S.A. Journal of Paleontology, 85 (5), 916-924 DOI: 10.166/10-113.1

Things that are not dinosaurs birds: Archaeopteryx?

2011-07-28T12:30:00.016-04:00

Since its discovery 150 years ago, Archaeopteryx has been considered the most basal bird ever discovered. In fact, current phylogenies show Aves (birds) comprises Archaeopteryx and Pygostylia (every other bird ever), meaning Archaeopteryx comes as close to "not-being-a-bird" as a bird can get. Its discovery also initially helped support the now firmly established notion that modern birds evolved from within a group of theropod dinosaurs. In my opinion, Archaeopterxy is as close as you are going to get to finding a "missing link", as it possessed traits found in both non-avian dinosaurs and birds.

The infamous "Berlin Specimen" of Archaeopteryx lithographica (HMN 1880) on display at the Humboldt Museum für Naturkunde. Photograph by H. Raab, from Wikimedia Commons.

However, a recent paper published in the journal Nature may have finally proven what some researchers and scientists have been saying for years: Archaeopteryx is a deinonychosaur more closely related to Velociraptor and Troodon than to avialans Gallus and Columba. The paper describes a new genus of paravian, Xiantingia zheng, and places it in a clade with Anchiornis and Archaeopteryx within Deinonychosauria, not Avialae.

Xiantingia is a remarkable fossil in and of itself. But it is also very cool because, if its analysis is correct, it has implications for both how we currently understand the evolution of birds, and the evolution of flight in dinosaurs. It also illustrates beautifully one of the most fundamental principles of science: that our understanding is constantly evolving as well. When Archaeopteryx was discovered, it was an anomaly. Half bird, half reptile. Their was no other animal quite like it. But the more fossils we unearth, the more we learn that the Mesozoic world was full animals that blur the lines between bird and non-avian dinosaur. For example, Allosaurus (clearly not a bird) has a furcula, or "wishbone", which was thought to only be found in birds. And Hesperornis (clearly a bird) had a mouth full of teeth, something thought to not be found in birds. There are dozens of other examples that show that there were lots of fluffy, fuzzy, feathered critters running around that weren't quite birds, but were closely related cousins. And Xiantingia is another one of these wonderful creatures.

Artists impression of Xiantingia zheng. Copyright Xing Lida andLiu Yi, from naturenews.

As for the new placement of Archaeopteryx outside of the bird clade, I'm sure the story will keep evolving as well. There is only "tentative statistical support" proving that this new phylogeny is the most accurate one we know of. And new research may show that it belongs somewhere else on the "Tree of Life", or that it and some of its deinonychosaur kin are actually "birds" after all. Regardless, as the picture becomes clearer, one thing stays evident, and is worth reiterating: All modern birds are dinosaurs!

For more on Xiantingia and Archaeopteryx, check out the following links:
Nature News press release by Matt Kaplan
Nature News and Views article by Larry Witmer
Nature article by Xu, X., You, H., Du, K., and Han, F.
WitmerLab blog post at Pick & Scalpel
Everything Dinosaur blog post
Theropoda blog post

References

Xu, X., You, H., Du, K., and Han, F. 2011. An Archaeopteryx-like theropod from China and the origin of Avialae. Nature 475: 465-470. doi:10.1038/nature10288

Backyard Botany: Native Maryland vines

2011-07-21T19:00:00.017-04:00

As I mentioned in my last post, I spend quite a good deal of time fighting the growth of invasive vines in my yard. I'll admit, I always feel guilty killing off any plants, invasive or not. But controlling invasive species and making sure they do not spread is essential to protecting and preserving the local ecosystem. That is why as I tear non-native plants out, I always try and replace them with species that can be found growing naturally in my area. And lucky for me, there are several such species that can be found in the region of Maryland that I call home.

Parthenocissus quinquefolia, working its way up my gutters.

Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia) is probably the most notorious. This hardy, woody vine is a serious climber (just ask the second story of my house), has a beautiful red fall color, and has berries that provide a winter food source for birds and wildlife. Over the summer months, you can find its five leaflet clusters growing up almost any surface, using both tendrils and the sticky pads on them to maintain their home. Luckily, I have this tenacious vine growing naturally in my yard already.

The first, lonely cluster of Lonicera sempervirens blooms on the trellis.

While Virginia creeper is great, its flowers are nothing to write home about. So when I took all of the Japanese honeysuckle out of my yard, my girlfriend and I both wanted to find a new vine that would show attractive flowers, and bring hummingbirds and butterflies to the yard. We found just that in the native trumpet honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens). It has really beautiful pink flowers, and the two we planted on our trellises easily acclimated to the climate and soil conditions. I highly recommend this shrubby vine for anyone looking to add a little color to their yard. It even keeps its green over winter, and the hummingbirds love it.

A black-capped chickadee investigates the trumpet flower of Campis radicans.

Another flowering Maryland vine that I'm still trying to get my hands on is trumpet creeper (Campis radicans). I haven't found any nurseries that carry it yet, but am very familiar with this plant, as it grows all over the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The next time I see its trumpet shaped flowers when I'm out and about, I'll have to look for the seed pods it drops right after flowering so I can get some in the ground. This is also a big hummingbird attractor, and other small birds like to nest in its foliage.

There is a garden fence in there somewhere. You just have to get past all of the Calystegia sepium appalachiana (and hope it doesn't choke your vegetables) first.

But even the native vines that can be found in my area have to be monitored and controlled for growth. Planting the vines is one thing, but if you want to keep them from overtaking your other trees and shrubs, you have to be vigilant. Hedge bindweed (Calystegia sepium) is another native herbaceous perennial vine, and it has lovely white flowers that look very much like its morning glory cousins, but it spreads like wildfire. I'll walk out my back gate in the morning, and by the time I'm home from work, it will have reached across the gap, preventing me from entering my own property. Any and all of these vines, while great where I live, could easily be considered invasive in other areas because of their ability to latch hold of the scarcest resources and thrive.

Backyard Botany: Invasive vines

2011-07-19T08:00:00.010-04:00

Invasive vines: climbing fences and choking out bushes like a boss.

My yard is covered in vines. Terrible, invasive, non-native vines, that seem to grow a lot faster than I can get rid of them. It has become a serious problem. Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), English ivy (Hedera helix), and mile-a-minute vine (Polygonum perfoliatum) can all be found on my property in Edmonston, Maryland. Initially brought in for ornamental purposes, their agressive growth have allowed them to take over large portions of my yard. They grow over natural groundcover, trees, shrubs, fences, gardens, sheds, and even the house itself. It makes me very unhappy. But their is one invasive vine that really gets under my skin, much more so than all the others combined: Porcelain berry (Ampelopsis brevipedunculata).

Ampelopsis brevipedunculata, with unripe fruit. If you see this in your yard, get rid of it before those berries start to turn blue.

Porcelain berry is the worst. Unless of course it's growing in its native Asian temperate forests. Like the others mentioned above, it has been cultivated in the United States for ornamental use, but where I live, it is a serious invasive threat. Any individual plant purchased for ornamentation quickly becomes many as a result of seeds being spread by birds and other animals, as well as by vegetative means. It is a climber, and will grow up and choke out even the tallest trees. One plant, in a pot or on a trellis in your yard can quickly become a neighborhood or city/county/state wide problem.

The reddish stem and tender young leaves associated with new growth in Ampelopsis brevipedunculata.

To add injury to insult (yes, I do mean it that way), there is one more thing that puts porcelain berry on my invasive "most wanted" list. I mentioned above that it really gets under my skin, and I mean that quite literally. I appear to be highly allergic. The first time I cleared it out of the American holly tree, I thought I must have gotten into poison ivy or oak (both of which can also be found in my yard), because I broke out in a bit of a rash. The second time I cleared it from a section of fence, it was immediately clear that it was the porcelain berry that was making me break out in the worst plant-based rash I've ever had (and I've had a few). This woody, deciduous, perennial vine is a menace. If you find it in your yard, I'd highly recommend you get rid of it. Just wear gloves before you start cutting and pulling it down.

Tetrapod Zoology (and a bunch of other blogs), now at Scientific American.

2011-07-05T12:20:00.002-04:00

When I got back to my computer this morning after the long weekend, I came to find that Dr. Darren Naish (previously of Tetrapod Zoology ver 1 and ver 2) has made the move from ScienceBlogs over to Scientific American. You can now find Tetrapod Zoology (ver 3) at Scientific American Blogs. Be sure to update your blogrolls... very carefully.

In my excitement over the move this morning, I inadvertently deleted mine. Like... the entire widget, with the list of 80 plus blogs I follow. I found a web cache of the blog, and I think I've managed to rebuild it, but let me know if you're missing or want to be added. My apologies to all my fellow bloggers!

But back to the topic at hand, please join me in congratulating Dr. Naish on the move, and check out his introductory post here.

**UPDATE 14 JULY**

It would appear that Eric Michael Johnson of The Primate Diaries and The Primate Diaries in Exile has also joined the gang over at Scientific American Blogs. Check out The [new] Primate Diaries at Scientific American!

**UPDATE 15 JULY**

And another great new blog has joined Scientific American. Check out Symbiartic, where Glendon Mellow and Kalliopi Monoyios write about the "art of science and the science of art".

Backyard Ornithology: House finch breeding

2011-07-01T09:00:00.144-04:00

A while back I left a teaser on the end of a post about house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus), and never got around to telling you all the reason that, despite their non-native status, they are a joy to have around the house. One word: babies!

A house finch nest, conveniently placed in one of my hanging planters.

Back in the beginning of April, I came home to quite a surprise when I went to water the plants on my front porch. Some little avian thought the pansies my girlfriend hung would be the perfect place to make a home. The nest was about 12 cm in diameter, with a 6 cm diameter depression, and was made mostly of twigs and grasses, with a bit of feather and plastic thrown in for good measure. It held three, 2 cm, white eggs (with a few brown flecks), that I initially worried belonged to the even more non-native house sparrow (Passer domesticus). I took a quick photo, and ran back inside, waiting at the window to see if mom or dad would stop by so I could get a positive identification.

The female house finch returns to the nest.

It didn't take long for the expecting mother to return. Though still just a little brown bird, the lack of a band behind the eye, and absence of mottled color on the upper portion of the wing, indicated that I was indeed sharing my property with a female house finch, and not house sparrow. She vigilantly sat on that nest for about two weeks, incubating the eggs and keeping them safe from predators. Occasionally, I'd catch the male dropping by to feed her and keep her company. And then one day, there was no mother on the nest. Instead, I caught a glimpse of one of the most unattractive babies I'd ever seen.

A hatchling house finch pokes his head above the rim of the nest.

Pink, blind, and only moderately fluffy, these chicks left a lot to be desired in the looks department. But in what seemed like no time at all, they were covered in a layer of down, and their pennaceous feathers began to fill in. I remember getting a text from my girlfriend one day telling me they looked like "little dinosaurs". Of course, they were just that, as she well knows. But she noticed a distinct stage of their development where the family resemblance was, at least to her, undeniable.

Five little dinosaurs, in a very small nest.

The next time I approached the nest, I was happy to find it crowded with five chicks, as opposed to the expected three. The female had laid a few more eggs between our first seeing her and the chicks hatching. They didn't have a whole lot of wiggle room, and the fecal sacs that covered the nest were a bit gross, but they all seemed in very good health. This is entirely because of their outstanding parents.

A male house finch feeding his hungry chicks.

Mr. and Mrs. Finch spent all of their waking hours flying back and forth from the hanging planter to feed their voracious chicks. They were two of the most dedicated parents I've ever seen, and not once did any chick ever apear to go hungry, and be any less fit than its siblings. As they continued to grow, the nest got smaller and smaller. I was amazed at how all five chicks were able to pile onto one another and become virtually invisible to anyone staring at the nest from a distance. But about two weeks after they hatched, it became clear that space was becoming an issue. I sat and watched as one day, five little birds stood up around the edge of the nest and began to stretch their wings.

A fledgling house finch, ready to leave the nest.

My girlfriend and I snuck around the back of the house to watch what we knew was inevitable. As we got into position, the chicks (now fully feathered and looking quite like their mother with the exception of their pin feather "eyebrows") began to chirp in response to the calls of their parents, who were singing to them from the branches of a nearby American holly tree. All of a sudden, they took off in unison, frantically fluttering their wings as if their lives depended on it, to join their parents in the tree.

Yay! They made it.

We watched as the happy family sang to each other, and flew between our American holly and the white oak in the neighboring yard. It looked like the chicks weren't quite ready to give up the free meals as they closely followed their parents. My girlfriend and I, similarly, were not quite ready to give up the chicks. Watching them grow and develop had been a wonderful experience, and we would end up missing them quite a bit. Mom and dad eventually came back and started building a second nest in a different planter, but abandoned it. A third was constructed (again, in a different planter) and two eggs were laid, but the nest was abandoned. So even though there have been plenty of other fledgling birds in the yard over the last several months, we only had the five house sparrows.

Occasionally, when I pull into my driveway after work, I'm greeted by a small flock of little red headed birds. Maybe I'm just being sentimental, but I believe it to be the five chicks, all male (females are known to lay one sex of egg first), that started their lives on my front porch. Regardless, I'm confident that I'll have more houses finches next season. Is this problematic on some level? Yes of course. They are not a native species, and utilize the resources of birds that should be traditionally found in the area. But new life, no matter what form it takes, is always a joy to have around, so I look forward to their return next season!

Time "Outdoors"

2011-06-30T14:50:00.002-04:00

Readers who frequent this blog may have noticed that, since March, things have slowed down quite a bit around here. At work, I've been required to spend less time at my desk (a great place to blog when I can), and more time moving about. I've been taking courses, which takes up quite a bit of time as well. But as the weather has gotten warmer, the majority of my free time has been spent outdoors. This has been the first spring and summer that I've been in my new home after the previous occupants moved out last year, which means I've had a lot of yard work to catch up on. Getting rid of invasive species, trying to get as many native plants on my property as possible, and keeping my garden take up the majority of my post-work daylight hours. Quite a bit of energy goes into this, which is both good and bad. Good because I love working outside, and I'm excited for my home grown foods and the wildlife that native plantscaping will bring to my yard. Bad because when the sun goes down, I usually do as well. Blogging, unfortunately, has not been as large of a priority as sleeping, so it has gone by the wayside.

But I'm hoping to change that. It recently occurred to me that botany, ornithology, and sustainable agriculture are all pretty science-y subjects, and that blogging about them here is probably a good idea. So in the next couple weeks, I'll be doing a series of "backyard" posts regarding the things that have been keeping me busy outdoors. Perhaps it will just be a photo, or a quick blurb about a particular organism, but there will be more content coming. In the meantime, please enjoy this adorable video of some Muppets singing a song about spending time outside. I hope that you (and your little ones, should you have any) have the opportunity to spend a lot of time having fun "outdoors" this summer as well!

"Outdoors"with Jason Mraz, by Sesame Street, via YouTube.

"The Fighting Pair"

2011-06-13T11:30:00.004-04:00

Allosaurus fragilis and Stegosaurus stenops face off at the Denver Museum of Science and Nature. Photo by Luke Jones, from Wikimedia Commons.

Good news, everyone! I woke this morning to discover that, once and for all, scenes like the one shown above are proven by science! That's right, good old fashioned science, where someone digs up fossils, doesn't publish research on them (someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that bit), and sells them to the highest bidder. Thanks to the diligent work of Heritage Auctions, we now know that Allosaurus and Stegosaurus existed together at the same time. Huzzah!

In case there is any question, I am being facetious in the above written paragraph. It has been known for quite some time that Allosaurus, a large predator from the Morrison Formation of the western United States, shared the Jurassic landscape with the heavily armored Stegosaurus and its kin. Any child who has read a picture book on dinosaurs could probably tell you that. But according to David Herskowitz, director of natural history at Heritage Auctions, "science did not even know [these two dinosaurs] existed together" until the discovery of "The Fighting Pair".

Discovered in 2007, "Dracula" the Allosaurus "jimmadseni" was discovered by a team from Dinosauria International LLC (you may remember the report they put out on Amphicoelias "brontodiplodocus" back in 2010) near the foothills of the Big Horn Mountains in Ten Sleep Wyoming. After the field jackets were taken back to the lab and the preparation of the specimen began, they discovered the leg bone of another dinosaur underneath the allosaur's skull. It turned out to belong to "Fantasia" the Hesperosaurus (Stegosaurus) mjosi. Based on the proximity of the skull and the leg bone, the team, led by Henry Galiano, deciphered that the two animals must have died together, locked in mortal combat. That piece of information helped the pair fetch a $2.75 million price tag when they sold at auction yesterday.

Maybe I'm being a bit unfair to Mr. Herskowitz, and he was misquoted when he talked about the pair. Perhaps he just doesn't know that much about dinosaurs. But to say that the scientific community had no idea that these two animals coexisted is just silly. There is ample indirect evidence that these two animals met from time to time preserved in many specimens known to science. In fact, Dr. Kenneth Carpenter et al. wrote up a pretty comprehensive paper about the predator-prey relationship of these animals in a book that Carpenter also edited, The Carnivorous Dinosaurs. Brian Switek does a pretty good job of summarizing that paper over at Dinosaur Tracking, so I won't rehash it here. But rest assured, the bones tell a pretty convincing story. If that's not enough, the Cleveland Lloyd Dinosaur Quarry in Utah (a possible predator trap) contains remains of Allosaurus and Stegosaurus together, deposited at the same time, in the same place. And "science" has known about it since at least 1927. To be fair, these particular animals did appear to have died, literally, right on top of one another, which is a remarkable find. But unlike the more iconic "Fighting Dinosaurs", these two animals were not locked in combat. At least, that is what one would gather from reading the description of the fossils on the auction website.

Which is what bothers me most about the whole thing. The Heritage Auction site with the listing for the specimens goes on and on about important the pair are to science; about how complete and undistorted the bones are, how they were articulated when discovered, how they both represent species known from only one other skeleton, and of course, how unprecedented it is to find the two together. Assuming the fact that all of that is true, why is it that they ended up on the auction block in the first place instead of in a museum or university? I've read that a museum outside of the United States bought the pair, and that the money from the auction will go to continued research and the search for new specimens. I tend to believe this means that Dinosauria International LLC is the research institution being funded at the end of the day. And I hope that whatever museum got them, does do some research on "Dracula" and "Fantasia". If there is proof that these two animals died fighting one another, I'd love to read about it. For now, I'll have to settle for the color pamphlet from the auction house.

I know there is no point moaning about the sale of fossils at auction. It is not something that is going to change at any point in the near future. Unlike the illegal fossil trade, it is, perfectly legal. Which is too bad, because it seems like the best, most complete specimens always end up at auction. Many go to private collectors, and research on the specimens is never done. This leads to a loss of invaluable data that could come from studying them. Luckily, this is not always the case. "Sue", safely the most famous Tyrannosaurus in the world, found her home at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago after selling at auction for $8.36 million. And since 1997, we have learned quite a bit from studying her remains. I hope the same can be said about "Dracula" and "Fantasia" in the not so distant future.

A quick, but important, post.

2011-06-01T14:10:00.000-04:00

The Xingu River is a tributary of the Amazon River located in the northeastern Brazilian state of Pará.

It is currently home to fourteen tribes of indigenous peoples that live along its borders. They get most, if not all of the things they need for survival from the river and the surrounding forest.

The area is home to countless terrestrial and aquatic species, some of which can be found no where else on earth.

The Brazilian government wants to build a dam there. This will result in the diverting of 80% of the rivers waters, the flooding of 400 km² of forest, and the displacement of indigenous tribes and an additional 20,000 people from the surrounding municipalities.

If this bothers you, please, take the time to have a look at the Amazon Watch website dedicated to informing the global public about the issue, and stopping the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. And if you're so inclined, perhaps you'd like to sign a petition urging the Brazilian government to abandon the project, and instead, search for a more sustainable energy solution.

Problematic passerines.

2011-05-18T12:00:00.033-04:00

A breeding pair of Carpodacus mexicanus, also known as house finches.

The house finch, Carpodacus mexicanus, is a little passerine bird that I have a bit of a rocky relationship with. Don't get me wrong; I love it when any of my "backyard dinosaurs" come to visit the feeders around my house. But I'm still on the fence about these little guys. Now before you label me some kind of finch hater (which I certainly am not), let me explain. While C. mexicanus is native to North America, it is not exactly native to the east coast, having been introduced to this area from Mexico and the southwestern United States in the 1940s. Populations that were released from illegal captivity quickly became naturalized, and their population has been expanding ever since. In many places, they have out competed the native species of purple finch, Carpodacus purpureus. This is a bird that should be at my feeders, but sadly, I have never seen.

But there is an even older threat that faces C. purpureus and other native birds in my area: the house sparrow, Passer domesticus. This Eurasian species was first introduced to the Americas, intentionally, as early as 1850, and has been breeding ever since, making it one of, if not the most abundant songbird in the country. This is also not good for the native birds, as it competes with them for food and nesting resources, and more often than not, wins. And all of this is completely ignoring the fact that it is a very aggressive bird as well. Many may find it hard to believe that the common little brown birds we see hopping about could be a danger to anything. But I assure you, they most definitely have theropod dinosaur blood coursing through their veins. Just ask the eastern bluebird, Sialia sialis. The population of this native species has severely declined in the last few years because house sparrows have taken up all of their real estate, and are known to destroy eggs, young, and even kill adult bluebirds guarding their nests. It's a huge problem, and I sadly admit that despite the fact that the eastern bluebird is the official bird of my county, I've never seen one in my area either.

So getting back to my initial point, I'm on the fence about house finches. Or rather, I was, until very recently. I'd much rather see native species, like the purple finch, in my backyard. But house finches are still better than house sparrows. And that is the bird I see the most at my feeder. It saddens me to know that they are always going to be around, and that the birds that have traditionally lived in my area, are probably not comping back any time soon. But as I said above, I'm not a finch hater (or a sparrow hater either), and I do enjoy seeing all the birds that frequent my yard. I would just prefer seeing some more than others. But they certainly aren't to blame for this, or their impact on the local fauna. In this instance, human beings are directly responsible for the introduction of these two non-native species. So I certainly can't have a problem with the birds. I just have a problem with them being here. And that is the result of the actions of my species, not theirs. The birds themselves, are just doing what comes naturally to them.

Speaking of birds doing what comes naturally to them, I think I'll leave it there for now. But I do have a bit more to share with you regarding house finches, and how, at the end of the day, they are more pleasant to have around than problematic. Stay tuned for more of the story ~~tomorrow~~ soon.

The Boneyard 2.9 and the ART Evolved Hadrosaur Gallery

2011-05-04T10:15:00.004-04:00

Man. April was intense. I don't know what happened, but I'm sure at least a few of you noticed my complete lack of blogging for pretty much the entire month. Things got a little quiet around here, and for that, I apologize. But now it's May, which means three important things.

First, that I should have much more time to dedicate to this blog and various ART Evolved projects I'm working on, which sounds great to me.

Second, that there is a new edition of The Boneyard Blog Carnival waiting for you to check it out over at Life As We Know It. Thanks to Taylor Reints for a great Boneyard 2.9! Paleo/natural history/science bloggers, I now task you with writing more phenomenal posts to submit to next months Boneyard. The hosting schedule has been finalized for the rest of 2011, but I'm hoping that with your continued support and enthusiasm, 2012 will be a huge year for items of paleontological interest as well. So keep supporting and submitting to boneyardblogcarnival(at)gmail(dot)com, and let's make sure it doesn't go extinct!

And third, ART Evolved: Life's Time Capsule has opened their newest time capsule, The Hadrosaur Gallery. Lambeosaurines, hadrosaurines; you name 'em, they got 'em. Well, maybe not all of them. So if you feel a particular genus is underrepresented, whip up a hadrosaur or two and submit it to artevolved(at)gmail(dot)com (I know I still have to finish my piece up, my bad guys). In fact, you can work on a piece for any of their older time capsules as well, or the upcoming Carboniferous Time Period Gallery. That one is going to be amazing.

More soon, I promise.

Things that are not dinosaurs: Mosasaurs

2011-05-02T16:45:00.016-04:00

Discovery of the "grand animal", Mosasaurus hofmani, at Maastricht. Engraving by G. R. Levillaire, from Wikimedia Commons.

Mosasaurs were a highly successful group of marine squamates that came to rule the seas towards the end of the Late Cretaceous (98-65 million years ago). Remains of these real life leviathans were some of the first (if not the first) sauropsid fossils ever discovered. Like their land dwelling cousins, they were air breathers, and secondarily returned to the sea where they became highly adapted to their new marine environment. They were powerful, streamlined swimmers with long narrow bodies, paddle-like limbs and tails, and gave birth to live young. Based on an abundance of fossils and a number of different taxa discovered, we have learned a lot about mosasaurs in the more than 200 years since they were first discovered. This has helped shape a new view of mosasaurs that is radically different from those of the past.

A cladogram showing the relationship between selected diapsid groups. As you can see, mosasaurs are not dinosaurs.

I give people grief for calling pterosaurs dinosaurs, but at least they are both kinds of archosaurs. Mosasaurs, on the other hand, are on a completely different branch of the diapsid family tree, as you can see in the obligatory MS Paint cladogram above. Despite being shown alongside dinosaurs on the pages of many books over the years, mosasaurids, are in fact, more closely related to "lizards" and snakes (Squamata), specifically falling within Varanoidea as a close relation to the Komodo dragon and other "monitor lizards". This is a fairly well known fact, and has been for quite a while. Their reduced limbs and loosely-hinged jaws with four rows of teeth caused Edward Drinker Cope to suggest that they were closely related to snakes, and that they shared a concestor and united them within "Pythonomorpha". While not that closely related, they are both scleroglossans, so I have to give him credit for noticing the family resemblance. If nothing else, he knew they were not dinosaurs.

A life restoration of Tylosaurus, by Charles R. Knight, from Wikimedia Commons.

The image of mosasaurs that most of us have from our childhood is probably like the one seen above. Giant sea lizards with dorsal fringes (we now know they were misidentified tracheal cartilage that became something of a meme for their day) who slowly cruised through the warm Cretaceous seas, long bodies undulating laterally as they snatched up anything they came across in their jaws. Their tails, aside from being highly dorsoventrally compressed, were not all that impressive or spectacular in most regards, and they moved with a simple anguilliform style of locomotion. Only the most derived mosasaurs, like Plotosaurus, had a more streamlined fusiform body, the corresponding carangiform style of locomotion, and a crescent shaped caudal fin (like those seen in sharks) that made them much faster swimmers, and generally better suited for an aquatic lifestyle than their other mosasaur cousins (Lindgren et al. 2007). But a paper was published a little under a year ago that described an extremely well preserved specimen of Platecarpus tympaniticus (LACM 128319) that put Plotosaurus to shame (Lindgren et al. 2010). It preserved skin impressions (with possible pigmentation), a partial body outline, various organ tissues (from the eye, respiratory system, digestive tract, and other viscera), and a downturned section of caudal vertebra with downturned neural spines that indicate it probably had a caudal fluke with two lobes. Given that Platecarpus lived around 20 million years before Plotosaurus, and is not considered to be as highly derived, it has led many to hypothesize that some (if not most) mosasaurs may have had a tail fluke they inherited from a common ancestor, and were probably faster, more powerful swimmers than traditionally presumed. If you think that tail flukes in marine diapsids seem strange, well, think again. They are known to have evolved convergently in two other groups of Mesozoic sauropsids: the ichthyosaurs and the metriorhynchids (two other groups of "not dinosaurs").

An updated life restoration of Platecarpus, using the skeletal reconstruction of LACM 128319 as a reference. Created by Dmitry Bogdanov, from Wikimedia Commons.

As if that weren't cool enough, just last Friday, another paper was published in PLos One on mosasaurs. This time, the mosasaur being discussed was Prognathadon, but no one was really concerned with its tail. The authors were interested in its proteins. That's right, I said proteins. Lindgren was at it again, this time using synchroton radiation-based infared microspectroscopy (a way to study and identify the chemicals in something) on a 70 million year old mosasaur bone (2011). The authors of the paper found that type I collagen, the most abundant protein in bone, managed to survive over the millennia, proving once again that primary soft tissues and biomolecules can be preserved, and in marine sediments at that! Amazing.

A Mosasaurus skeleton on display at the Maastricht Natural History Museum in the Netherlands. Photo by Wilson44691, from Wikimedia Commons.

So basically, mosasaurs were fast, terrifying, Cretaceous "sea monsters" that came in a multitude of shapes and sizes and had a global distribution. They were the dominant marine predators in an underwater world that was full of other nasty critters, be they marine reptiles, bony fish, or elasmobranchs. Whether out in the open ocean, or close to the shoreline, your chances of running into one were pretty good, but your chances of it being a pleasant encounter, were certainly not. The more fossils that we uncover, and the more research that is done on this fascinating group of animals, the more we learn about them. But of all the important things to remember about mosasaurs, this one is key: they are not dinosaurs.

(For more on mosasaurs or the other critters from the Late Cretaceous Western Interior Sea, I highly recommend the Oceans of Kansas Paleontology website, or the book Oceans of Kansas, both by Michael J. Everheart.)

References

Lindgren, J., jagt, J.W., & Caldwell, M.W. 2007. A fishy mosasaur: the axial skeleton of Plotosaurus (Reptilia, Squamata) reassessed. Lethaia, 40: 153-160. doi: 10.1111/j.1502-3931.2007.00009.x

Lindgren, J., Caldwell, M.W., Konishi, T., & Chiappe, L.M. 2010. Convergent Evolution in Aquatic Tetrapods: Insights from an Exceptional Fossil Mosasaur. PLoS One 5(8): e11998. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011998

Lindgren, J., Uvdal, P., Engdahl, A., Lee, A.H., Alwmark, C. et al. 2011. Microspectrospic Evidence of Cretaceous Bone Proteins. PLos One 6(4): e19445. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119445

The Boneyard 2.8

2011-04-05T12:10:00.000-04:00

April is here, and with it come rain showers and a new edition of The Boneyard Blog Carnival. Head on over to Sorting Out Science, where Sam Wise has written up a fossiliferous Boneyard 2.8. Extremely well done, in my humble opinion.

What can you do to help support The Boneyard? That's an easy one. Follow, submit to, or host an edition. Just send an e-mail to boneyardblogcarnival(at)gmail(dot)com and let them know you want to get in on the action. Have a great week everyone!

Blogging on the Bay (Part 2)

2011-04-05T11:30:00.024-04:00

Sunrise over the Chesapeake Bay, taken on the beach in front of the Philip Merrill Center.

Although I'm a little farther from the Bay at this point, it always remains very close to my heart. So I just wanted to say a few more words on some of the issues affecting the Chesapeake Bay watershed today. I know the last time I wrote (which was quite a while ago - my apologies) I spoke of oysters, and some of the problems they've been having over the last hundred years or so. Disease, poor water quality, and over harvesting are three of the big culprits. This time, I want to home in a little on the poor water quality issue.

It's no secret that the water in the Chesapeake Bay is not as clean and healthy as it once was. The reduction in oyster population is part of the problem, but there are other anthropogenic factors involved as well. One of the biggest is changes in the way the land in the Chesapeake Bay watershed has been used in the last 100 years. Many of the traditionally forested areas have been turned into agricultural, urban, or suburban areas. This may seem like a good idea, as people need food and places to live. But it has had some serious side effects on the Bay. Trees play a crucial role in the watershed. They literally hold onto the soil with their roots, preventing sediment and runoff from eroding into the streams, creeks, and tributaries that lead to the Bay. They also absorb nutrients from the soil in order to survive and grow. But today, these excess nutrients flow into the Bay, and are one of the major pollutant offenders.

These nutrients aren't only good for trees, but for another group of photosynthesizing organisms as well: algae. And if the nutrients aren't absorbed by the trees, they make it into the Bay, where they cause algae blooms to flourish. This is also not a good thing. Algae live fast, and die hard, ad as their bodies decompose, dissolved oxygen in the water is used up, causing hypoxic conditions. Low oxygen levels in the water means that the critters that live in the Bay - oysters included - have one more agent working against them. The stress from poor water quality, over sedimentation, and excess nutrients, also makes them more susceptible to a number of diseases that hurt their populations.

A field of freshly planted trees on a farm in the Prettyboy watershed that will one day grow into a reclaimed forest.

It's a viscous cycle. Too many oysters are harvested, so the young don't have a place to attach and grown, and water quality begins to degrade. Changes in land use release more sediments and unwanted nutrients into the Bay, which only makes the situation worse. Disease takes a foothold. Less oysters survive into adulthood, even in protected areas, and it takes longer for the Bay to bounce back. The Eastern oyster serves a crucial role in the bay, providing a habitat for other species of plants and animals, and as the primary filtering agent. And it's easy to point to them and show their importance in protecting the fragile ecosystem of the Bay. But like any ecosystem, the Chesapeake Bay is a complex environment, composed of many living and non-living factors, and the interactions between them. Trees might not seem all that connected, because when one thinks of the Bay, they think of blue crabs, osprey, and diamondback terrapins. But they play a vital role, as do the people working to restore and many of the traditionally forested areas in the Chesapeake bay watershed. Every tree planted; every oyster spat that grows to maturity, makes a difference. And so can you. Whether it's picking up a piece of litter you find on the ground and preventing it from going down a storm drain, donating a few dollars or your time to a non-profit organization, or just fixing a dripping faucet, each one of us has the potential to make a huge positive impact on the health of the Bay, or your local watershed. So do what you can, when you can, and be a part of the process that will help preserve this beautiful place for generations to come. The seafood lovers and beach goers of the future thank you!

Blogging on the Bay (Part 1)

2011-03-21T23:29:00.008-04:00

An oyster bed at low tide. Notice the thousands of individual oysters encrusted on top of one another. Photo taken by JohnCub, from Wikimedia Commons.

The Chesapeake Bay is home to a wonderful variety of plants and animals. One of the invertebrates that makes a home here is the Eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica. This bivalve mollusk, which was once abundant in the Bay, has faced many hardships in the recent past. Over-harvesting, poor water quality from over nitrification and pollution, and in increase in sedimentation from runoff has caused populations to decline to less than 2% of their historical numbers. This is a problem for the oysters, and other denizens of the Bay.

When oysters breed, the larvae float in the water column until they find a hard substrate to latch onto. Often, this substrate is the shell of other oysters. But with less oysters in the Bay, it is becoming harder and harder for the larvae to find a place to call home. The once abundant oyster bars (or reefs) are no more, which means that other fish and invertebrates also no longer have a place to make their homes. If a lucky oyster can find a resting place, it latches on, and starts to secret a shell around it. These juveniles, known as spat, are hermaphroditic, only becoming male or female later in life. Once they reach reproductive age, they release eggs and sperm into the water, and the cycle starts again.

As if hunting for real estate at such a young age doesn't pose enough of a problem, C. virginica also has trouble finding a proper meal. The Eastern oyster is a shallow water filter feeder. Large individuals are said to be able to filter over 40 gallons of water a day. In fact, the not so distant past, it would take all the oysters in the Bay between three and five days to filter the entire volume of the Chesapeake. Now it takes them more than a year to accomplish the same goal. But the new filter feeding problem comes from the sediment from runoff that clogs the Bay, which also clogs their gills as they pump water through their shells. When they should be filtering out the plankton and other nutritions particulates, they are filtering dirt and polluted water, which effectively chokes them to death. This, in combination with the other factors mentioned above, makes the situation for oysters in the Bay rather grim.

Luckily there are both organizations and individuals working to restore the oyster populations in the Chesapeake. Certain areas of the Bay are now protected from harvesting, so that oysters can live and reproduce with minimal human interference. Sustainable practices keep unprotected areas from becoming over harvested. And shells from harvested oysters are collected and placed back into the Bay, in the hopes that they will provide a home for spat that are "seeded" on these natural, man-made bars. After 100 plus years of population decline, humans are finally realizing the importance of these animals, and making a concerted effort to help them regain their former glory.

Spring Break! Again!

2011-03-19T10:00:00.001-04:00

I'm sure that many of you have noticed that my posting here has been intermittent in the last month or so. That is in part because I've been gearing up for another trip with the University of Maryland's Alternative Spring Break program. This time around, me and a group of eager students will be headed to the Chesapeake Bay Foundations headquarters at the Philip Merrill Center for the week to camp out and help clean up the bay! I don't know what my internet situation will be like when we arrive, but I'm going to try to keep active on Twitter via my mobile, posting pictures and info along the way if I can't do it here on the blog. Feel free to keep tabs on us at the official ASB Chesapeake 2011 blog as well.

**UPDATE 30 MARCH**

Photos of the week are starting to flow onto my Flickr account. Check out the set here!

Interweb Science of the Week #10

2011-03-19T01:32:00.003-04:00

This week, ISW goes to a website that, like last week's awardee, is primarily aimed at school aged children interested in learning about biology. Ask a Biologist aims to provide the best scientific information to anyone (not just children) interested in learning in the ins and outs of the biological sciences, including paleontology - huzzah! It's a really brilliant concept: go to the website, ask a question, and have a professional scientist answer it. Too easy, right? I know, it's awesome. Lots of questions have already been asked, but there are still plenty more out there. If I was going to ask anyone, it would be this lot.

Coincidentally, ART Evolved is also sponsoring an "Ask a Biologist Initiative" at the request of Dave Hone. They are looking for printable posters and blog icons to be used on their site, so if you want to break out your mad art skills and contribute something in honor of them being awarded with "Interweb Science of the Week", now would be a pretty good time.

The new "Bone Wars": Greg Paul, science, and the art of paleontology.

2011-03-17T15:45:00.004-04:00

*Let me start by saying that I have been sitting on and rewriting this post for nearly a week now. As the conversation has been taking place in e-mails and on the web, my opinions on the subject have been all over the place. But I finally feel that I have something to add the conversation, so here it goes.*

The only time I ever ~~met~~ interacted with Greg Paul was at SVP in Pittsburgh in October 2011. I had picked up a copy of his new book, the somewhat controversial The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, and was thumbing through it, when a voice from behind said, "I hear it's terrible." As I turned around I said, "I don't know, I've always been a fan of his work." I nearly fell over when I realized it was Mr. Paul whom I was speaking with. My girlfriend, who was with me at the time, can attest to this fact. I was speechless for a few seconds, but in the end, I was glad to see that he was capable of having a laugh at himself, and I admired his dry wit as much as I admired his work.

For those of you who don't know Mr. Paul, he is a dinosaur illustrator and researcher who has been influential in establishing the "new look" of dinosaurs over the last several decades. He has published a number of books, scientific papers, magazine and newspaper articles, and illustration guides. He has also hand drawn an extensive collection of skeletal restorations, muscle studies, and life reconstructions that are unparalleled in their accuracy. As is indicated above, I have the utmost respect and appreciation for the work he has done over the years. But my opinion about him started to shift around

a week ago, when he sent to an e-mail to the Dinosaur Mailing List regarding the use of his dinosaur restorations.

In the message, Paul starts by talking about a very real problem: blatant plagiarism of his work, people making money off of this plagiarism, and the fact that people selling ripped-off art undermines his ability to sell his own. The action of the offenders, as many have commented, is completely unacceptable. But things got a little stranger from there, as Paul started multiple other threads on the subject, asked people to stop posing their skeletal restorations in the same manner as his, and asked artists not use his work at all as reference material for anything they are working on. Other paleontologists and paleoartists quickly got involved in the conversation. The blogosphere then started to talk about it, with posts on the exchanges showing up on ART Evolved: Life's Time Capsule (twice), The Paleo King (twice), Love in the Time of Chasmosaurus (twice) , drip, and The Bite Stuff. It's even reached Scientific American at this point.

I tried to hold off on writing about the whole thing, as the conversation is taking place in multiple locations already. But there is something about what Paul has said that directly impacts me, and so I think I'll add one more voice, as small as it may be. And I do mean that. I am not a professional paleontologist, or a professional artist. I do not derive any income at all from my writing here, or the art I create. In fact, I'm almost hesitant to call myself a writer or an artist at all, despite the fact that I do write, and I do create art. I do both because I want to. But that doesn't mean that in the future, I wouldn't like to be monetarily compensated for my work, should I become proficient at either skill.

And this is where Greg Paul comes in. He has, unquestionably, inspired generations of paleoartists with his work. He also created an industry standard for skeletal restorations. Whether you know it or not, you've probably seen a piece by Greg Paul. He has published many of them in books, articles, and papers. He spends a great deal of time and energy on his work. His skeletals in particular are top notch, as Paul and others in the field fully acknowledge. I don't want to take that away from him (or any other professional paleoartist) in any way, shape, or form. And no one else should be able to get away with copying his work and calling it their own. But the "rules" he is imposing raise some serious questions for someone like myself who wants to draw a picture of a dinosaur, just for the sake of drawing it and expanding their knowledge and artistic ability.

I'll give you an example. Back during the month of October, ART Evolved hosted their "Pink Dinosaur" event. I drew a dinosaur every day for a month. Some of them were simple and cartoonish. Others were a bit more detailed. And again, even though I'm not trained as a paleoartist, I like to try and create images that are (as) accurate (as I am capable of making them). I used a reference image, be it a photo of mine, a skeletal from a paper, or an image from Wikimedia Commons, for most of the pieces I did. And I made note of the specimen, figure, or paper that I got my reference from. With my Balaur bondoc, I referenced and used a skeletal restoration from the PNAS article. For my Anchiornis huxleyi, I didn't use a skeletal reference, but I did use information from the Science article that described the color and patterns present in this animals feathers. In both situations, I used a peer-reviewed, scientific article to assist in my life reconstruction. I just used different data from each. Before last week, I wouldn't have thought anything about it. The articles were produced to communicate and share scientific knowledge. I used that knowledge to make amateur reconstructions. That's ok, right?

According to Greg Paul, no. Well, let me clarify. Had the papers or images been his, it wouldn't have been ok to use them. I think. His basic points in his initial e-mail are that he wants anyone working on a reconstruction to not use any of his work as a reference, and do all of the research for themselves. That is, go to a museum collection, photograph specimens, dig through papers, scale skeletal elements, and create a unique skeletal restoration (not to be posed in the same style as his either), upon which they should then wrap the muscle and skin to create a unique piece of art. I'm not opposed to that, at all. And if I had access to collections and papers, I would be totally for it. In fact, I'd love it. That being said, am I doing something inherently wrong by using skeletals that that come from journal articles if they are the only sources I have access to? Especially if what I am doing is not for commercial gain, and I don't stand to compete with anyone in the paleoart market?

If "of course not" is your answer to that question, let me take it a step further. Would it be unthinkable for me to reference skeletal restorations that Greg Paul has published in articles in peer-reviewed journals or volumes as references? Not copy them or call them my own, but use them as a basis, with permission from and/or credit to their creator, for my work? What about books, like Predatory Dinosaurs of the World or Dinosaurs of the Air? Paul has made a point to say that his skeletal restorations, muscle studies, and life reconstructions featured in the The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs are copyrighted. And out of respect for his very clear wishes, I guess I won't ever be using any of them as a basis for my own reconstructions. That's too bad, because I've purchased many of Paul's books specifically to gain access to his restorations, which I consider of the highest caliber. I have paid money, a portion of which I imagine he receives, in order to gain this access. Just like I pay for SVP membership to access the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. He has created what he calls a "uniquely extensive library of detailed skeletal restorations that are exceptionally proportionally accurate in most cases". Scientifically accurate skeletal restorations, pure and simple. And they most certainly are. Should that not, then, mean that they are part of a body of scientific knowledge, which should be accessible to those interested in the field. Should his research not be used, referenced, and built upon?

I really don't know anymore. I have a copy of Ken Carpenter's Carnivorous Dinosaurs on my shelf. And I used an article in it, by Greg Paul, as a reference for a reconstruction and a post I did on Therizinosaurus about a year ago when Art Evolved put up their "Therizinosaur Gallery". I didn't use his skeletal as a base for my reconstruction (as you can clearly tell from my piece), but I used information in his article - helpful information - to decide the posture and look for my therizinosaur. I used information from other articles as well. Was what I did wrong? Should he want to, can Mr. Paul seek legal action because I've made it publicly known that I've referenced (again, not copied or even used his restorations) his work? Where does one draw the line?

Looking back on my Therizinosaurus, the end result is not perfect, and having learned from that experience, I know what I would do differently the next time around. Using a skeletal restoration would be an integral part of making my reconstruction all the more accurate. Paul himself has said that he is worried that there will be no "professional body of paleoillustration that paleontolgists could call upon", and believes that "the quality of the art available to the public" is degrading. You would think, given such sentiments, that he'd be willing to let his work, which he knows is scientifically accurate, be used by those looking to produce paleoart, even at the level of someone like myself. It really is a shame, because I think he has made amazing scientific contributions to the field of dinosaur paleontology. Paul's work is some of, if not the, best out there. And to cut off paleoartists of the future and hobbyists like myself off from his work, means the quality of what we produce (again, admitting that my work is not of the highest quality in general) will only be diminished.

Luckily, there are places out there to find skeletal drawings and reconstruction tips, like Scott Hartman's Skeletal Drawing.com, his new blog, and ART Evolved, among others. And I completely want Paul, and all other professional paleoartists to be able to make a living with what they do. I cannot stress enough how important their work is to the scientific community, and the general public as well. But I also want up and coming professionals to be able to get a foot in the door. They deserve the opportunity. For example, all of the "Crew" over at ART Evolved (who seemed to go unmentioned when people on the list started talking about organizing a paleoart presence online, when they clearly already have) deserve a shot at "going pro" if they want it. That's why I'm truly disheartened by one statement in particular that Paul has made. And it is less than encouraging to read things like the following, coming from such a highly respected member of the field:

"If you are thinking that gee wiz doing your own technical research and restorations sure sounds like a pain in the butt, or may be beyond your knowledge base, and you don't want to risk doing inaccurate restorations or do not think paying me a fee is workable, then there is another alternative. Perhaps it is better if you do something else. I know, it's lots of fun illustrating dinosaurs. But if you cannot produce high quality, original paleorestorations is it really a good idea to be in the business?"

I'm sorry. But I cannot agree with that. He's not talking about people stealing his work, or underbidding him at this point. He's straight up telling people that if their work isn't as good as his, they should stop trying. And that's not right. I don't care who you are. It's downright mean, and honestly, he's been a little nasty and dismissive to some other individuals who have commented on how realistic his vision is. I really don't want to speak negatively of someone that I've regarded so highly for so long. But it has become increasingly difficult to take some of his more valid points seriously, let alone have a productive conservation on some of the real issues facing art, science, and the intersection between them today.

Paul knows it, you know it, I know it. Drawing dinosaurs is fun, and if you want to do it, do it, no matter what your skill level. I may never have the status of Greg Paul, or sell any of my art, but that isn't going to stop me from doing illustrations of dinosaurs and other critters. And I'm not looking to break into "the business" today, but if someone does want to sign me onto a project in the future, I think it would be an honor, and I would reserve the right to set any price I want for my services, should I charge. If Paul expects others to take him seriously in all of this, and respect his wishes in regards to his work, he should respect the wishes of others in regards to theirs as well, and stop treating anyone that doesn't meet his standard like their opinions on the issue don't matter. Again, my voice might be small, but that doesn't mean it should not be heard.

In closing, I think it's important to reiterate that even if I'm taking issue with his personal opinions now, I have the utmost respect for Greg Paul, and his work. I would certainly never copy it, and call it my own. Nor would I do that with the work of any other artist. To do so is simply wrong. And I want professional paleoartists to be able to make a living. But I also want part-time and aspiring paleoartists to be able to get work as well. And everyone reserves the right to do work for pay, pro bono, or under some type of creative commons license. If you want to use a pose for a skeletal restoration that has become an industry standard, I don' think you should be afraid to. You can't copyright a pose that is within the biological limits of an animals movement anymore than you can copyright an animal itself. But you can (and I will) respect Mr. Paul's wishes, and not use his skeletals for any of my future reconstructions.

I'm sure that this discussion is far from over, so please, feel free to comment here, or at any of the links that I've overpopulated this post with. If nothing else, I hope that Mr. Paul's e-mails have shed some light on a subject that doesn't get a lot of attention, and that some real solutions to the real issues that face all paleoartists (not just Paul's list of demands) are addressed. Here's to a brighter future for the science and art of paleontology.

Interweb Science of the Week #9

2011-03-11T14:20:00.001-05:00

It's no secret that I'm a huge fan of science and the natural world. It's also not hard to see that I think that science education, starting at a young age, is one of the most important things that any child can have access to. Sadly, in some places, providing this education is difficult for those responsible for shaping the minds of tomorrow. Low funding, fear of starting a controversy, and lack of proper training for science educators are all roadblocks that teachers today face. It's a sad but simple fact: the United States is falling behind in science education. This is something even President Obama recognized in the State of the Union address in January. He wants "to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science and technology and engineering and math", and "teach our kids that it's not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair". I could not agree more.

That's where this weeks ISW award winner comes in. Science Netlinks: Resources for Teaching Science, is a website put together by the Thinkfinity partnership* that "provides free, Internet-based content across academic disciplines [...] for K-12 educators, including lesson plans, interactives, and reviewed Internet resources." Simply put, this is the greatest science resource for educators I think I've ever seen. I know I'm going to be telling all of the teachers I know about it. I highly suggest checking out, whether you are an educator, have kids of your own, or are just plain into science. There are a couple of projects in there that caught my interest.

As much as this weekly award is supposed to be about internet based science, I really want to give an award to all the teachers out there as well. I worked in the field of education for over 12 years ( technically, I still do), with children and young adults of all ages, and I know the amount of time, energy, and patience that goes into being a teacher. In fact, as much as I was encouraged to get a degree in education, I steered away from it simply because I knew those things, and knew I couldn't cut it. Teachers and former teachers out there, this ISW goes out to all of you, too. Your work often goes unrecognized or under-appreciated, but you should all know that if it weren't for you and the work you do, the world would be in a terrible, terrible state. Thank you!

Well, this is long overdue.

2011-03-10T14:30:00.000-05:00

A while back, I posted an image on the blog of a few skeletal elements that had been found in the backyard of some friends of mine, and posed a challenge to my readers to try and identify them. About a month has passed, and they are still sitting out on the deck, uncleaned, judging me every day as I walk past them to go work on other things. But I do think it's about time that I get around to talking about them a bit more, describing the process I went through in identifying them, and telling you what animal I believe they came from.

The three bones in question, properly identified by Scott Elyard as a pelvis (top, in left lateral view), femur (bottom left, in anterior view), and tibia (bottom right, in anterior view), all from the left side of the animal.

When my friends called me, they were a little creeped out that these bones would just be lying about, unexposed, in a neighborhood backyard. After quickly calming their nerves and assuring them that they were not human remains, I started looking into alternative hypotheses. As you can (maybe) see in these pictures, they aren't particularly large, and they seem to come from an older animal. The ends of the long bones show signs of epiphyseal closure and a decent amount of "wear and tear" that comes with age. The bones were mammalian, and given the region where they were discovered, that limited my options as to what they belonged to. They were too large to belong to a raccoon, opossum, or fox. And I thought, too small to belong to a white-tailed deer.

My initial reaction, upon reassembling the elements on that dark spooky night, was that they had to come from an animal that was somewhere in between the size range of the animals mentioned above. A juvenile white-tailed deer was my first thought, but the bones seemed to have come from an older individual, so I quickly abandoned that line of thinking. Coyotes are known to have made it as far east Cecil County, Maryland. But I thought the the odds of finding a partial coyote skeleton in the backyard of a Mount Rainier home would be slim. The most parsimonious explanation I could come up with was that they belonged to a large, domestic dog. Perhaps it was a family pet that was buried in the yard. Something around the size of a German shepherd. But that didn't quite sit right either, as the bones were found exposed on the surface, and if an entire animal had been there, the remainder of the skeleton would have been easily found in the vicinity.

The left hind leg of a dog? We will see...

While the bones sat, my thoughts on them kept rattling around in my head. I had convinced myself that, logically, they had to belong to a dog. But in actuality, that wasn't logical at all. I had only looked at them once, in the dark, for about 5 minutes. That's not good science! I needed to get my hands dirty (literally), see if I could falsify my hypothesis. I needed to examine the bones. Now, I'm not a proper anatomist, but I've spent a decent amount of time studying and comparing the bones of different vertebrates in museum collections and in the literature. And it only took a quick look at the pelvis to notice a few things that made the "not dog" alarms in my head go off.

The pelvis itself is made up of three fused bones - the ilium, ischium, and pubis. To me, it seemed like the whole element was not robust enough to have come from a dog. And despite how narrow the canine pelvis is compared to a human, this one was a bit too narrow to fit the bill. The real deal breaker for me was the shape of the ilium. Dogs typically have a more rounded iliac crest than the one present on the "mystery pelvis". This one was more angular, and had ridges and "folds" as opposed to a smooth, curved surface. Another point of curiosity was the ischiatic tuberosity, which serves as an attachment point for the sacrotuberal ligament to connect the ischium to the sacrum and the first (few in some cases) caudal vertebra. In dogs, it is typically a narrow projection off of the ischium, as the ligament it supports is narrow and cordlike. This one reminded me more of an "ungulate", where the tubersity is broader to accommodate a broader ligament.

Anatomy of a pelvis, the phenomenal result of make figures in MS Paint during your lunch break.

The features of the pelvis alone made it pretty clear that I wasn't looking at the bones of a dog. Reevaluating the situation, I started thinking of white-tailed deer again. All the evidence supported this identification, yet for some reason, I had abandoned it early on in my investigation. Why? Looking back to that first night, I had convinced myself that the limb was too small to come from an adult deer. This was the direct result of a crucial, silly mistake on my part: I was looking at the bones from an anthropocentric point of view. Immediately upon seeing the bones, I started comparing them to the bones of a human being. Now of course, all tetrapod hind limbs are homologous, and share similar structures. But there are important differences as well. One of the most important is the form, function, and arrangement of bones below the ankle. Let me show you what I mean.

The skeletal anatomy of the hind limbs of a human, dog, and deer (not to scale).

As you can see here, despite a few minor morphological changes, the leg above the ankle (seperated by the horizontal line) is pretty similar in all three animals. There is a pelvis, a femur, and a tibia fibula pair (in the deer, the two bones have fused together). But below the ankle, we can see that pedes (feet) are all pretty different. In humans, we have a plantigrade foot, where out tarsals, metatarsals, and phalanges (the bones of the foot) all touch the ground. In the dog, we see a digitigrade foot, where only the phalanges (or the padding between them and the bone) touch the ground, and we see an elongated set of metatarsals. The deer takes things to an extreme. It has an unguligrade foot, where the only part that touches the ground is the ungual phalanx (tip-toe), covered by the hoof. Like with their fused tibia-fibula, they have fused metatarsals and phalanges as well. And as you can see, the metatarsals are extremely elongated, accounting for a good portion of the total leg length. This is something I clearly wasn't thinking about when I first saw the bones.

Because of how small I assumed the leg would have been in life, and the aged appearance of the bone, I completely discredited the possibility of it having belonged to a deer. Admittedly, this was a foolish mistake. With the bones I had, the missing skeletal elements, and the tissue that would have surrounded them in life, this animal would have been around 80 cm (2.6 ft) at the hip, if not taller (the scale bar in the photo is 15cm). That's not a huge deer, but for a white-tailed, it's certainly not small either.

A male white-tailed deer, photographed by Scott Bauer, from Wikimedia Commons.

So congratulations again to Scott Elyard for his correct identification! I do believe what we have here (please correct me if you think I'm still missing something) are elements of the left hind limb of Odocoileus virginianus virginianus, the Virginia white-tailed deer. I realize that to many, this identification would have been a quick affair. Others would have been completely perplexed. I fall somewhere in between those two ends of the spectrum, and I hope that this lengthy (almost too much so) post has helped show the process involved with how I came to my conclusion. I made a discovery, formulated a hypothesis, tested it, falsified it, came up with a new one, made observations, collected data, and drew a conclusion that best fit the information I had. Of course, I did this on a very basic level, and there is always the possibility that additional information could come to light that would alter the conclusion I reached. But that's just how science works.

Perhaps I take too much pleasure in the finding of dead animal parts. But something as seemingly grotesque as coming across a dismembered limb (I still wonder how it got there in the first place) can actually serve a fairly practical purpose. It got me thinking - something I feel I don't do quite enough of anymore - and got some of the people around me (in real life and on the web) immediately interested in the scientific process and natural history. As far as I'm concerned, that's a win-win situation. Actually, make that win-win-win situation, because hopefully it's a win for all of you too!

Interweb Science of the Week #8

2011-03-04T08:38:00.004-05:00

This is probably long overdue, even if we're only eight Fridays into "Interweb Science of the Week". This edition features a website that, for the last two years, has been "the home of Paleo-Art online", hosted 12 galleries, written over 450 posts, and showcased the work of more artists than I can count. That's right folks; this week, ISW goes to none other than the "crew" over at ART Evolved: Life's Time Capsule.

The recently u pdated ART Evolved banner, from ART Evolved, by five different, uncredited artists.

For those who might not think that drawing dinosaurs and other extinct critters is really science, let me assure you, the art of paleontological reconstruction and restoration is a science all to itself. Becoming a professional scientific/medical illustrator, in general, often involves just as much preparation and study as becoming a medical doctor. When you're working with fragmentary or deformed remains of creatures long gone, it makes things even more difficult. The level of detail and research that goes into some of the work I've seen is mindblowing. And for myself (an amateur/hobbyist, at best, when it comes to technique and the science of reconstruction) or anyone interested in paleo-art or paleontology in general, ART Evolved is a fantastic resource, and offers reconstruction tips, insightful articles, and the opportunity for anyone and everyone to submit their work and have it showcased on the website. They are an important and vibrant community that is not only here to support those with an interest in paleo-art, but to serve the public as well. They really do create "paleo-art for a difference", and their efforts have not gone unnoticed here at Superoceras.

If you haven't already, go check out their most recent gallery/time capsule, which features the Phorusrhacids, also known as "terror birds". And don't miss out on past galleries either. In fact, just spend time looking at everything you see there. You won't be disappointed, I'm sure.

The Boneyard 2.7

2011-03-01T17:45:00.008-05:00

Welcome to another edition of The Boneyard, a blog carnival specializing in items of paleontological interest. Paleontology, defined, is the study of ancient life and their remains. It seems straightforward. And in many ways it is. But it's also a very eclectic field of study, encompassing geology, chemistry, physics, genetics, mathematics, biology, computer sciences, ecology, engineering, art, systematics and so much more. You don't just find paleontologists in the field digging up bones, or in museums alongside them, but also in labs, studios, classrooms - even on the internet. And paleontology not only has the ability to teach us about the past, but the present and future as well. Is it really any wonder then, that paleontology of all sciences seems to capture the attention of people all over the world, both young and old? I think not. I hope that in this edition of The Boneyard, I manage to share with you, some of the fascinating things happening in the world of paleontology today.

Much of what I know about paleontology, I learned in my youth. When I got to university, I learned a lot of the finer points from my professors. Recently, I was lucky enough to get a refresher from one of them, when Dr. Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. shared a guest (cross) post here at Superoceras on what everyone should know about paleontology. Whether you're an old pro, or new to the subject, I think it's a must read.

Theropod footprints, a type of ichnofossil, on display at the "Dinosaur Mysteries" exhibit at the Maryland Science Center.

With that foundation in place, we can begin to delve into other topics more specific to the various subfields within paleontology. Maybe you're interested in ichnology, the study of trace fossils (burrows, trackways, coprolites, and the like). Well you're in luck, as Anthony Martin of The Great Cretaceous Walk offers insights into the role of gastroliths in marine sauropsids of the Mesozoic, takes us on a trip to the former Cretaceous seaway in Boulia, and recalls his time spent at the Dinosaur Dreaming dig site as the 2011 season comes to a close.

A Thalassomedon "swims" overhead in the Vertebrate Origins Hall of the American Museum of Natural History (thanks for catching the correction, Matt).

Speaking of dinosaurs, it seems like last month, the paleo-blogosphere was flooded with news and views of dinosaurs, old and new. Dinosaur paleontology has always had a large appeal, and that hasn't changed much in the last 169 years. Last week, the "big dinosaur" news was the official announcement of Brontomerus mcintoshi, which two of the authors, Mike Taylor and Matt Wedel, wrote about extensively (and defended) over at Sauropod Vertebrae Picture of the Week. If you have any print coverage of "thunder thighs", send it their way.

The Diplodocus pelvis has nothing on that of Brontomerus, even if it was one of the first fossils collected by the AMNH.

Fellow saurischians Dinky and the Skull quibble about the potential for vocalization in different lineages of archosaurs over at Raptormaniacs. Leave it to Albertonykus to ruin my childhood forever, as he succinctly explains why non-avian dinosaurs probably couldn't sing, despite what television and motion pictures might lead you to believe.

While on the subject of common misconceptions and blunders in the paleontological realm of the media, Tricia's Obligatory Art Blog doesn't hold back as she expresses her disappointed in the trailer for the upcoming series, Terra Nova. I completely agree with her, and if I were Steven Spielberg, I'd listen to Trish's advice on this one. We don't need any more misconceptions perpetuated, or memes introduced in public. Don't you guys remember what happened with the dinosaur formerly known as "Syntarsus"? Unacceptable.

A Deinonychus "takes flight" at the AMNH, showing the commonly accepted relationship between dinosaurs and birds.

But when it comes to former dinosaurs and skewed public opinion on paleontology, their is no story more infamous than that of "Archaeoraptor". David Orr (founder of The Boneyard 2.0) of Love in the Time of Chasmosaurus looks back at 1989 Discover article on Stephen Czerkas, a central figure in the plot, and shows that in spite of all the things he's said and done, he still might have something to offer the paleontological community. His Deinonychus models really are phenomenal, even if he doesn't believe them to be non- avian dinosaurs (but rather secondarily flightless birds).

Tyrannosaurus rex: extreme predator or simple scavanger? This is one of the "dino-mysteries" that you hear about quite a bit (because there is no way it could possibly both hunt and scavange), with opinions ranging from one extreme to another, and evidence that seems to favor each side. Well, if you've been on the fence about this one, you're in luck. Matt van Rooijen over at The Optimistic Painting Blog has created a piece of art that should be about all the proof you need to see that this Cretaceous creature was a real predator.

Psittacosaurus, reconstructed, at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History's "Dinosaurs in their Time" exhibit. Look at those quills!

If you're not a huge fan of saurischians, fear not. On the ornithischian front, Taylor over at Secrets of the Horned Dinosaurs writes about the quills of Psittacosaurus, their possible origin and function, and the relationship between marginocephalians and heterodontosaurids.

Anthony Maltese also brings in news from the RMDRC Paleo Lab blog of a massive lambeosaur hindlimb that has recently been collected from the Judith River Formation. With the help of some local ranchers, they managed to get this huge right leg out of the ground and into the lab where they have recently completed preparations of the specimen. Look at the size of that thing!

A rear-end view of the lambeosaurine Tsintaosaurus, on display at the "Chinasaurs" exhibition at the Maryland Science Center.

Dinosaurs are a fascinating group of animals, but let's not forget there were other critters all over the place during the Mesozoic. Pterosaurs in particular are high on my list of favorites, and over at Tetrapod Zoology, Darren Naish writes about "Mrs. T.", the Darwinopterus specimen found with an egg, and how her discovery can shed light on the sexual behavior of the pterosaurs.

A beautifully preserved Pterodactylus antiquus from the Solenhofen limestone, at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History.

Mike Habib also writes on flight capabilities in the largest of pterosaurs over at Pterosaur.net Blog. With the help of Mark Witton, they've published a paper that helps prove the notion that, not only could behemoths like Quetzalcoatlus make it off the ground, they managed to do so in a style all their own.

Over at A Central Coast Paleontologist, accpaleo provides some insight on some other extinct vertebrates. In his extremely detailed post on Arctodus, the "short-faced bear" (or not so short-faced, as it turns out), he gives a great account on the "evolution" of our view of this critter, from "uber bear" to "just another bear", showing that science is about learning what you can from the evidence available, and not trying to prove what you want to believe.

Left lateral view of the skull of Ursus spelaeus, the Pleistocene cave bear, hanging out in the Carnegie Museum.

For more on mammals on our own branch of the "family tree", Brian Switek (founder of The Boneyard 1.0) discusses what we do and do not know about the evolutionary history of our own species over at Laelaps. Looking at our fossil record, he is right to question which, if any, fossil hominids represent our direct ancestors, as opposed to just part being of our extended family.

It's all in the family - our family - at the AMNH.

For all of you invertebrate enthusiasts out there, Kentuckiana Mike writes about a pea sized Waldron Shale fossil he collected over at Louisville Fossils and Beyond. After a bit of investigation, there is lots more to be said about this enigmatic echinoderm, so be on the lookout for more in the future.

An assemblage of fossil invertebrates at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History. How many can you identify?

In spite of some recent, less than favorable behavior demonstrated towards him, Dave Hone of Archosaur Musings was good enough to indulge his readers with a top five list of things he'd like to see if he could travel back in time. Those are some great picks, if I do say so myself.

Remember The Dinosauricon? I know I was a little saddened when it disappeared from the web. But its founder, Mike Keesey has recently started a new project he's calling PhyloPic. So far, it's off to a great start and he offers an update of the first week's activity over at A Three-Pound Monkey Brain. I wish him all the best in his new endeavor, which you can easily be a part of.

A recent addition to the database, Phacops rana, a Devonian trilobite.

Also new to the web in the last few weeks it Paleo Illustrata: One Man's Journey into the Art of Paleontology. On behalf of Superoceras, The Boneyard, and the paleo and art blogospheres, I'd like to welcome Stu Pond to the Interwebs! Be sure to go visit his site and welcome him yourself. I know I've added it to my blogroll. His presence goes to show that there is no shortage of voices when it comes to trying to disseminate paleontological information to the masses.

I hope that in this edition of The Boneyard, I've managed to do just that. It's been great hosting, and I look forward to doing it again in the future. Thanks to all who submitted posts and have helped spread the word. That being said, there is still plenty left to say on the subject of paleontology. Be sure to submit and "tune in" next month as well, when The Boneyard 2.8 will be hosted by Sam Wise over at Sorting Out Science. Have a great month, everyone!

And another thing...

2011-02-28T01:20:00.002-05:00

If you don't blog, but you draw, sculpt, paint, etc. (or if you blog and create art), don't forget that ART Evolved: Life's Time Capsule has a new gallery coming up on March 1st as well. This month will be dedicated to the "terror birds", so if you have something you want to submit, send it on to artevolved(at)gmail(dot)com.

A Call for Posts

2011-02-28T00:55:00.000-05:00

Alright bloggers, it's that time again. A new month is fast approaching, which means that a new edition of The Boneyard is right around the corner. The Boneyard 2.7 is going to be hosted right here at Superoceras on the first of March, so if you have a post you'd like to submit about paleontology or other relevant natural history topics, just send a link via e-mail to boneyardblogcarnival(at)gmail(dot)come with the word "Boneyard" in the subject line. Anything and everything, new and old, is welcome, and I'm really looking forward to seeing what you all have to offer!

Interweb Science of the Week #7

2011-02-25T13:30:00.002-05:00

This week, my selection for ISW was a no brainer. The following website has been making the rounds on the Interwebs, and it's easy to see why. From T. Michael Keesey, the mind behind A Three-Pound Monkey Brain, comes PhyloPic, an open database of life form silhouettes.

My first submission, Triceratops horridus, in silhouette form.

As Mike states on his blog, this project has anazing potential. With 145 silhouettes already in the database, it's a fantastic resource and I can't wait to see (and help it) grow. Go check it out, submit images if you have them (thanks to Traumador for posting the tutorial over at ART Evolved), and most importantly, spread the word. And congratulations to Michael and PhyloPic for taking home the "Interweb Science of the Week" award for a job well done!

You knew I wasn't going to let anyone else upload a Cooperoceras texanum before I did. Huzzah, relatively unknown taxa!

"He says no one's gonna fancy a girl with thighs the size of big tree trunks."

2011-02-23T15:00:00.003-05:00

Well that's certainly not true if the interest the media is taking in this lovely lady* is any indication. Meet Brontomerus mcintoshi, a new sauropod from Early Cretaceous of Utah.

*Note: there is no mention that any of the specimens of Brontomerus are in fact female, but I'm going to pretend it's a girl for the sake of title quote.

Speculative life restoration of an adult (female) Brontomerus mcintoshi defending its young from a Utahraptor. Executed by Francisco Gascó under direction from Taylor and Wedel, from Taylor et al. 2011.

In a paper published today in Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, Michael Taylor, Mathew Wedel (both of Sauropod Vertabra Picture of the Week) and Richard Cifelli introduce us to "thunder-thighs", one of the many sauropods recently discovered in Cretaceous rocks that helps disprove the long held theory that sauropods disappeared at the end of the Jurassic Period. She's a real beauty, as the figures, photographs, reconstructions and restorations in the paper show. I particularly like the Mad Men-esque scale reference they use in their skeletal inventory. So classy. The paper itself is also brilliantly written - good science at its very best. That means there's lots more to say about this newly described dinosaur. But as I'm generally late to the party with these things, the paleo-blogosphere has already done a pretty good job of covering the details. You can find more information on Brontomerus at SVPoW, Dinosaur Tracking, Dave Hone's Archosaur Musings, Love in the Time of Chasmosaurus, Everything Dinosaur, and the brand new Paleo Illustrata.

References

Taylor, M.P., Wedel, M.J., and Cifelli, R.L. 2011. A new sauropod dinosaur from the Lower Cretaceous Cedar Mountain Formation, Utah, USA. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 56 (1): 75-98 doi:10.4202/app.2010.007

Interweb Science of the Week #6

2011-02-18T10:00:00.002-05:00

Another Friday, another "Interweb Science of the Week". I love it. And this time, not only will it stimulate the mind, but also tug at the heart strings a little. Meet Riley, the "first grade paleontologist". This kid is awesome. He breaks out his dinosaur toy collection, gets in front of the camera and... well wait, why am I talking about it. Just watch!

Riley the Paleontolgist Show 1 "Carnivores". Check out Rileytalk's YouTube channel for more videos.

In all seriousness, if this kid keeps it up, he's going to go places. He's on the right track, and at his rate, he'll have his Ph. D. before I do! Riley provides the perfect example of kids doing what kids do best: retaining information about the world around them as they explore it. In this particular case, the information is about dinosaurs, and while he might need to polish up some of the finer points, he's already starting to throw his weight around and question the established view of things. Why do paleontologists generally say theropods only have three toes on their feet, when they very clearly have four? Only a child would ask a question this obvious - one I admit I've never even thought of. If you tell me a synapomorphy of Theropoda is a three-toed foot, I'm going to accept it. But he's absolutely right in pointing out that, although the pes is functionally tridactyl, digit I, also known as the hallux, is still present in "three-toed" dinosaurs. What a brilliant kid.

Best of luck to Riley as he continues on his journey, and happy Friday everyone!

Love in the Galápagos

2011-02-14T12:30:00.007-05:00

In many parts of the word, today is a day set aside to celebrate love and affection. Inspired by last week's posts on the Galápagos (which I know I have yet to finish), I thought I'd share some photos of signs of "love and affection" I saw when I was traveling the islands.

The uniquely shaped pad of the cactus Opuntia galapageia profusa on Isla Rábida .

Some Galápagos marine iguanas hug it out near the shore of Isla Plaza Sur.

There must be something in the air on Isla Isabela. These Chelonoidis nigra can't help themselves.

"Pardon me, I didn't mean to interrupt." I seem to have distracted two blue-footed boobies dancing on Isla San Cristóbal.

"I'm yours"? More like "she's mine". A male magnificent frigatebird stakes his claim on Isla Seymour Norte.

The frigatebirds aren't the only birds in the mood. Swallow-tailed gulls, caught in the act on Isla Española.

Crabby no more! "Sally lightfoot" crabs mating on Isla Española.

Aww, love . A bull and cow Galápagos sea lion at La Loboria on Isla San Cristóbal.

Happy Birthday, Charles Darwin!

2011-02-12T00:00:00.003-05:00

On this day, 202 years ago, Charles Robert Darwin FRS was born. What else could I possibly say about this most remarkable of men that I haven't already said? Well I can think of one thing, for sure, but I'll have to sing it.

SSE Darwin Birthday Card, uploaded to YouTube by ssemeagher in 2009.

Please, if you have a moment, take the time to wish my good friend Chuck a happy birthday, and happy Darwin Day to you all!

Interweb Science of the Week #5

2011-02-11T10:00:00.004-05:00

Generally speaking, the point of "Interweb Science of the Week" is to showcase something I stumbled across on the web over the course of the last seven days and re-share it with you all. I'd be lying if I said I had done that this week. I've known for a long time what I was going to be featuring today. So without further ado, this edition of ISW is brought to you by YouTube.

YouTube? What? I can hear you all now. "That is certainly interwebs, but where is the science?" Well frankly, if you look for it, you can find science all over YouTube, but since it's Darwin Week, I had a special video I wanted to share. Unfortunately, the official BBC YouTube Channel doesn't have this particular film up, but YouTube user bchetdls has saved the day, and presents Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life, hosted by none other than Sir David Attenborough, in six glorious installments.

The program was originally aired back in 2009 in commemoration of Darwin's 200th birthday and the 150th anniversary of the publication of "On the Origin of Species". In that spirit, it touches on Darwin's (and Attehborough's) personal voyage of discovery, the development of evolutionary theory over the last century and a half, and how important it is today. I think it's a must see, so give it a look, and enjoy!

In Darwin's Footsteps: Field Studies in the Galápagos Archipelago (Part 2)

2011-02-10T23:50:00.015-05:00

A lava gull at the Lobos Islet of Isla San Cristóbal.

If memory serves me, yesterday I left off discussing speciation events that have occurred in the Galápagos Archipelago. Obviously, there is lots of this going on there. Animals and plants, separated from their traditional breeding population, adapt and evolve to better survive in new environments. The lava gull (Leucophaeus fuliginosus) provides the perfect example. The population of this sea bird is only around 400 pairs, and they only live in the Galápagos. However, on and around Pacific coast of South America, many other closely relates species can be found. The lava gull, being isolated from the rest of the parent population, has evolved into a unique species found nowhere else on Earth. But geographical isolation is not the only driving force behind the evolution of new species in the Galápagos.

The giant Opuntia echios barringtonensis of Isla Santa Fé.

Some species evolve as a result of an evolutionary arms race between producer and consumer, predator and prey. Where one organism evolves a defense, another evolves an offense, and the two, trying to outdo one another, exaggerate certain phenotypic features. Just look at the different species of giant prickly pear cactus (Opuntia spp.) found there. These cacti resemble the cacti found on the mainland in many ways, but some have grown to massive heights as a result of being fed upon by Galápagos land iguanas (Conolophus subcristatus) and Galápagos giant tortoises (Chelonoidis nigra). The tallest of these prickly pears, O. echios gigantea, evolved on the island of Santa Cruz, and can be found in great abundance near Puerto Ayora. They have tall wide trunks, and hard spines covering their pads. Not surprisingly, the island of Santa Cruz has both Conolophus, and its own subspecies of Chelonoidis. The exact opposite can be found on the island of Rábida, where O. galapageia profusa grows. This is a low-growing shrubby variety with soft spines covering its pads that produces large quantities of fruit. And to no surprise, Rábida has never had a population of iguanas or tortoises living on it. It seems that the pressure to be tall and avoid being the lunch of some voracious sauropsid was a very heavy one indeed.

Some fancy footwork from a male blue-footed booby on Isla San Cristóbal.

But it’s not just interspecific pressures that act as a driving force either. Many interactions between males and females of the same species result in the exaggeration of phenotypic features (and behavior) as well. Take for example, the infamous blue-footed booby, (Sula nebouxii). On the island of North Seymour, one can find many mating pairs of blue-footed booby, and if lucky, can watch them engage in their rather drawn out courtship display. It centers mainly on their brightly colored blue feet for which they are adored, not only by humans, but by members of the opposite sex. These intense blue feet are the result of sexual selection in the species. The male will show off his feet, lifting them one at a time with head pointed downward, “whistling” at the female. If the female is interested, she will “honk” back at the male. One or both of the pair will then “skypoint”, spreading out their wings and pointing head and tail towards the sky in a display of bravado “honking” or “whistling” all the while. Most often it is the male that begins this behavior, but I saw more than one female engaged in this activity while I was there. If the prospective mate is satisfied with this display, the male will offer the female a gift of a small twig or some grass as a sign of affection, and that he is competent enough to handle the building of a nest, which will house their precious egg. This dance is more elaborate than that of the other two booby species in the Galápagos, and is the direct result sexually selection.

Waved albatross court one another on Isla Española.

Sexual selection acts on other species of sea birds in the Galápagos as well. The waved albatross (Phoebastria irrorata) engages in an equally unique (and elusive) mating ritual. I was lucky enough to catch a pair in the act while visiting the island of Española. This is the primary breeding site for this species, the only diomedeid found in the tropics. It is here that they build their nests on and out of volcanic rocks and the sparse vegetation they can collect. Their courtship involves clacking bills, bowing, and raising their heads to the sky while emitting “whoo hoo” sounds, nearly in unison. Once a pair has come together, they will remain mated for life, lest one of them dies.

A "beach master" and some of his lady friends at La Loboria on Isla San Cristóbal.

Not all animals in the Galápagos are quite as classically romantic. The bull Galápagos sea lion (Zalophus wollebaeki), for example, takes not one cow as a mate, but as many as he possibly can. This harem is guarded by the “beach master” as they rest on the shore, and he diligently swims from one boundary of his colony to the other. While swimming with the pups is a great deal of fun, the bull will aggressively defend his territory from any interlopers, human or sea lion. And unfortunately for them, they don’t feed while they are performing their masculine duties, so they are often week when challengers approach their 2 km stretch of beach. Ousted males often congregate in “bachelor colonies”, the likes of which can be seen on the cliffs of South Plaza Island.

Amniotes of a flipper: a Galápagos sea lion and a green sea turtle swim circles around me off the shore of Isla Santa Fé.

Male Galápagos giant tortoise also engage in dominance displays, meeting face to face, standing tall, and stretching their necks out, mouths agape, to determine who is the bigger guy. The victor, equipped with a concave plastron with knobs on the posterior margins, then begins to court the female by ramming her shell and biting at her legs. Then it is onto the arduous task of mounting her. He can weigh up up to 180 kg more than she, and she may not like it, but he isn’t deterred. The shape of his plastron helps him maintain his position on her shell as he emits grunts and bellowing noises you would never expect to hear coming out of a chelonian.

Obligatory photo of Chelonoidis nigra chathamensis mating at a breeding center on Isla Isabela. If only I had an audio clip to go along with it.

As aggressive of a mating strategy as that seems, things get considerably raunchier for other Galápagos species, Take for example, the so deemed “rape” of female Conolophus by male Marine Iguanas (Amblyrhynchus cristatus) on the island of South Plazas. It is known by Galápagos naturalists that at least three, presumably sterile hybrid iguanas live on the island, and are the result of the interbreeding of the two species. This occurs on South Plazas, because, unlike anywhere else in the Galápagos, the land and marine iguanas are both in heat at the same time on this island. The male Amblyrhynchus will mount and fertilize a female Conolophus, and the resulting offspring will have the long round tail of the land mother, and the short snout and sharp claws of the marine father. It lives near the sea and feed on cactus pads and seaweed like both of its parents. This hybridization is only able to occur because the two species share a common ancestor, one that the hybrid iguana probably resembles. Conolophus and Amblyrhynchus are each other closest living relatives, having diverged from one another around 17 Ma. Quite a thing to see for any squamate lover.

A hybrid iguana (foreground) hangs out with a land iguana (background) on Isla Plaza Sur.

In the interest of getting this post up before today turns into tomorrow, I think I’ll end here for now. But I still have a bit to say, so it looks like you all are in for a three parter. I’ll try to have the conclusion to this series, and some more photos on my Flickr stream, up by Sunday for the official end of Darwin Week.

Setting sail for adventure on the Millennium.