jabhatta2
Hi
KarishmaB - for the 4th question - while i agree A through D are wrong - i thought 4E was wrong too
-- The presence of fibro-lamellar bones
does resolve the debate over dinosaur physiology per my understanding - if dinosaurs have fibro-lamellar bones - dinosaurs were warm blooded
-- The question remain un-answered
in the green is referring to the fact that the author CANNOT say, if the dinosaurs have fibro-lamellar bones or don't have fibro-lamellar bones to begin with
-- That is why the mordern repiles / juvenile crocodiles was mentioned by the author (mordern repiles DONT HAVE fibro-lamellar bone whereas juvenile crocodiles DO have fibro-lamellar bones) -- so both scenario's are possible
-- We just dont know if dinosaurs are like mordern repiles or like juvenile crocodiles.
Quote:
..........
In the 1980’s, however, Bakker’s contention began to be questioned, as a number of scientists found growth rings in the bones of various dinosaurs that are much like those in modern reptiles. Bone growth in reptiles is periodic in nature, producing a series of concentric rings in the bone, not unlike the growth rings of a tree. Recently, Chinsamy investigated the bones of two dinosaurs from the early Jurassic period (208-187 million years ago), and found that these bones also had growth rings; however, they were also partially fibro-lamellar in nature. Chinsamy’s work raises a question central to the debate over dinosaur physiology: did dinosaurs form fibro-lamellar bone because of an innately high metabolic rate associated with warm-bloodedness or because of periods of unusually fast growth that occurred under favorable environmental conditions? (Although modern reptiles generally do not form fibro-lamellar bone, juvenile crocodiles raised under optimal environmental conditions do.) This question remains unanswered; indeed, taking all the evidence into account, one cannot make a definitive statement about dinosaur physiology on the basis of dinosaur bone. It may be that dinosaurs had an intermediate pattern of bone structure because their physiology was neither typically reptilian, mammalian, nor avian.
The question tests your comprehension of all that you have read up to that point.
Were dinosaurs warm- or cold-blooded?
Warm bloodied grow quickly so they have haphazard bone filaments (fibro-lamellar) (birds & mammals). Dinosaurs have such bones.
Reptiles grow slowly so they have parallel laid bone filaments (reptiles). They are cold blooded.
But growth rings were found in dinosaur. Growth rings are found in reptiles showing periods of growth.
So scientists wondered whether fibro-lamellar bones were because of warm blooded dinosaurs or because of periods of high growth rate (in which case dinosaurs could have been cold blooded).
Now here is the question that came to my mind - reptiles have growth rings but they do not have fibro-lamellar bones. Then why should growth rings in dinosaurs explain fibro-lamellar bones? Growth rings (periods of high growth) does not lead to fibro-lamellar bones in reptiles. Then how can growth rings explain fibro-lamellar bones in dinosaurs?
This is what the author tried to explain by pointing out - (Although modern reptiles generally do not form fibro-lamellar bone, juvenile crocodiles raised under optimal environmental conditions do.)
He explains that periods of high growth (which give growth rings) could lead to formation of fibro-lamellar bones as they do in juvenile crocodiles. He says that is why growth rings could indicate that dinosaurs were cold bloodied.
So he mentions juvenile crocodiles to explain why the presence of fibro-lamellar bone does not resolve the debate over dinosaur physiology. Why we cannot say that dinosaurs must be warm bloodied. Because fibro-lamellar bones are found in juvenile crocodiles (cold blooded) raised under right conditions too.