Sunday, March 4, 2012

Velociraptor scavenging an azhdarchid pterosaur


An image I did for David Hone. I'll just send you there for all the actual info:) Big thanks to my wife Jess for actually coloring this! Far better than I could have done!

And Spartan. I'm not sure when the Canadian Primeval will be out. They are supposed to start shooting during the winter months of 2012... so that might be now, or it might be 9 months from now.

Best!

Brett

31 comments:

  1. oh, good work, but, Ihave information for you Brett:

    -the velociraptor was an scavenger, but it was a hunter too, I saw a group of velociraptors that hunted an old male Protoceratops.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm pretty sure that rings true for all predators:) This was a specific instance, as was the last image I drew for Dave Hone:)

      Delete
  2. Hey Brett! Thanks to mention me :) From an article I read this year will be in Omni in Canada and Watch in USA.
    http://www.imediamonkey.com/primeval-spin-off-to-air-on-digital-channel-watch/
    By the way, its interesting. But its probably the raptor eat a dead arzharid or he killed?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe Dave has more on this on his blog. I'm not entirely sure...

      Delete
  3. Congratulations, Brett and Jess, your work was greeting me this morning when I checked the BBC Nature section this morning!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! I'm still hoping for Fox News!!!

      Delete
  4. Brett! I have some really big news! Terra Nova is cancelled. Torosaurus is now consider as a separated genus and do you know about a nanotyrannus mymmy with a chasmosaurid mummy? I have an idea. If you drawn that part. I can imagine that pic with your incredible talent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I heard, I hated the series so no big loss for me. It was just bad!

      I've heard of it, I didn't think they were a 'mummy' but maybe there's a paper or something? No time right now for personal drawings (oh how I wish I did have the time!)

      Delete
  5. Another f¡good news Brett! Another dinosaur now have colour! Microraptor!
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/03/08/a-shiny-dinosaur-%E2%80%93four-winged-microraptor-gets-colour-and-gloss/

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Brett! A wonderful illustration, indeed... as usual. As you may have noticed from the blogroll on the left side of your blog, "Geomyhtologica" is no longer updated. I baptized my new blog "Deep Times. Nature & History, Shaken Not Stirred" [in Italian: " Tempi profondi. Natura e storia, shakerate, non mescolate"] a few months ago.
    Here's the link:
    http://tempiprofondi.blogspot.com/

    It is entirely devoted to the history of science/history of evolutionism [& dinosaurs as well!]. If you're interested: the artwork which is depicted over the blog's template was realized by Fabio Manucci [http://agathaumas.deviantart.com/gallery/] & designed by graphic designer Andrea Pirondini [http://gogodinosaurs.blogspot.com/] [I originally imagined & drew a first draft of the composition].

    Keep up the good work!

    All the best,

    Leo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Leo!

      I'll check it out and I'll fix the blog roll after get this fricken issue done! I need to update a bunch of the other ones as well!

      Delete
  7. Good drawing as usual, but the Velociraptor is missing the primary and secondary feathers on the wings. Also, I don´t think one could see the shape of the muscles through the body plumage...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Actually there are primary and secondary wing feathers, they are just reduced. I see no reason why they must be the size of a bird that flys/glides in an animal that hunts/lives on the ground. Seems like a waste of resources, penguins don't seem to need them. We have no idea what the body plumage is like, downy like a chicken, 'hairy' like a kiwi or sleek like a penguin. I opted for a more sleek look to fit it's name:)

    Best,

    Brett

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, flightless birds do have fairly short remiges and its likely that this was also the case of derived eudromaeosaurs unable to fly like Velociraptor. But the fossil record and philogeny tell us that deinonychosaurs had primary feathers attached to the second finger (up to the tip), in a similar way to real birds with their fused digits, either flying or ground based. This is how the wings are normally estructured in paravians.

      Even in sleek birds you´re normaly unable to see the shape of the plucked body and the muscles beneath the feathers. I don´t believe that penguins, with their particular body plan, generous fat deposits and lifestyle are a good analogue for anything dromaeosaur-related, but fair enough. You´re the artist. :)

      Delete
    2. Yes, but the fossil says the ulna or the radius, it doesn't say that it had feathers to the 2n'd finger. If it did I'm sure there would be a paper, there are several good fossils of this animal, it hasn't been mentioned to my knowledge. As this was looked at by a paleontologist if there was a problem (and I did have to shrink the bone he's eating) he would have said something. Your assuming something without evidence. Your also assuming feathers and feather placement would be stagnent for 60 million years. We know it had some sort of arm feathers but that's about it.

      Well, we have no idea what feathers they had so until we do, anything and everything feather wise is acceptable. Even fairy short feathers similar to hair. I have a some dogs that have short hair that are plenty muscled. I have some that are basically an anatomy lesson for dog musculature. It comes down to personal preference at this point. Chicken or greyhound... I prefer a greyhound for velociraptor.

      Best,

      Brett

      Delete
    3. We have the fossil evidence of primaries attached to second finger on Jeholornis, Microraptor, Sinornithosaurus, Archaeopteryx...its inmediate relatives. Velociraptor can´t have a different wing structure to those the same way a chicken don´t have a different wing structure to an eagle or an ostrich. I don´t know what paleontologist approved your depiction, but it definitely needs a second, and more exigent opinion. Sorry if it sounds harsh, not what I meant.

      I remember your picture of a Velociraptor scavenging a Protoceratops (very nice, by the way). Seem like you did better there, although it was hard to tell because it had a fairly small resolution.

      Delete
  9. Those animals might all have had either limited flight or gliding capabilities. Velociraptor was too big for either and the arms not nearly long enough. It did have different arms, similar but shorter and more robust, much smaller hands. What does evolution teach us about waste? Long arm feathers on arms used to catch prey would be a hinderance and constantly broken off. They would get covered in blood, eaten off by protoceratops and other prey. There is NO direct evidence for it in this species. Your basically trying to force your ideas, that are not supported by the fossils, onto others because it's ancient relatives had them. Frankly i have a hard time believing any of the larger 'raptors' had long wing feathers, they had no need for them other than display.

    Dave Hone was the paleontologist, ask him about it.

    Yes, I did that one. And I wasn't happy with it. Looked too much like a chicken for me. Lost all the anatomy in the fluff. Uninteresting angle, no depth. Generic.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well, we don´t know if juvenile Velociraptors could have been able to climb or glide. Young eudromaeosaurs like Deinonychus (a velociraptorine)have proportionally longer arms than adults, so it could be likely the case.

    Anyhow. I don´t think arm feathers would have get in the way when a dromaeosaur used them to grab the prey, since primaries normally stick out in a different angle to the digits. Even if they did, we don´t even know if they used the arms for this grabbing function on a daily basis or they just flapped their wings in order to clip their prey to the ground with their feet (as modern raptors, their best analogues do. See : http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0007999). The "fighting Dinosaurs of Mongolia" remains suggest a quite desperate scenario rather than a regular hunt scene, where the Velociraptor was clearly on the losing side, being crushed under an oponent more than 10 times its own weight (and a lot of flying bird species aren´t usually afraid or bite or being biten on their wings when they fight fiercely. Those quarrels can get really ugly, in fact.) Even ignoring all this theories or speculations, cladistics and phylogenetics tell us that all paravian forelimbs have this particular structure (regardless of their lenght). Sometimes with variations, like the odd Scansoriopterygids with their primaries attached to the 3rd finger.

    Also, makes sense that Velociraptor could look like a chicken, since chickens are... theropod dinosaurs!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're making massive assumptions without evidence. Even in most birds, juveniles can't fly. They need to mature to a certain level to have the muscle strength for gliding or flight. You have an idea that you like, not one supported by evidence. You can't make assumptions when all you have are a string of 14 feather attachment points on an ulna. They might not be flight feathers, they might be more akin to ostrich feathers. And with that many on their arms, and it being a short ulna it's more than likely they were small feathers.

      There is NO evidence that velociraptor had feathers on is finger. Until there is, drawing it either way is fine, it's all personal preference. And I'm sorry, any predator that used it hands for hunting, killing eating, will not have those hands covered on blood and risk them getting damaged, feathers use up resources and having to constantly replace them would waste a lot. Anything around the hands and arms is going to take a beating. If they used that claw for killing then the arms would play a big role in catching and holding, the risk of damaging long feathers would be incredibly high.

      Yes, chickens are theropods, but they don't hunt geese now do they? And they do have smaller wing feathers than say a goose doen't they?

      Delete
  11. 1stly, I really like this Velociraptor image (even more than your previous 1). I especially like the coloration. What shade of red is that?

    2ndly, while I do agree that eudromaeosaurs would've had smaller wing feathers than basal dromaeosaurs, there were 2 things you said that I wasn't sure about (See the following quotes). In reference to the 1st thing, I was reminded of a Tet Zoo post ( http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/03/passerine_birds_fight_dirty.php ). I know you specifically said "on arms used to catch prey", but I figured it's worth reading anyway if you haven't already. In reference to the 2nd thing, that's not completely true: We know that eudromaeosaurs brooded their eggs ( http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/e06-033 ) & so they would've needed wing feathers for that. A good example of what I mean is Headden's Velociraptor ( http://Qilong.deviantart.com/art/Velociraptor-in-a-Dune-Field-24730566 ) in which the wing feathers, while smaller than those of a basal dromaeosaur, are still large enough to brood with. See his responses to my comments for his reasoning.

    "Long arm feathers on arms used to catch prey would be a hinderance and constantly broken off. They would get covered in blood, eaten off by protoceratops and other prey."

    "Frankly i have a hard time believing any of the larger 'raptors' had long wing feathers, they had no need for them other than display."

    -JD-man

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No idea what shade, pshop doesn't have shades, you just pick a color;)

      You don't need arm feathers to brood a nest. Body ones will do just fine. Or like the megapode, no brooding at all. You seem to be stuck in the 'if it's true for one then it must be true for all'. This is simply too simple an idea. Animals, even closely related one, can have very different behaviors and appearances.

      Best,

      Brett

      Delete
    2. "Body ones will do just fine."

      The problem w/that analogy is that birds that only use their body feathers do so b/c their arms/hands are too short/small, respectively.

      "Or like the megapode, no brooding at all."

      The problem w/that analogy is that megapodes couldn't be more different from eudromaeosaurs in terms of behavior/lifestyle.

      "You seem to be stuck in the 'if it's true for one then it must be true for all'."

      I resent that, given that my previous comment was the only 1 about behavior/appearance inferences.

      "Animals, even closely related one, can have very different behaviors and appearances."

      The thing is I'm not saying that all eudromaeosaurs brooded their eggs just b/c Deinonychus did, but b/c all eudromaeosaurs were similarly adapted to do so. Specifically, all eudromaeosaurs (like all birds that use their arms & hands to brood) have long arms & large hands.

      -JD-man

      Delete
    3. You are assuming that the way MODERN birds do it is the ONLY way, This is simply not the case. Tyrannosaurs had feathers but small arms AND short arm feathers, at least for a few species.

      You are assuming we know the entire lifestyles of these animals when we are VERY lucky to get even a small glimpse. We don't know how all the different 'raptors' behaved or if all of them brooded their eggs.

      Resent all you want, I read what you wrote on DA. You are assuming far too much based on another animal entirely or in the case of Bambiraptor, a drawing. Short feathers or long we have NO idea. All we know is that they had some type of feather that required a quill nob, that's ALL.

      The paper said it MAY have been brooding, an egg was associated with a body. It's also possible it was GOING to lay the egg, stealing it or whatever. Until a fairly complete skeleton is found with several eggs in some sort of nest, it's not conclusive to me.

      And yes, those with long arms use them for brooding... sometimes. Chickens don't, they use their body. But those wings are not also used to kill/capture prey. You're assuming because it's common now it was ALWAYS that way.

      Delete
    4. "Tyrannosaurs had feathers but small arms AND short arm feathers, at least for a few species."

      Why are you bringing tyrannosaurs into this? I never said anything about them. In any case, I seriously doubt any non-maniraptoran dinos brooded their eggs the way most birds do.

      "You are assuming we know the entire lifestyles of these animals when we are VERY lucky to get even a small glimpse."

      You know just as well as I do that the evidence for eudromaeosaur behavior/lifestyle suggests something VERY different from known megapode behavior/lifestyle.

      "Resent all you want, I read what you wrote on DA."

      I resented your comment b/c you were judging me based on 1 comment, which isn't a fair thing to do to anyone (unless maybe their 1 comment is especially ridiculous, but that obviously isn't the case here). Besides that, my DA comments have nothing to do w/this, given that they're just me asking Headden questions about his Velociraptor & nothing more.

      "The paper said it MAY have been brooding, an egg was associated with a body. It's also possible it was GOING to lay the egg, stealing it or whatever."

      The paper made it clear that brooding was MUCH more likely the other possibilities, given the evidence.

      "And yes, those with long arms use them for brooding... sometimes. Chickens don't, they use their body. But those wings are not also used to kill/capture prey. You're assuming because it's common now it was ALWAYS that way."

      1stly, I didn't say that all birds w/long arms brood their eggs w/them, just that all birds that use their arms to brood their eggs have long ones (like all eudromaeosaurs).

      2ndly, that's why I agree that eudromaeosaurs would've had smaller wing feathers than basal dromaeosaurs. All I'm saying is that, as Senter & Headden have shown, it's possible for eudromaeosaur wing feathers to have been both large enough to brood with & small enough to not hinder predation. Given the evidence for brooding, 1 could say that it's probable.

      -JD-man

      Delete
    5. Fine, Kiwis and elephant birds, penguins...The point is, birds don't really use their wings for brooding. They use their bodies, so your entire argument is moot.

      Delete
    6. "The point is, birds don't really use their wings for brooding."

      Actually, they do, but don't take my word for it. See Hopp & Orsen 2004 in "Feathered Dragons: Studies on the Transition from Dinosaurs to Birds" ( http://www.amazon.com/Feathered-Dragons-Studies-Transition-Dinosaurs/dp/0253343739/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1337548763&sr=1-4 ).

      -JD-man

      Delete
    7. No we don't. Those animals are not brooding in the classic egg hatching way, they are protecting the eggs from wind/sandstorms. That's how they died, NOT how the hatched eggs. You are assuming again, and those are not velociraptors are they? When they find a raptor on a nest you might have some closure. But I will say, for a dromeosaur, velociraptors have SHORT arms.

      Honestly I don't give a crap either way, but you seem to be stuck on this so why not ask a pro where they stand?

      Delete
  12. "No we don't. Those animals are not brooding in the classic egg hatching way, they are protecting the eggs from wind/sandstorms. That's how they died, NOT how the hatched eggs. You are assuming again, and those are not velociraptors are they? When they find a raptor on a nest you might have some closure. But I will say, for a dromeosaur, velociraptors have SHORT arms."

    1stly, you're inexplicably changing the subject & putting words in my mouth: You 1st said that "birds don't really use their wings for brooding"; I then pointed you to a paper showing that birds do use their wings for brooding; You then said "no we don't" & started talking about oviraptorids & claiming that I assumed something about them. Seriously, what are you talking about?

    2ndly, for someone who doesn't "give a crap either way", you're coming off as overly confrontational. I've asked around & I'm not the only 1 who has noticed.

    -JD-man

    ReplyDelete