A fossil skeleton of a dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx, preserved in volcanic ash, was discovered in Liaoning, China, in 1996. Interestingly, the fossil included a pattern of fine lines surrounding the skeletal bones. Some paleontologists interpret the lines as evidence that Sinosauropteryx had feathers. However, critics have opposed the idea that Sinosauropteryx was a feathered dinosaur, citing several reasons.
First, the critics point out that the fine lines may not even represent functional structures of a living dinosaur, but rather structures that were formed after the animal’s death. After the animal died and was buried in volcanic ash, its skin may have decomposed into fibers. The skin fibers then became preserved as lines in the fossil; the lines were misinterpreted as evidence of feathers.
Second, even if the fine lines are remains of real structures of a Sinosauropteryx, scientists cannot tell with certainty what part of the dinosaur’s anatomy the structures were. Many dinosaurs had frills, ornamental fan-shaped structures growing out of some parts of their bodies. Some of the critics argue that the lines surrounding the skeleton are much more likely to be fossilized remains of frills than remains of feathers.
A third objection is based on the fact that the usual functions of feathers are to help animals fly or regulate their internal temperature. However, the structures represented by the lines in the Sinosauropteryx fossil were mostly located along the backbone and the tail of the animal. This would have made the structures quite useless for flight and of very limited use in thermoregulation. This suggests that the lines do not represent feathers.
The reading is opposing the idea that fine lines of a Sinosauroteryx fossil skeleton indicates it was a feathered dinosaur. The lecturer, on the other hand, believes that the fine lines represent feathers is strong evidence that it was a feather dinosaur.
First, although a study shows that the fine lines were formed after the animal died and then decomposed into fibers, other animals who were buried on the same site did not have these fine lines. The professor mentions that these animals’ functional structures were well preserved in volcanic ash, which is make it likely that the Sinosauroteryx functional structure was beautifully preserved as well. This fact indicates that the patterns might have represent feathers not fibers.
Second, even though some of the critics assert that the lines of the sinosauropteryx’s fossil are more likely to be remains of frills than feathers, it can not be rational. This is because the chemical composition of frills and feathers is different, feathers typically contain beta carotene and frills do not. Moreover, studies analysis showed that the remaining fossils have beta carotene, which is make it impossible to be fossilized remains of frills.
Finally, it is true that the position of the feathers would have made the structures useless for flying or in thermoregulation process, but there are other functions for feathers. The professor indicates that feathers could be used for a displaying purpose. For example, a beccoek usually has a long colorful tail use it to attract a mate. Furthermore, studies showed that the Sinosauropteryx had an orange and white tail for displaying function as well. This information signifies that the lines represent feathers.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-28 | Salehi | 3 | view |
| 2019-12-27 | Bonjourkmm | 88 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | shrijan | 3 | view |
| 2019-11-05 | Seema Modak | 71 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | alta | 80 | view |
- The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers’ crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad mul 80
- The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers’ crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad mul 80
- In recent years, many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in their environment. These drops in population and widespread extinction events have serious consequences for the ecosystems in which frogs l 35
- Because of climate change, more and more land that was once used to grow crops or provide food for animals is turning to dry, unusable desert land. There are many proposals about how to stop this process, known as desertification. A number of proposals in 3
- Declines in Frog PopulationsIn recent years, many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in their environment. These drops in population and widespread extinction events have serious consequences for the 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 456, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'represented'.
Suggestion: represented
... indicates that the patterns might have represent feathers not fibers. Second, even...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t have represent feathers not fibers. Second, even though some of the critics ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 21, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...s not fibers. Second, even though some of the critics assert that the lines of the si...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 518, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...fies that the lines represent feathers.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, if, moreover, second, so, then, well, for example, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 16.0 30.3222958057 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1468.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37728937729 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04145350552 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545787545788 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5805912295 49.2860985944 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.923076923 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.76923076923 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.169144223874 0.272083759551 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0624036539672 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0667034595017 0.0662205650399 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110192240896 0.162205337803 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0666928414168 0.0443174109184 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.8541721854 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.