CLOSE

10 Fun Facts About Deinonychus

We no longer see dinosaurs as the same oafish, tail-dragging monsters that trudged through King Kong (1933). Over the past 50 years, they’ve undergone an amazing scientific makeover—and if this shift in our perception could be traced back to a single breakthrough, it’d have to be the discovery of an athletic creature named Deinonychus antirrhopus.

1. Deinonychus Helped Revolutionize Dino Paleontology ...

Some odd-looking remains were discovered on a fossil-hunting trip through Montana in 1964. Yale paleontologist John Ostrom quickly deduced that these were the bones of a carnivorous dinosaur that belonged to the theropod suborder. He also realized that this new animal defied almost everything we thought we knew about the “terrible lizards.” This predator clearly wasn’t built for a sluggish, reptilian existence. Instead, its light frame, counterbalancing tail, and huge, hooked claws betrayed an active lifestyle. Perhaps it was even warm-blooded. Five years later, Ostrom released a paper that introduced the world to his game-changing dinosaur, which the scientist called Deinonychus, or “terrible claw.”

2. … And it Revived the Whole Dinosaur/Bird Idea.

Today, virtually all paleontologists recognize that birds are the descendants of dinosaurs. Back in 1970, however, this notion seemed outdated. Naturalists started wondering about a possible link during the mid-to-late 1800s, but the conclusion that birds actually evolved from dinosaurs quickly fell out of favor—until Ostrom came along. In short order, he noted many glaring similarities between Deinonychus’ arms and those belonging to an ancient, feathery critter known as Archaeopteryx, and the long-dormant concept once again took flight.

3. Deinonychus Inspired the Raptors of Jurassic Park.

An unfortunate naming mix-up has kept Deinonychus from getting the celebrity treatment it so richly warrants. In 1988, researcher Gregory S. Paul published a splendid book entitled Predatory Dinosaurs of the World: A Complete Illustrated Guide. At the time, he believed that Deinonychus antirrhopus was really a large, North American species of Velociraptor, an exclusively Asian genus, and his book uses the name Velociraptor antirrhopus instead.

Even then, however, the overwhelming majority of paleontologists strongly disagreed with this assessment. Deinonychus, they argued, was far too different from Velociraptor to be casually lumped together with it. For starters, the Old World dinosaur was only about 6 feet long and had a fairly narrow snout. In contrast, Deinonychus antirrhopus stretched over 11 feet from end to end and sported a much taller snout. Soon enough, Paul heeded their remarks and resumed calling a spade a spade and a Deinonychus a Deinonychus.

But Paul’s work left a big impact on novelist Michael Crichton, who almost certainly used Predatory Dinosaurs of the World as a reference while writing Jurassic Park. So his characters wound up fleeing from an animal that’s obviously modeled after Deinonychus—right down to its size and skull shape—but is called Velociraptor anyway. Stephen Spielberg followed suit, and the rest is pop culture history.

4. Deinonychus and its Kin Probably Weren’t Half as Smart as the Media Would Have You Believe.

Thanks to Jurassic Park, dromaeosaurs—also known as raptors—have been painted as super-intelligent killers whose IQs were supposedly on par with those of whales and primates. Don’t buy the hype. Though they do appear a bit brainier than your typical dinosaur, it’s impossible to figure out just how smart an extinct animal really was, and even liberal estimates put clever dinosaurs in the same league as ostriches and opossums.

5. Also, There’s no Concrete Evidence that They Hunted in Wolf-Like Packs.

Ostrom himself first suggested this in the '60s after finding the skeletons of three Deinonychus scattered around one Tenontosaurusa much larger herbivore. Case closed, right? Not so fast: Perhaps they were merely squabbling over carrion, Komodo dragon-style. Nowadays, you won’t find any nonmammalian carnivores that form complicated hunting groups. Usually, a disorganized mob works just as well. 

6. Deinonychus Had a Semi-Rigid Tail.

AStrangerintheAlps via Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 3.0

Long, interweaving rods extended from most of its tail vertebrae, which made the appendage abnormally stiff. According to most experts, the dinosaur’s strange tail acted as a counterweight to the rest of its body. Hence, a running Deinonychus could have made sharp turns midstride by suddenly swinging that thing about.  

7. Its Dexterity Left a Lot to Be Desired.   

Listen up, humans: Never, ever take your opposable digits for granted! Deinonychus’ smaller cousin Bambiraptor—and, yes, the lil’ bugger was named after Disney’s wide-eyed deer—had one on each hand, meaning that it could grasp things with relative ease. Deinonychus wasn’t so lucky: Because none of its fingers worked this way, the animal had to pick up an object by squeezing it between its palms.

8. A Probable Deinonychus Egg Has Been Located.   

Certain dinosaurs had stomach ribs called gastralia. These bones (which crocodiles also possess) were situated in the belly, where they helped support vital organs. In 2006, researchers found a few Deinonychus gastralia nestled atop an incomplete fossil egg. Assuming that a Deinonychus actually laid this egg, the position of the ribs implies that one of its parents died while brooding on it like a hen.

9. Deinonychus Most Likely Kept its Arms Folded.  

Emily Willoughby via Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 4.0

By and large, dromaeosaurs have been illustrated with their forelimbs dangling almost limply from their torsos. But in recent years, this portrayal has come under fire. That position would have been ungainly, and although Deinonychus, Bambiraptor, and company couldn’t bend their wrists as far as today’s birds can, they probably spent most of their time with each arm tucked up against the body anyway.

10. We May Have Been Underrating its Bite Force.

Depending on who you ask, Deinonychus either bit weakly or used more chomping power than a hungry hyena. One 2010 analysis of several Tenontosaurus bones laced with Deinonychus tooth marks concluded that in order to leave these punctures, the dino’s jaws had to have been as strong as a present-day alligator’s. But this study had its critics, who argued that Deinonychus’ slender skull didn’t leave room for jaw muscles large enough to cause such damage. Besides, it was plenty frightening without them.  


Original image
iStock
arrow
science
The T. Rex Fossil That Caused a Scientific Controversy
Original image
iStock

In the early 2000s, a team of paleontologists inadvertently set the stage for a years-long scientific saga after they excavated a well-preserved partial Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton from Montana's Hell Creek formation. While transporting the bones, the scientists were forced to break a femur. Pieces from inside the thigh bone fell out, and these fragments were sent to Mary Schweitzer, a paleontologist at North Carolina State University, for dissection and analysis.

Under a microscope, Schweitzer thought she could make out what appeared to be cells and tiny blood vessels inside the pieces, similar to those commonly discovered inside fresh bone. Further analysis revealed what appeared to be animal proteins, which sent Schweitzer reeling. Could she have just discovered soft tissue inside dinosaur leg bone many millions of years old, found in ancient sediments laid down during the Cretaceous period? Or was the soft stuff simply a substance known as biofilm, which would have been formed by microbes after the bone had already fossilized?

Following a seemingly endless series of debates, studies, and papers, Schweitzer's hunch was proven correct. That said, this contentious conclusion wasn't made overnight. To hear the whole saga—and learn what it means for science—watch the recent episode of Stated Clearly below, which was first spotted by website Earth Archives.

[h/t Earth Archives]

Original image
Courtesy the University of Colorado Boulder
arrow
science
Fossilized Poop Shows Some Herbivorous Dinosaurs Loved a Good Crab Dinner
Original image
Lead author Karen Chin of the University of Colorado Boulder
Courtesy the University of Colorado Boulder

Scientists can learn a lot about the prehistoric world through very, very old poop. Just recently, researchers from the University of Colorado-Boulder and Kent State University studying fossilized dinosaur poop discovered that some herbivores weren't as picky about their diets as we thought. Though they mostly ate plants, large dinosaurs living in Utah 75 million years ago also seem to have eaten prehistoric crustaceans, as Nature News reports.

The new study, published in Scientific Reports, finds that large dinosaurs of the Late Cretaceous period seem to have eaten crabs, along with rotting wood, based on the content of their coprolites (the more scientific term for prehistoric No. 2). The fossilized remains of dinos' bathroom activities were found in the Kaiparowits rock formation in Utah's Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, a known hotspot for pristine Late Cretaceous fossils.

"The large size and woody contents" of the poop suggest that they were created by dinosaurs that were well-equipped to process fiber in their diets, as the study puts it, leading the researchers to suggest that the poop came from big herbivores like hadrosaurs, whose remains have been found in the area before.

Close up scientific images of evidence of crustaceans in fossilized poop.
Chin et al., Scientific Reports (2017)

While scientists previously thought that plant-eating dinosaurs like hadrosaurs only ate vegetation, these findings suggest otherwise. "The diet represented by the Kaiparowits coprolites would have provided a woody stew of plant, fungal, and invertebrate tissues," the researchers write, including crabs (Yum). These crustaceans would have provided a big source of calcium for the dinosaurs, and the other invertebrates that no doubt lived in the rotting logs would have provided a good source of protein.

But they probably didn't eat the rotting wood all year, instead munching on dead trees seasonally or during times when other food sources weren’t available. Another hypothesis is that these "ancient fecal producers," as the researchers call them, might have eaten the rotting wood, with its calcium-rich crustaceans and protein-laden invertebrates, during egg production, similar to the feeding patterns of modern birds during breeding season.

Regardless of the reason, these findings could change how we think about what big dinosaurs ate.

[h/t Nature News]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios