New research sheds light on South Pole dinosaurs

Aug 05, 2011

Dog-sized dinosaurs that lived near the South Pole, sometimes in the dark for months at a time, had bone tissue very similar to dinosaurs that lived everywhere on the planet, according to a doctoral candidate at Montana State University.

That surprising fact falsifies a 13-year-old study and may help explain why dinosaurs were able to dominate the planet for 160 million years, said Holly Woodward, MSU graduate student in the Department of Earth Sciences and co-author of a paper published Aug. 3 in the journal "."

"If we were trying to find evidence of dinosaurs doing something much different physiologically, we would expect it to be found in dinosaurs from an extreme environment such as the South Pole," Woodward said. "But based on bone tissues, dinosaurs living within the Antarctic Circle were physiologically similar to dinosaurs living everywhere else.

"This tells us something very interesting; that basically from the very start, early dinosaurs, or even the ancestors of dinosaurs, evolved a physiology that allowed an entire group of animals to successfully exploit a multitude of environmental conditions for millions of years," Woodward said.

Jack Horner, Woodward's adviser and Regents Professor of Paleontology/Curator of Paleontology at MSU's Museum of the Rockies, said Woodward's findings are consistent with other results from the museum's histology lab.

"I think the most important finding is that polar dinosaurs don't seem to be any different than any other dinosaurs in respect to how their bones grew," Horner said. "Dinosaurs have annual growth lines and those that don't have them are simply not yet a year old."

Woodward said she conducted her research after reading a 1998 study about polar dinosaurs. Intrigued by the study, she decided to review the findings and received a National Science Foundation grant that allowed her to travel to Australia last summer, set up a histology laboratory and analyze bones in a rare collection in Australia's Melbourne Museum.

Woodward analyzed the of 17 dinosaurs that lived 112 to 100 million years ago during the latter part of the Early Cretaceous Period. All but one of the dinosaurs in her study were plant eaters. All lived in the Antarctic Circle in what is now known as the Australian state of Victoria.

Also participating in the study were the authors of the original study: Anusuya Chinsamy at the University of Cape Town in South Africa, Tom Rich at the Melbourne Museum and Patricia Vickers-Rich at Monash University in Australia.

The three scientists who conducted the original study welcomed her analysis and didn't mind that she falsified their hypothesis, Woodward said. She added that the new study looked at more dinosaur bones than the original study because more bones from the polar dinosaurs were available. Paleontologists have been adding to the collection over the past 25 to 30 years.

The original study looked at the bone microstructure of the polar dinosaurs and concluded that the differences they saw indicated that some dinosaurs survived harsh polar conditions by hibernating, while others evolved in a way that allowed them to be active year-round, Woodward said.

The new study showed that all but the youngest dinosaurs had "Lines of Arrested Growth" or LAGs, Woodward said. Since the hibernation hypothesis was based on the presence or absence of LAGs, the new study falsified the hypothesis.

LAGSs, in a bone cross section, look like tree rings, Woodward said. Like tree rings, they are formed when growth temporarily stops.

"Research on animals living today suggests that LAGs form annually, regardless of latitude or climate," Woodward said. "Like , LAGs can be counted to age an animal, so that the absence of these marks likely indicates a dinosaur was less than a year old. These marks have also been found in dinosaurs that lived at much lower latitudes having no need to hibernate."

The new study doesn't mean there was nothing unique about polar dinosaurs, but those qualities aren't apparent in bone tissue, Woodward said.

"It is very likely that living in different environments evolved specific adaptations – either physical or behavioral – to cope with environmental conditions," she said. "Analysis of bone microstructure can tell us a great deal about growth, but some things just aren't recorded in bone tissue."

Explore further: Experts seek to save Haiti's archaeological sites (Update)

Related Stories

Possible dinosaur burrows clues to survival strategies

Jul 16, 2009

Internationally renowned palaeontologist and Monash University Honorary Research Associate, Dr Anthony Martin has found evidence of a dinosaur burrow along the coast of Victoria, which helps to explain how dinosaurs protected ...

Recommended for you

User comments : 7

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

kevinrtrs
1 / 5 (10) Aug 05, 2011
basically from the very start, early dinosaurs, or even the ancestors of dinosaurs, evolved a physiology that allowed an entire group of animals to successfully exploit a multitude of environmental conditions

This statement simply make pure nonsense of the evolutionary model which relies on environmental input to drive genetic/molecular change. How could the evolutionary process have anticipated the need to make the dinosaur adaptable to numerous climates in one fell swoop?

Surely a much more appropriate explanation would be that the dinosaur was DESIGNED from the start - by someone who knew what other conditions exist - to have the ability to live in a multitude of environments.
kevinrtrs
1 / 5 (8) Aug 05, 2011
Analysis of bone microstructure can tell us a great deal about growth, but some things just aren't recorded in bone tissue

What tissue is she referring to here? Did she actually examine Dino bone that still had recognizable soft-tissue in it?
Or was there some other [new] means of analyzing permineralized organic components? Would be instructive to know, since I haven't read the original paper.
If she worked on real soft-tissue, it raises the question as to how it could have survived at least 65Ma, given that currently the best lab preservation methods can only sustain such tissue for an estimated optimistic duration of 100k years?
Ojorf
3.9 / 5 (7) Aug 05, 2011
Darnit, the reprotard got in first.
Y8Q412VBZP21010
5 / 5 (4) Aug 05, 2011
Darnit, the reprotard got in first.


Oh whatever. I don't even bother to read Kevin's stuff any more, I just give it a one star vote and move on.

I suppose it might be unjust to ding someone without reading what he has to say, but the betting odds of him actually saying anything worth reading for the rest of his life are too low to worry about.

And since he's trolling a science site just to bash science, he's not in a good position to complain that he's not getting the applause he deserves. I think he is.
that_guy
not rated yet Aug 05, 2011
So now we're back to square one on the question on whether dinosaurs hibernated or not. There's never a time machine available to settle debates when you need one.
macsglen
not rated yet Aug 06, 2011
What I don't understand is why bone growth would periodically stop every year, regardless of climate. Is this something that only happens in reptiles?
Ojorf
1 / 5 (1) Aug 06, 2011
I think LAGs are probably found in most mammals, to some extent, it is just more visible in animals that hibernate. Things are warmer in summer and there is more to eat so animals grow faster in summer, leading to rings of less and more dense bone.