English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Sometimes, comparative zoologists and acheologists determine that a bone fragment found constitutes an entire different species. Can this really be deduced from a buried bone fragment sometimes millions of years old? Are these guesses or fact? Also, if there are no complete skeletons of certain animals (such as some dinosaurs) how can zoologists really know that some dug-up bone fragment belongs to an entirely different species?

2007-03-25 07:37:03 · 4 answers · asked by misoma5 7 in Science & Mathematics Zoology

4 answers

The answer is in your question: comparative zoologist. They find a feature which is not present in any living animal, it may be quite minute, like the small bump on a bone where the tendons would have attached, but the proportions are different from anything else. Then, the idea is to rule out a freak deviation or an infirmity or the result of a wound that healed strangely; and again, the archaeologist know what to look for to rule those things out.
In conclusion, those are very educated guesses, and more often than not, they are spot on -- more fossils discovered late showing the same characteristics.
This is why the comparative idea is important. A bump that would indicate attachment of a ligament would be bigger for a very strong animal, one fast runner for instance, than for a slower moving one, even if the bones are about the same size overall. And that is as true for existing animals as for dinosaurs that dies 65 million years ago.
As for incomplete skeletons, finding a bone that is, say, similar in appearance to that of one for which a complete skeleton exists, but with small differences, the paleontologist can deduct that this animal is a cousin of one for which a more complete description exists, and so on.

2007-03-25 07:54:18 · answer #1 · answered by Vincent G 7 · 0 0

Good question!

Yes they can tell in many cases if it is a seperate species from known animals because different organisms have different skeletal structures, very simple eh? When someone difs up dinosaur fossils, they are not likely to classify it as a human. Obviously it's not. They give it a new species.

However, there is no doubt that scientists sometime DO classify animals as seperate when they are actually the same species. If a scientist dug up a chihuahua skeleton and a Great Dane skeleton, he would classify them as two seperate species when in fact, the chihuahua and the great dane are the same species of animal.

2007-03-25 07:57:13 · answer #2 · answered by RG 2 · 0 0

Well: according to "Prehistoric & Jurastic periods each
Animal Fossil has been studied by an Team of Scientists
called Palentologist where they'd known about all forms
like Trees, insects, Dinosaurs ect"

2007-03-25 07:55:53 · answer #3 · answered by toddk57@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0 0

we've purely pointed out 10% of each and all of the a number of species presently residing. that's no ask your self to me that we've not got an entire fossil checklist, or that there are some very historic creatures long concept extinct that quite are not. i don't see how that's an affront to evolutionary concept.

2016-11-23 14:50:46 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers