Topic: Archaeopteryx feather remnants? (Read 2056 times)

Nemesis · « **on:** May 16, 2010, 10:31:39 am »

Quote

A new study of a 150-million-year-old fossil of an Archaeopteryx has shown that remnants of its feathers have been preserved.

Quote

But now a new scanning technique has revealed that one fossil contains fragments of the original feathers - rather than just being an imprint of an animal whose remains had long ago disintegrated into the dust.

The bad news though is that museum curators have inadvertently chipped and scrubbed off a lot more fragments of the creature's feathers and skin fragments as they prepared the fossil for public display to highlight the bones.

How many other fragments are there that older techniques couldn't find? What might even newer techniques find in coming years?

Centurus · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2010, 10:59:44 am »

Can you say Jurassic Park?

knightstorm · « **Reply #2 on:** May 16, 2010, 11:54:58 am »

Jurassic Park is a bit of a stretch, but it could help us clarify taxonomic relationships.

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 16, 2010, 01:29:07 pm »

And creat more acuarit reconstrictions

Centurus · « **Reply #4 on:** May 16, 2010, 01:31:35 pm »

Watch, one day they'll be able to detect viable DNA fragments from fossils they didn't think had any DNA left. I'm not saying it's gonna happen soon, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens one day. I mean, 20 years ago they didn't think they'd be able to actually detect feather remnants that they are now able to discover. You never know.

*waits patiently for T-Rex burger with Bronto fries*

knightstorm · « **Reply #5 on:** May 16, 2010, 02:23:29 pm »

Quote from: Centurus on May 16, 2010, 01:31:35 pm

*waits patiently for T-Rex burger with Bronto fries*

Forget that. I want an Entelodont ham at Christmas.

Centurus · « **Reply #6 on:** May 16, 2010, 02:42:57 pm »

Quote from: knightstorm on May 16, 2010, 02:23:29 pm

Quote from: Centurus on May 16, 2010, 01:31:35 pm

*waits patiently for T-Rex burger with Bronto fries*

Forget that. I want an Entelodont ham at Christmas.

I wouldn't recommend them. Not only are you hungry an hour after eating, but that ham gives you heartburn and the runs.

manitoba1073 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 16, 2010, 03:03:45 pm »

Quote from: Centurus on May 16, 2010, 01:31:35 pm

Watch, one day they'll be able to detect viable DNA fragments from fossils they didn't think had any DNA left. I'm not saying it's gonna happen soon, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens one day. I mean, 20 years ago they didn't think they'd be able to actually detect feather remnants that they are now able to discover. You never know.

*waits patiently for T-Rex burger with Bronto fries*

They already found DNA in a T-Rex 5 yrs ago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/

Centurus · « **Reply #8 on:** May 16, 2010, 03:08:11 pm »

Quote from: manitoba1073 on May 16, 2010, 03:03:45 pm

Quote from: Centurus on May 16, 2010, 01:31:35 pm
Watch, one day they'll be able to detect viable DNA fragments from fossils they didn't think had any DNA left. I'm not saying it's gonna happen soon, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens one day. I mean, 20 years ago they didn't think they'd be able to actually detect feather remnants that they are now able to discover. You never know.

*waits patiently for T-Rex burger with Bronto fries*

They already found DNA in a T-Rex 5 yrs ago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/

I know. I thought it was 10 years ago though. Anyway, who's to say though that they can't find more DNA samples from fossils currently believed to be void of all genetic tissue.

News: