It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
We describe three-dimensionally preserved feathers in mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber that share macro-morphological similarities (e.g., proportionally wide rachis with a “medial stripe”) with lithic, two-dimensionally preserved rachis-dominated feathers, first recognized in the Jehol Biota. These feathers in amber reveal a unique ventrally concave and dorsoventrally thin rachis, and a dorsal groove (sometimes pigmented) that we identify as the “medial stripe” visible in many rachis-dominated rectrices of Mesozoic birds. The distally pennaceous portion of these feathers shows differentiated proximal and distal barbules, the latter with hooklets forming interlocking barbs. Micro-CT scans and transverse sections demonstrate the absence of histodifferentiated cortex and medullary pith of the rachis and barb rami. The highly differentiated barbules combined with the lack of obvious histodifferentiation of the barb rami or rachis suggests that these feathers could have been formed without the full suite and developmental interplay of intermediate filament alpha keratins and corneous beta-proteins that is employed in the cornification process of modern feathers. This study thus highlights how the development of these feathers might have differed from that of their modern counterparts, namely in the morphogenesis of the ventral components of the rachis and barb rami. We suggest that the concave ventral surface of the rachis of these Cretaceous feathers is not homologous with the ventral groove of modern rachises. Our study of these Burmese feathers also confirms previous claims, based on two-dimensional fossils, that they correspond to an extinct morphotype and it cautions about the common practice of extrapolating developmental aspects (and mechanical attributes) of modern feathers to those of stem birds (and their dinosaurian outgroups) because the latter need not to have developed through identical pathways.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 The Dinosaur Institute, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
2 The Dinosaur Institute, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA, USA
3 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA