Talk:Teratornis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Teratornis is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
|
WikiProject Birds To-do:
|
|
Contents |
[edit] ===============wing area======
There must be some mistake: a wingspan of 3.5-3.8 m is indicated, and a wing area of 17.5 sq m. This would mean that the wings are much wider than they are long. Could it be that the 17.5 sq m figure should be 17.5 sqft, and should be converted to sq m?
[edit] ================================================
11 or 12 ft? I've read that this bird had a wingspan up to 14ft?
[edit] 14-ft?
--In 1997 at Woodburn, Oregon the 12.5-inch humerus of a possible new species of Teratorn was discovered. This incomplete specimen dubbed "Teratornis Woodburnensis" has been examined by Alison Stenger and paleontologists in LA who have estimated the predator bird's wingspan at about 14-feet. The scant remains of the bird were found in the Pleistocene Ice-age level of around 12,000 years before present. --70.59.155.91 06:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- No relevant hits on Google and Google Scholar. Google finds Alison Stenger at the "Institute for Archaeological Studies" in Portland, might be worth trying to contact her.
- 2 facts seem suspicious:
- "Woodburnensis" - scientists know better than to capitalize dedication names of species as was done 100 years ago
- "dubbed" - this is a Very Bad Thing in taxonomy, see nomen nudum. Taxa are not "dubbed", but scientifically described. The fact that the taxon yields no hits suggests that it may never have existed save in the author's imagination... and the original source is lost it seems. Dysmorodrepanis 01:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
It is a matter of fact that bone fragments of this Teratorn were discovered at the Woodburn site. The size of the wingspan is of course an estimation, but 14 feet (over 4 meters) is a figure which has been mentioned in articles and on Public Television broadcasts, namely, Oregon Field guide: http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,,812982,00.html --75.175.51.175 (talk) 07:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thunderbird?
--It seems presumptuous to claim that this bird was the source of the Amerindian thunderbird myth. Though this bird may have been impressive, thunderbird stories from across the continent seem to be more closely related to actual weather phenomena than any type of animal. While it would be tempting to connect this bird with those stories, is there any real evidence that ties them together?
[edit] Re:
Is there any evidence to associate the Native American Thunderbird with Teratorn? That's a good question. It seems that Thunderbird is more associated with Thunder and Nature. Yet indipendant legends of physical giant birds exist in native american folk context, regardless of wheather or not these are considered "Thunderbird" or other giant birds like the Condor. Some good info can be found here: http://sped2work.tripod.com/evidence.html
- The dry fact remains that these were the only birds of their size which are definitely kown to have been encountered by humans. So if the Thunderbird references back to any real bird, this is it. Perhaps also the California Condor, but less so than Merriam's Teratorn, as it was less impressive. Which should give an idea of how impressive this here tweety was.... Dysmorodrepanis 00:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Biggest flying bird encountered by man?
"T. merriami is the largest species of flying bird that was encountered alive by man."
... yet it's mass is said to be 15kg. There are a few birds that get that get bigger than that: swans and bustards come to mind. Albatrosses have it outclassed in the wingspan stakes too. I think the sentence should be removed, or change to "predatory bird" (maybe). — John.Conway (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
