Well - no sauropods grew 100ft tall (although a few were more than 100ft
long); & they were more of a design which which would allow such a shape to
develop. I did include a proviso _all other things being equal_; & the
bigger you get, the less the carrying capacity of any environment. Add the
cost factors involved in the ability to internally regulate body
temperature; & the carrying capacity of an environment becomeas more limited
still.
Crocodylians - which have no internal body temperature regulation & in
theory never stop growing - don't appear to have grown any larger than the
admittedly spectacular purosaurus (Cainzoic; Amazonia); which was 15+m &
5-10metric tons of really bad scale day....
All the best,
Robert Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 9:13 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: On The Rise of Oxygen...
>
> Then why didn't Imperial Mammoth grow 100' tall, especially when in cold
> climates such as an Ice Age, it would be a benefit? I suppose that steppe
>
> grasses will only take you so far...
>
> On the other hand, perhaps the combination of high body mass AND internal
> temperature regulation would lead to overheating? Perhaps the brontothere
>
> and titanothere had a danger of heat exhaustion?
>
>
==
You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
