Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday September 26 2018, @09:56AM   Printer-friendly
from the try-stuffing-that-into-the-oven dept.

This Was the World's Largest Bird. It Weighed as Much as a Dinosaur.

The world's largest bird — a newly identified species of elephant bird — weighed as much as a dinosaur when it strutted around Madagascar more than 1,000 years ago, a new study finds.

This monster bird is now extinct, but it weighed as much as 1,760 lbs. (800 kilograms), or about as much as seven modern ostriches when it was alive. It also stood a whopping as 9.8 feet (3 meters) high — a good 8 inches (20 centimeters) taller than an ostrich. And, also like the ostrich, this elephant bird couldn't fly.

[...] V. titan is so big, that its average weight of 1,430 lbs. (650 kg) is comparable to Europasaurus, a small sauropod (a long-necked dinosaur), which weighed about 1,500 lbs (690 kg), Hansford and study co-researcher Samuel Turvey, a professor at the Zoological Society of London's Institute of Zoology, wrote in the study.

When the herbivorous elephant birds went extinct about 1,000 years ago — largely because of human hunters — the Madagascar ecosystem changed. Plants that depended on the birds to eat and disperse seeds floundered.

Unexpected diversity within the extinct elephant birds (Aves: Aepyornithidae) and a new identity for the world's largest bird (open, DOI: 10.1098/rsos.181295) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday September 27 2018, @08:57AM

    by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Thursday September 27 2018, @08:57AM (#740709) Homepage
    Bullshit. To "weigh" has always meant to determine the mass of - even NIST have admitted this (you know, the authority that defines how to deal with, ahem, weights and measures). The proxy used for determining the mass may be the gravitational attraction of that mass to the earth, but the figure they ended up with represented the amount of matter, the mass. Of course, spring measures need to be calibrated such that this proxy is accurate. The fact that a small subset of scientists have decided to adopt an ancient word with constant meaning over the centuries and tried to shoehorn it into taking on a new meaning in a specific context should not, and does not, affect the language as used by the masses. If you adopt the policy that "weight" isn't weight, then most "nuts" aren't nuts, most "berries" aren't berries, and plenty of "fruit" aren't even fruit (and plenty of non-fruits are).

    And, Mr. pretent-smartypants who thinks he's thought of everything, you haven't - even when you're measuring the gravitational weight (wow - did you see how easy it was to neologise a term that disambiguates the concept?), you're not measuring its gravitational weight - you're measuring its gravitational weight minus its buoyancy. Pahhhh!
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2