![]() |
| Selurian (with tits) |
Now, of course, that's utterly absurd. We know dinosaurs are more like lizards, lizards don't have breast (mammary glands or 'tits') and anyway, dinosaurs evolved into birds and birds don't have any tits either. So, should we dismiss the notion?
![]() |
| A Dinosaur (no tits) |
I've made the handy-dandy diagram below to illustrate what modern species have tits and which ones don't and were the dinosaurs fit in the scheme of things. As you can see, they are somewhere in between the species with and without tits.
![]() |
| The evolution of tits over time |
Dinosaurs are usually depicted with scales, like lizards, but we know now that many dinosaurs had feather-like hair and later species had actual feathers, like birds. As a matter of fact, the more we learn about dinosaurs, the less lizard-like the seem. Single filament feathers are a lot like hairs and it wouldn't surprise me if some evidence for furry dinosaurs would one day be uncovered. Fur must have developed at some time, why not in dinosaurs or their direct offspring? Nothing with only scales has tits, tits and fur seem to go together. Platypus has mostly fur, but has a scaly beak too; it's in-between. It's hard to say whether fur came before tits. Fur is rarely preserved and tits are never preserved (well, in ice-mummies, but those are quite recent).
Altogether, it seems unlikely that 'true' dinosaurs had tits. Their evolutionary cousins, the Synapsids, who developed into mammals, may have developed tits as well. At what stage this happened, is impossible to say. Quite recently, I suppose. After dinosaurs, but before Platypus. Platypus is itself a fully evolved species, very well-adapted. Elsewhere in the world, however, the Platypus-like creatures that used to roam the earth have gone extinct. Simply because laying eggs on the ground is rather hazardous if you can't fly and there are hungry mammals about (see also the Dodo). Birds still lay eggs because they can fly. No need to evolve much, once you've mastered that trick!
In conclusions: Dinosaurs did not have tits and it seems unlikely that if they did stick around somewhere, they would have grown a pair through convergent evolution. They might have evolved life-birth, but they would still have puked some pre-digested food into the mouths of their young, just like birds, rather than feed them with milk.
July 3, update: I noticed this article today (published yesterday). Traces of furry-feathers have been discovered on a remarkably well-preserved dinosaur fossil from Germany. This proves that feathers were more wide-spread on dinosaurs than previously thought (most feathered dinosaur fossils were found in China). Still no tits, though. In time, perhaps!



I once read an article about male members of a species of fish that produce secretions from specialized glands, which are eaten by their young. Male tits?
ReplyDeleteVery good point! Seahorse males also 'incubate' their young until they're ready to hatch in a specialized pouch; presumably containing some kind of secretory gland to nourish the young. I can fish developed 'tits' of a sort, but dinosaurs still not.
ReplyDeleteSoooo... were tits a male invention, later usurped by females when the X-chromasome went into decline?
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't think primitive fish had tits. Lizards and amphibians don't have them, so their fishy ancestors probably didn't have them either. I think they were recently invented by fish as well. I could talk about child-rearing strategies too, but I'll safe that for another time. I have much more pressing issues to discuss!
ReplyDeleteWhat could be more "pressing" than the origin of mammaries?
ReplyDelete