Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Restore Open DinoWings - Final Corrections by Smnt2000 Restore Open DinoWings - Final Corrections by Smnt2000

It seems to me that I have never hidden the fact that I am not perfect.  I know, I’m almost there. But alas, it can happen to make some mistakes.
Among the most popular articles and diagrams I’ve written, my post on how to portrait the wings of the members of Aviremigia have had a great success (first part : ktboundary-smnt2000.blogspot.i…; second part: ktboundary-smnt2000.blogspot.i…; third part: ktboundary-smnt2000.blogspot.i…). This is understandable: the wings of birds are among the most difficult animal parts to draw accurately, since they require an adequate understanding of their structure and variety, and this problem is also reflected in artistic depictions of extinct species, which may have feathered limbs more or less similar to those of their relatives today. This common problem pushed me to do a quick and simple guide on how to illustrate them. Despite the good will, the discoveries made in recent years and the anatomical oversights dictated by the lack of experience (J. Campbell- Smith, of all people, is the one who inspired me to revise everything, and for that I thank her very much) required a considerable restoration work that took me more a lot of time, but I hope that the results are satisfactory.

Models: Archaeopteryx and a generic maniraptoriform (based on Anchiornis)


Orange: lesser coverts

Dark orange: elongated lesser coverts

Light blue: median coverts

Blue: greater coverts

Dark blue: secondaries

Light brown: median primary coverts (lost in modern birds)

Brown: greater primary coverts

Red: primaries

Green: scapulars (speculative)

Dark green: tertials (speculative)

Alula not present, but you can add it on the first digit.


Don't miss the other tutorials: smnt2000.deviantart.com/art/Re…, smnt2000.deviantart.com/art/Re…


Full post on my blog: ktboundary-smnt2000.blogspot.i…

Ps: sorry for the colours' quality. Bad scanner.

References
J. Campbell-Smith. Links: sagekorppi.deviantart.com/, corvidblog.tumblr.com/
Scott Hartman
Matthew P. Martyniuk. Link: dinogoss.blogspot.it/2013/09/y…

Primitive Wing Feather Arrangement in Archaeopteryx lithographica and Anchiornis huxleyi. Nicholas R. Lonrich, Jakob Vinther, 2012.
Evolution: Taking Wing with Weak Feathers. Xing Xu, 2012.

Plumage Color Patterns of an Extinct Dinosaur. Quanguo Li, Ke-Qin Gao, Jakob Vinther, Matthew D. Shawkey, Julia A. Clarke, Liliana DAlba, Qingjin Meng, Derek E. G. Briggs, Richard O. Prum, 2010.
Structure and Function of hindlimb feathers in Archaeopteryx lithographica. Nicholas R. Longrich, 2006.
The asymmetry of the carpal joint and the evolution of wing folding in maniraptoran theropod dinosaursSullivan, C., Hone, D., Xu, X., & Zhang, F. (2010).
Animals Real and Imagined: Fantasy of What Is and What Might Be, by Terryl Whitlatch (Editor), Gilbert Banducci (Editor)
The Prophet and the Liar, Chapter 03: Animal Anatomy. Link: theprophetandtheliar.tumblr.co…
External Anatomy of a Bird. Link: swartzentrover.com/cotor/Photo…

Add a Comment:
 
:iconmaxterandkiwiking:
MaxterandKiwiKing Featured By Owner May 19, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Is there any chance of the wing feathers being... Shorter?
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner May 19, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I don't understand, why the wing featheres should be shorter?
Reply
:iconmaxterandkiwiking:
MaxterandKiwiKing Featured By Owner May 19, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
No real reason. I just wonder if the wing size could differ from species to species.
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner May 20, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
That is certainly plausible. For example, Microraptor has very long primary remiges, which give to its wings an almost swallow-like silhouette.
However it seems that in a lot of maniraptorans the wing feathers' lenght is similar to the humerus lenght. That is clear in some excellent fossils (Caudipteryx, Anchiornis, Jinfengopteryx, Similicaudipteryx, etc.) and seems to be the norm in many moden birds too, from ostriches to common pigeons (or, to put in another way, all the species with a 'generic' type of wing).
Reply
:iconsagekorppi:
SageKorppi Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Love it!
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thank you! Glad you like it, and thank you so much for the help you gave me!
Reply
:iconsagekorppi:
SageKorppi Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Any time!! :)
Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Professional General Artist
Nevertheless maybe one of the best tutorials about this topic at the moment.
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thank you very much :)
Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Professional General Artist
My friend, Scapulars and even more Tertials are veeeery speculative.
A fairer guess would've been Alula (or how I call them in non-avians: "Pseudoalula" - made-up term!), shown from the Microraptor fossil.
The multi-layering of Coverts is well-made!
Another thing to nitpick: According to skeletal reconstructions by Hartman, Headden, etc. the claw would rather point forward in a topview. That's obviously perspective-wise, but as you show it it looks more like the fingers are pointing backwards.
Reply
:iconmattmart:
MattMart Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
"the claw would rather point forward in a top view"
I'm not sure this is true. AFAIK there's no reason all the claws would not point inward (medially). I'm pretty sure they are shown pointing forward in skeletal as a convenience to illustrate the shape of the claw which would others be obscured without a front view of the animal.

As for tertials, the description of the Thermopolis Archaeopteryx states no tertials are present. But then describes weak impressions of non-remex feathers between the elbow and the torso. I'm guessing the authors assumed all tertials are remixes, when this is not the case for most birds. The evidence from Archaeopteryx supports the kind of pseudo-covert tertials supported here.

I don't know of any evidence for scapulars but they'd be almost impossible to preserve/differentiate in most fossils. They protect the remixes when the wing is fold,d so I'd expect they or something like them would probably be present in all paravians that had well-defined flight feathers and reasonable degree of wing folding.
Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014  Professional General Artist
The claw-orientation thing was weakly explained be me. I mentioned the matter of perspective which leads to this. Obviously they would point inwards.

As explained below I went with the same definition as the authors when it comes to Tertials. Similar to Elijah's definition of Alula. So that might just be a talk at cross purposes.

About the Scapulars, they only make real sense (as you mentioned) in "paravians that had well defined flight feathers and reasonable degree of wing folding". We know that is not true for all of them. I think it highly likely that all of them had some kind of covering feathers on the shoulders. But I'm unsure to which degree we can refer to such (speculative) structures as Scapulars.

In my opinion a tutorial about "DinoWings" has always the problem of generalization and usage of maybe not appropriate terms.
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
"As for tertials, the description of the Thermopolis Archaeopteryx states no tertials are present. But then describes weak impressions of non-remex feathers between the elbow and the torso. I'm guessing the authors assumed all tertials are remixes, when this is not the case for most birds. The evidence from Archaeopteryx supports the kind of pseudo-covert tertials supported here.
I don't know of any evidence for scapulars but they'd be almost impossible to preserve/differentiate in most fossils. They protect the remixes when the wing is fold,d so I'd expect they or something like them would probably be present in all paravians that had well-defined flight feathers and reasonable degree of wing folding."
So much information and very usefull. Didn't know about the tertial question in Archaeopteryx and it's nice to read such things said from an expert.
You made my day.
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist

"Scapulars and even more Tertials are veeeery speculative. A fairer guess would've been Alula (or how I call them in non-avians: "Pseudoalula" - made-up term!), shown from the Microraptor fossil."

Yes they are. But there is also the possibility that they aren't well preserved. Think about it: truth be told, the majority of feathered dinosaurs are known for some kind of feathers, but not all of them. Remiges are 'easly' preserved since they're attached to the bone, but the rest of the plumage is more 'delicate'. When tertials are missing, other types of plumage are missing as well. There is a huge gap between the remiges and the rest of the body and it seems pretty weird to me that there are no feathers at all to protect the remiges. Even ostriches and rheas have humeral and scapular feathers. To draw an aviremigian without any kind of humeral or scapular feather is like drawing a mammal without fur on the first part of the forelimb: it doesn't have any sense.

And to be fair, the alula is even more speculative. Microraptor, the most gliding dinosaur of them all, is the only genus to have it. Even Archaeopteryx, with its asymmetrical and wider feathers, similar to modern birds, didn't have it. I don't think it's wrong to portrait some maniraptorans with alulae, but I think it's a very rare feature.


"Another thing to nitpick: According to skeletal reconstructions by Hartman, Headden, etc. the claw would rather point forward in a topview. That's obviously perspective-wise, but as you show it it looks more like the fingers are pointing backwards."

So true. I wanted to focus so badly to the different types of feathers that I didn't care about where the claws pointed. But of course I'll keep that in mind!

Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Professional General Artist
I'm right now laughing about our duplicity.
Your support for Tertials is basically the same as mine for "Pseudalula".
It's just that I think of remiges when I hear Tertials, which are present in highly volant, mostly gliding bird-species. Modern Birds can do very well without having remigous Tertials [link], and still there is no distinct gap.
Here is an additional chart about the feather distribution on Avians. The gap you mentioned is covered by coverts/contour feathers.
And about me, I didn't either think that the "Pseudalula" would portray actual remiges or any flight support but just as you described the tertials.
Furthermore the term Scapular could also be confusing in context with non-avians as we really don't know if they had the same thing or just something analogous.
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist

"I'm right now laughing about our duplicity.
Your support for Tertials is basically the same as mine for "Pseudalula"."

Yeah, great minds, same thoughts :P .


Passeriforms are actually the only group withouth tertials, all other birds have them. In this type of birds, the remiges close to the body have the same function as the tertials (to protect the other remiges) in other birds, that's why they lost them. For this reason I believe that they might be present in ancient taxa, even if not developed to such a degree.

The gap I mentioned is in fact covered by humeral (which are a unique kind of coverts) and scapular feathers (which are body feathers), as you said.


"Furthermore the term Scapular could also be confusing in context with non-avians as we really don't know if they had the same thing or just something analogous."

I think it's confusing for non aviremigians, but otherwise it seems plausible to suppose their presence. Even if there was something analogous, we must draw such a thing, don't you agree?

Reply
:iconjoakinmar:
JoakinMar Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014
So, this is the way many theropod hands must be reconstructed???

It's curious that feathers are attached to the second finger, making for the animal impposible to harm anything. These seems that the images of dromaeosaurids capturing prey with their hands are dubious. It also could respond to the position of the arms, similar to birds, making impossible to pronate hands. But at least, I've heard some studies that theropods are able to pronate hands for capturing prey. I must make some research to understand this.
Reply
:iconsagekorppi:
SageKorppi Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Just going to chime in and say that modern predatory birds have zero problem killing prey without using their hands ;)
Reply
:icontomozaurus:
Tomozaurus Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Student General Artist
Make note that I mean absolutely no offence whatsoever when I say this, but I am stunned that these questions are still being asked. It's not your fault, it's a problem with scientific education, but we've known this stuff for over 10 years now...

To be clear there are no studies anywhere that say theropods could pronate their hands, you've heard wrong.
Reply
:iconjoakinmar:
JoakinMar Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014
I'm not offended. In fact, I knew theropod hands were oriented in same manner like birds. What I'm questioning about the function due to it's position and the fact it was covered by feathers. The study I refer is the same Smnt2000 has referrenced. 
Reply
:icontomozaurus:
Tomozaurus Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Student General Artist

I know what you are questioning. The "some maniraptorans might not have had feathers on their second finger so they could hunt better" argument is what I'm exasperated by. This has been brutally and thoroughly debunked. We've known that feathers attach to the second finger for over 10 years. The first study stating outright that they would not get in the way of predation came out 8 years ago. The first study detailing how they may have been used in predation came out 3 years ago.

 

On the other matter. Again, no study has EVER said that a theropod can pronate their hands, but it would appear from your comments to SMNT that you may have misinterpreted what the word means, so that’s fine.

Reply
:iconjoakinmar:
JoakinMar Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014
Yeah, I confused the word. About the feathers attached to the second finger, I didn't hear about these after I visited Devianart and viewed many reconstructions of feathered dinosaurs with this attachement and I was surprised to see it. In many drawings I saw after arriving here, I didn't see this attachment or I haven't seen the detail, so I think you're right that there isn't enough informatino about the subject.
Reply
:icontomozaurus:
Tomozaurus Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014  Student General Artist
Which is why it's so good that smnt has made these. And necessary.
Reply
:iconjoakinmar:
JoakinMar Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014
Yeah. more if we want to have a best idea of the aspect of these animals. One question, I think these comes from fossil discoveries, in which dinosaurs it has been found?? I heard Anchiornis, but I am not sure. If you can answer, I would appreciate it.
Reply
:icontomozaurus:
Tomozaurus Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2014  Student General Artist
Too many to list, some examples on more famous animals include Archaeopteryx, Ornithomimus, Microraptor, Sinornithosaurus and Caudipteryx. There also may be some residual hints of the presence on Deinonychus but it's unpublished.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconjoakinmar:
JoakinMar Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014
When I say hands ,I refer arms. Sorry.
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist

"So, this is the way many theropod hands must be reconstructed???"

Well, not all of them. Just the Aviremigians: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuniaoa…


"It's curious that feathers are attached to the second finger, making for the animal impposible to harm anything. These seems that the images of dromaeosaurids capturing prey with their hands are dubious. It also could respond to the position of the arms, similar to birds, making impossible to pronate hands. But at least, I've heard some studies that theropods are able to pronate hands for capturing prey. I must make some research to understand this."
Yeah, it is true that feathers may have complicated the animal's hunt, but that doesn't mean it couldn't grab at all his prey. Some species have really developed wing claws which they could use for climbing on trees and on their prey too, like hooks. Most probably they were used as stabilizers, like modern eagles. There is a very interesting study about the raptorial behaviour of some genra; if you're interested you can find it here: www.plosone.org/article/info%3…
One thing: theropod dinosaurs can't pronate their hands. Really, they just can't ;) .
Reply
:iconjoakinmar:
JoakinMar Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014
Well, when I said pronation I was meaning they colud grab things. I made a mistake understanding the word (I'm spanish). But at least, they could a little bit: archosaurmusings.wordpress.com…
Reply
:iconsmnt2000:
Smnt2000 Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Okay, now I got that ;) .
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
February 7, 2014
Image Size
721 KB
Resolution
1297×1584
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,411 (2 today)
Favourites
129 (who?)
Comments
30
Downloads
17
×