Special Book Article
How Many Dinosaurs Are Birds?
E
very school child knows that
birds are dinosaurs. Numerous
magazine articles and popular books
on the topic are available. If they
report the history of the subject, they
say that Thomas Huxley, known as
Charles Darwin’s bulldog in Victorian
England, was the first to propose the
idea that birds evolved from dinosaurs
(Huxley, 1868, 1870) or, at least, that
birds and dinosaurs have a common
ancestor (Naish 2012). The more specific idea that birds evolved from small
theropod dinosaurs was proposed in
1969 in John Ostrom’s monograph
about the bipedal raptor Deinonychus
(Ostrom 1969). Ostrom wrote that the
skeleton of Deinonychus, like that of
Archaeopteryx (the oldest known bird
at the time), had fused collarbones,
long arms, and wrist bones that permitted the forelimb to fold like a bird’s
wing. He suggested that Archaeopteryx
was ground dwelling and could not fly;
he also thought that dinosaurs might
have been warm-blooded like modern
birds.
Those ideas are still held by some
of today’s prominent dinosaur paleontologists, and they are presented
in displays in many museums. Other
paleontologists have switched their
view to one in which avian flight
arose in an arboreal context, especially
after the arboreal gliding four-winged
microraptors were described as theropods (Xu et al. 2003). Whether or
not dinosaurs were warm-blooded is
still a matter of controversy (Benson
2018). Even so, as new discoveries
of fossils from China, Mongolia, and
elsewhere have been pouring in, their
data have been incorporated into everlarger matrices for analysis. The results
are consistently interpreted as further
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience
confirmation of Ostrom’s hypothesis,
that birds evolved from small theropod
dinosaurs. The laterally flexing wrist
and modern-type feathers evolved in
theropods for reasons unrelated to
birds or flight (Padian and Chiappe
1998, Clarke 2013).
Even more specifically, the prevailing hypothesis today is that the closest relatives (sister group) of birds
are among the maniraptoran theropod
dinosaurs. Theropoda is a large group
of bipedal dinosaurs, most of which
had three forward-facing toes and
three fingers. They ranged in size from
diminutive to gigantic, like the famous
Tyrannosaurus rex. Members of the
theropod group Maniraptora have a
half-moon shaped (semilunate) bone
in the wrist and a wing-like forelimb.
Recently, three groups of maniraptorans were named the Pennaraptora
(Foth et al. 2014). They have the
same type of wing feathers (pennaceous) and V-shaped collar bones as
modern birds. Opinions differ about
which maniraptoran group is closest
to birds, but the overall framework of
the hypothesis that birds are maniraptoran theropods (the BMT hypothesis)
is hailed as one of the great achievements of vertebrate paleontology (Xu
et al. 2014). The maniraptorans have
specialized skeletal features that are
found only in birds, and independent
supporting data exist. According to the
BMT hypothesis, in the Jurassic Period
(between 201 and 145 million years
ago), some bipedal theropods with
reduced forelimbs reelongated them
into wings.
In spite of all this confidence that
the problem of the origin of birds
has been solved, strong grounds exist
for regarding the issue as unsettled,
and that is exactly the subject of Alan
Feduccia’s new book. He thinks not
only that Archaeopteryx could fly
but also that birds and avian flight
evolved long before Archaeopteryx.
Indeed, in his view, birds were already
distributed worldwide at the time of
Archaeopteryx. The book is a detailed,
up-to-date, and accessible report of the
evidence that Feduccia finds contrary
to the BMT hypothesis. Each of the 23
short essays is followed by suggestions
for further reading.
Feduccia’s biggest issue is the
neoflightless problem. He argues that
some unknown number of flying and
flightless birds are being misclassified as dinosaurs. In combination
with the data-analysis problem, the
BMT issue should not be considered
settled at all. In addition, there are
the reduced-forelimb problem, the
protofeather problem, the digit problem, the behavior problem, the confirmation-bias problem, and so forth.
Feduccia charges that BMT advocates
are not fully addressing these problems (table 1).
Feduccia’s skepticism has been growing for decades. His original research
is what showed that Archaeopteryx
could climb (Feduccia 1993) and fly
(Feduccia and Tordoff 1979, Olson
and Feduccia 1979) and that the digits
of the hands of birds are the second,
third, and fourth of the tetrapod fivefingered plan (Feduccia and Nowicki
2002). Romancing the Birds and
Dinosaurs is his fourth major book. In
The Age of Birds (Feduccia 1980), he
tentatively followed Heilmann (1926),
who argued that, overall, a pretheropod
origin of birds seemed more likely than
a dinosaurian one. He emphasized that
avian feathers are highly aerodynamic
and unlikely to have been originally
adapted for any function other than
flight. In his next book, The Origin
and Evolution of Birds (Feduccia 1996,
1999), he added a critique of the way
that cladistic methods of data analysis
were being used to estimate phylogenetic trees from morphological data.
The analyses are unable to detect the
parallelism and convergence that are
such common features of the evolutionary history of lineages, especially
XXXX XXXX / Vol. XX No. X • BioScience 1
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biab060/6288358 by guest on 01 June 2021
Romancing the Birds and Dinosaurs:
Forays in Postmodern Paleontology.
Alan Feduccia. Brown Walker Press,
2020. 314 pp., illus., $34.95. (ISBN:
9781599426068 paper).
Special Book Article
Table 1. Problems with the prevailing view that birds evolved from maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs.
Main problems raised by Alan Feduccia
The flight architecture of birds evolved in a nonflight context
Neoflightless problem: Some flying and flightless birds are being
misclassified as theropods.
Standard phylogenetic analyses applied to fossils support the main
framework of the BMT. They can be used to estimate basic similarities
(homologies) after the analysis.
Data analysis problem: Standard phylogenetic analyses are unable to
detect complex evolutionary processes like convergence. Flightless
birds converge on the body plan of theropods. To estimate basic
similarities (homologies), anatomical studies are needed before the
phylogenetic analysis.
The reduced forelimbs of early theropods evolved into wings.
Reduced forelimb problem: Complex characters, once lost, are unlikely
to reevolve. Dollo’s Principle.
The integumentary filaments (protofeathers) in the Maniraptora are
homologous with feathers.
Protofeather problem: “Protofeathers” may be degraded collagen
fibers.
The difference in the manual digits (II-III-IV in birds, I-II-III in theropods)
can be accounted for by a digital frame shift.
Digit problem: The frame shift is a verificationist explanation, designed
to fit the BMT.
Studies that infer the nesting behavior of theropods support the BMT.
Behavior problem: Studies that infer bird-like behavior in dinosaurs are
about misidentified birds.
Scansoriopterygids are assumed to be theropods.
Confirmation problem: Scansoriopterygids have no distinctive theropod
characters. An assumption that they are theropods is a form of
confirmation bias.
those related to flightlessness. In his
third book of this series, Riddle of the
Feathered Dragons, Feduccia (2012)
agreed with Lingham-Soliar (2003a,
2003b) that the “protofeathers” of theropods were probably degraded collagen fibers. Many of the unambiguously
feathered recent fossils from China
that had been identified as theropods
were probably misidentified flightless
birds. The BMT phylogeny was being
turned topsy turvy by the parsimony
criterion used in cladistic data analyses. It seeks the smallest number of
character changes and minimizes convergent evolution among taxa.
Feduccia supports the neoflightless
hypothesis of Gregory Paul (Paul 1988,
2002) that some fossils identified as
theropods were actually flying and
flightless birds, more advanced toward
modern birds than Archaeopteryx. Like
Feduccia, Paul has been skeptical about
the reliability of analyses that presume
to identify basic structural similarities (homologies) after an analysis. An
example with modern birds is with
the large flightless ratites. The ostrich,
rheas, cassowary, elephant bird, and
moa are now known from molecular
analyses to have converged on the
same body plan. They became large
and flightless independently (Mitchell
et al. 2014). Similarly, early birds that
became flightless would have converged on bipedal theropods in their
2 BioScience • XXXX XXXX / Vol. XX No. X
body plan. Paul’s current view is that
bipedal theropods evolved into longarmed climbers, which evolved into
sprawling flying birds. Then some, like
Deinonychus, became large and flightless, but they still retained characters
that were better adapted for flight than
those of Archaeopteryx. Even so, Paul
thinks that his version of the neoflightless hypothesis is compatible with the
BMT (figure 1; Paul 2016).
The case for neoflightless status is
best for the bird-like Pennaraptora
(figure 2). If the hypothesis is true,
this error accounts for all kinds of
improbable inferences that are now
part of the BMT. One no longer
ends up having to invent exaptations
(characters that evolved for functions other than their current use).
A well-studied example of a flightless
bird that shows up in most phylogenetic analyses as an oviraptorid theropod is Caudipteryx. Caudipteryx
has an avian hand with a digital formula more advanced toward modern
birds than that of Archaeopteryx.
Maryanska and colleagues (2002)
found all oviraptorosaurs to be
flightless birds.
Another aspect of Feduccia’s skepticism is that Ostrom’s model requires
that birds and avian flight evolve in
bipedal theropods with greatly shortened forelimbs. Even Huxley’s original
concept was that bipedal dinosaurs
evolved first into ostrich-like flightless
birds, which then acquired the ability for powered flight. The legacy of
Huxley’s error seems to be the failure
of BMT advocates to recognize flightless birds among the theropods. It is
contrary to Dollo’s principle, by which
a complex character like a forelimb,
once reduced, is unlikely to reevolve.
Feduccia’s alternative scenario is that
birds may have evolved from climbing quadrupedal dinosauromorphs or
even earlier archosaurs. No evidence
exists that any flightless bird lineage
ever regained flight.
Feduccia also thinks that dinosaur paleontologists are dismissing
some of the sound principles of evolutionary reasoning, morphological
interpretation, and homology determination that emerged from the
Modern Synthesis, when Darwin’s
ideas about natural selection were
put together with Mendelian genetics—hence his subtitle’s reference to
the term postmodern paleontology.
He dedicates Romancing the Birds
and Dinosaurs to Ernst Mayr, and
the book has the same format: a set
of short essays building up to one
long argument, that Mayr used when
explaining Darwinian thought. He
emphasizes that applications of phylogenetic methods of data analysis to
morphological data, though useful,
can be misleading if they fail to detect
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biab060/6288358 by guest on 01 June 2021
Birds are maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs (BMT)
Special Book Article
Figure 2. According to the hypothesis that birds are maniraptoran theropod
dinosaurs (left side), their lineage is nested within the pennaraptorans,
maniraptorans, and theropod dinosaurs. The pennaraptorans have moderntype vaned feathers and a V-shaped fused collarbone. The maniraptorans
have an enlarged breast bone (sternum) and a fused semilunate wrist bone
that facilitates folding of the forelimb. These characters are presumed to have
evolved in theropods, for unknown functions, before the origin of birds. Alan
Feduccia thinks that at least the pennaraptorans are flying and flightless birds,
not dinosaurs (right side). He argues that birds are more likely to have evolved
from predinosaurian early archosaurs than from bipedal dinosaurs with
foreshortened forelimbs.
convergence, mosaic evolution, and
the retention of ancestral juvenile
characters. All three of these processes occur regularly in vertebrate
evolution and are known to confound
analyses.
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience
After a major study of salamanders, Wiens and colleagues (2003)
concluded that their phylogenetic
analysis was misleading and that
“ontogeny discombobulates phylogeny.” Flightless birds often become
larger while retaining juvenile characters (paedomorphosis). They converge on the basic theropod body plan.
Another advantage of Feduccia’s objections to the BMT is that they eliminate
the need for improbable changes in
the function of highly sophisticated
aerodynamic structures (exaptations),
now thought to have evolved in a
nonflight context. Feduccia’s concept
also accounts for the digital mismatch
in the hand whereby birds appear to
retain digits II, III, and IV, whereas
theropods appear to retain digits I, II,
and III. He does not need to postulate
implausible mutations or alterations
in the conserved process of limb-bud
development, and he does not need
to postulate an Ostrom-like groundbased origin of flight.
Feduccia claims that BMT advocates fail to recognize contradictory
evidence. Their intention, which is to
interpret all future discoveries in terms
of the BMT (Smith et al. 2015), is a clear
example of confirmation bias. A recent
example from China is their treatment
of the recently discovered mid-Jurassic
(174–164 million years ago) scansoriopterygids, which appear to be more
primitive than Archaeopteryx.
None of the four species that have
been identified so far has any salient
XXXX XXXX / Vol. XX No. X • BioScience 3
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biab060/6288358 by guest on 01 June 2021
Figure 1. Two proposals about the origin of birds. In the prevailing view (left side), anatomical studies support the
hypothesis that the origin of birds was among maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs. Independent studies are interpreted as
lending support for this BMT hypothesis. In Gregory Paul’s and Alan Feduccia’s views, anatomical studies indicate that
at least some maniraptorans are misclassified flying and flightless birds. Paul thinks this neoflightless hypothesis can be
integrated with the prevailing view. Feduccia argues that other independent information supports his view that the origin
of birds is unknown.
Special Book Article
References cited
Benson RBJ. 2018. Dinosaur macroevolution and
macroecology. Annual Review of Ecology,
Evolution and Systematics 49: 379–408.
Clarke J. 2013. Flight before feathers. Science
340: 690–692.
Czerkas SA, Yuan C. 2002. An arboreal maniraptoran from northeast China. Pages 63–95
in Czerkas SJ, ed. Feathered Dinosaurs and
the Origin of Flight. Dinosaur Museum
Journal, vol. 1. Dinosaur Museum, Blanding,
Utah.
Czerkas SA, Feduccia A. 2014. Jurassic archosaur is a non-dinosaurian bird. Journal of
Ornithology 155: 841–851.
Feduccia A, Tordoff HB. 1979. Feathers
of Archaeopteryx: Asymmetric vanes
4 BioScience • XXXX XXXX / Vol. XX No. X
indicate aerodynamic function. Science 203:
1021–1022.
Feduccia A. 1980. The Age of Birds. Harvard
University Press.
Feduccia A. 1993. Evidence from claw geometry
indicating arboreal habits of Archaeopteryx.
Science 259: 790–793.
Feduccia A. 1996, 1999. The Origin and
Evolution of Birds. Yale University Press.
Feduccia A, Nowicki J. 2002. The hand of
birds revealed by early ostrich embryos.
Naturwissenschaften 89: 391–393.
Feduccia A. 2012. Riddle of the Feathered
Dragons. Yale University Press.
Foth C, Tischlinger H, Rauhut OWM. 2014.
New specimen of Archaeopteryx provides
insights into the evolution of pennaceous
feathers. Nature 511: 79–82.
Heilmann G. 1926. The Origin of Birds. Witherby.
Huxley TH. 1868. On the animals which are
most nearly intermediate between birds and
reptiles. Annals and Magazine of Natural
History 2: 66–75.
Huxley TH. 1870. Further, evidence of the affinity between the dinosaurian reptiles and
birds. Quarterly Journal of the Geological
Society of London 26: 12–31.
Lingham-Soliar T. 2003a. Evolution of birds:
Ichthyosaur integumental fibers conform to dromaeosaur protofeathers.
Naturwissenschaften 90: 428–432.
Lingham-Soliar T. 2003b. The dinosaurian origin of feathers: Perspectives
from dolphin (Cetacea) collagen fibers.
Naturwissenschaften 90: 563–567.
Maryanska T, Osmolska H, Wolson M. 2002.
Avialan status for Oviraptorosauria. Acta
Palaeontologica Polonica 47: 97–116.
Mitchell KJ, Llamas B, Soubrier J, Rawlence, NJ,
Worthy TH, Wood J, Lee SMY, Cooper A.
2014. Ancient DNA reveals elephant birds
and kiwi are sister taxa and clarifies ratite
bird evolution. Science 344: 898–900.
Naish D. 2012. Birds. Pages 379–423 in BrettSurman MK, Holtz TR Jr, Farlow JO.
The Complete Dinosaur, 2nd ed. Indiana
University Press.
Olson SL, Feduccia A. 1979. Flight capability
and the pectoral girdle of Archaeopteryx.
Nature 278: 247–248.
Ostrom JH. 1969. Osteology of Deinonychus
antirrhopus, an Unusual Theropod from
the Lower Cretaceous of Montana. Peabody
Museum of Natural History, Yale Univesity.
Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural
History no. 30.
Padian K, Chiappe LM. 1998. The origin and
early evolution of birds. Biological Reviews
73: 1–42.
Paul GS. 1988. Predatory Dinosaurs of the
World. Simon and Schuster.
Paul GS. 2002. Dinosaurs of the Air. Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Paul GS. 2016. The Princeton Field Guide to
Dinosaurs, 2nd ed. Princeton University
Press.
Prum R. 2002. Why ornithologists should care
about the theropod origin of birds. Auk
119: 1–17.
Smith NA et al. 2015. Rhetoric versus reality: A
commentary on “Bird Origins Anew” by A.
Feduccia. Auk 132: 467–480.
Wiens JJ, Chippendale PT, Hillis DM. 2003.
When are phylogenetic analyses misled by
convergence? A case study in Texas cave salamanders. Systematic Biology 52: 501–514.
Xu X, Zhou Z, Wang X, Kuang S, Zhang F, Du
X. 2003. Four-winged dinosaurs from China.
Nature 421: 335–340.
Xu X, Zhou Z, Dudley R, Mackem S, Chuong
C-M, Erickson GM, Varricchio DJ. 2014. An
integrative approach to understanding bird
origins. Science 346: 1253293.
FRANCES C. JAMES
Frances C. James (
[email protected])
is a professor emerita at the Department
of Biological Science at Florida State
University
doi:10.1093/biosci/biab060
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biab060/6288358 by guest on 01 June 2021
dinosaur or theropod features (Czerkas
and Yuan 2002, Czerkas and Feduccia
2014). These animals have bird-like
bones in the wrist, unusual feathers,
and a reversed first toe like birds but
also have membranous wings, boxy
skulls, and a nontheropod type femur.
They were just assumed to be theropods and added to the bird and dinosaur matrices.
So far, no molecular data are available from as deep in history as the
origin of birds. All we have is morphology, and we do not know its
limits for revealing genealogy. But,
contrary to Prum (2002), a challenge
to a hypothesis need not propose an
alternative. Surely, admitting that the
hypothesis that birds are maniraptoran
theropods has serious problems would
be better than to defend it so strongly.
Romancing the Birds and Dinosaurs
offers an accessible and challenging
entry into this complex subject.