In the reading passage, the author casts doubt on the idea that a pattern of fine lines on the skeleton fossil of Sinosauropteryx led to the conclusion that Sinosauropteryx had feathers. The professor, however, strongly considers it unconvincing for the following reasons.
First, in the reading passage, it is pointed out that the fine lines on the fossil were decomposed skin fibers and were formed after death instead of representing any functional structures. On the contrary, the professor maintains that no such decomposition as skin fibers happened to other animals buried at the same site. Besides, the functional structures of other animals were all well-preserved, so the fine lines on Sinosauropteryx were more likely to be functional structures like feathers.
Second, the author argues that although those fine lines could be the remains of the structures on Sinosauropteryx, scientists have no idea of what the dinosaur was like. Therefore, some critics think the fine lines could more likely to be the remains of frill which grew out of the Sinosauropteryx. By contrast, the professor challenges the idea by claiming that feathers and frills have different chemical content. Feathers contain a kind of protein called beta keration which was also found in the feathers of other animals buried near Sinosauropteryx, whereas the frills contained no such protein, so the fine lines could be remains of the feathers.
Third, the author argues that the fine lines were found near the backbones or tails of Sinosauropteryx, which means it had no use in flying or keeping the body warm. However, the professor states that the Sinosauropteryx’s feathers were colorful, so the function of them was not for flying but for display just like the bird peacock.
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容