Panda paws
I read today that a mascot of the Dozenal Society of America was the giant panda bear.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Giant_panda_Left_hand_Bone_2.jpg by Momotarou2012.
Panda Hand by Travis, on Flickr
The sixth not being a true digit, is an enlarged radial sesamoid bone, unless the sesamoid bone generally were a diminished or vestigial digit.
The giant panda is supposedly descended from carnivora but is a vegetarian, specialising in the eating of bamboo. It is supposed that the enlarged sesamoid bone in the paw could have evolved as an adaptation for holding bamboo, which the giant panda does indeed do. However,
It is often difficult to believe genetic studies when the results come out of computers, which are often connected to the internet or can be operated remotely, and are not corroborated with morphological and biochemical evidence. For example, I find ureotelic Testudines not being true anapsids difficult to believe.
I read today that a mascot of the Dozenal Society of America was the giant panda bear.
M1n1f1g, 05-Jan-2012 00:39:35, #10, https://forum.colemak.com/topic/1325-dozenal-support/ wrote:You know, the Dozenal Society of America's mascot is a panda. They have 6 digits on each hand, apparently.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Giant_panda_Left_hand_Bone_2.jpg by Momotarou2012.
Panda Hand by Travis, on Flickr
The sixth not being a true digit, is an enlarged radial sesamoid bone, unless the sesamoid bone generally were a diminished or vestigial digit.
Paul J. Morris and Susan F. Morris, http://www.athro.com/evo/pthumb.html wrote:The panda's "thumb" is a much enlarged sesamoid bone. Not only is it not a true thumb, but it can't move much. It is primarily a bony support for the pad above it, a support the panda's true thumb and fingers can squeeze against to hold bamboo (Endo et al 1996).
The giant panda is supposedly descended from carnivora but is a vegetarian, specialising in the eating of bamboo. It is supposed that the enlarged sesamoid bone in the paw could have evolved as an adaptation for holding bamboo, which the giant panda does indeed do. However,
What is interesting about this hypothesis of the giant panda having descended from a climber of trees and first evolved enlarged sesamoid bones there is that the red panda, which because of genetic studies is no longer thought to belong to the Procyonidae, such as racoons, or Ursidae (bear) families, eats bamboo and is a tree climber with similarly enlarged wristbones.Paul J. Morris and Susan F. Morris, http://www.athro.com/evo/pthumb.html wrote:There is a relatively large bone in the foot in the same location as the radial sesamoid is in the hand. This bone is the tibial sesamoid, and it is larger than the same bone in other bears. [...] enlarged to serve as tree climbing aids in the ancestors of the giant panda (Macdonald, 1992 p.178). The radial sesamoid was then co-opted to help the panda grip bamboo.
In combination with the fact the red panda has similar facial fur colouration contrast especially with the dark patches around the eyes, and the darker fur of the limbs like the giant panda, this makes the genetically reconstructed classification very difficult to believe. It seems likely that the pattern of fur colouration must be ancestral to the Arctoidea and even further back, as some of these features can be seen in foxes and Nyctereutes, which are Vulpini of Canidae. I think it is unlikely to be convergent evolution, which would seem less parsimonious.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_panda wrote:The red panda is specialized as a bamboo feeder with strong, curved and sharp semi-retractile claws[7] standing inward for grasping narrow tree branches, leaves, and fruit. Like the giant panda, it has a "false thumb", which is an extension of the wrist bone.
It is often difficult to believe genetic studies when the results come out of computers, which are often connected to the internet or can be operated remotely, and are not corroborated with morphological and biochemical evidence. For example, I find ureotelic Testudines not being true anapsids difficult to believe.
By fake facts and information being too easily simply made up these days, and with human motives, new evidence with nothing more than the authority of taking the word of someone for it is often hard to believe when it goes against what can be readily seen. As behaviour of people has not changed with evolution much through history, why should scientists be any more credible than priests?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anapsid wrote:Ureotelism therefore would suggest that turtles were more likely anapsids than diapsids.
Sat Feb 17, 2024 3:18 pm by Phaethon
» Information per Area of Numerical Forms
Mon Jan 29, 2024 10:50 am by Phaethon
» Denominational Dozenal Numerals
Sun Jan 28, 2024 9:25 pm by Phaethon
» Proto-Indo-European Numbers
Fri Jan 12, 2024 4:25 pm by Phaethon
» Radix Economy for Alternating Bases
Sun Dec 24, 2023 5:41 pm by Phaethon
» Graduation Subdivisions
Sat Dec 02, 2023 12:58 pm by Phaethon
» Pendulum System
Sat Oct 07, 2023 9:22 pm by Phaethon
» Colour Classification
Sat Oct 07, 2023 7:16 pm by Phaethon
» Unit Power Prefixes
Thu Oct 05, 2023 5:29 pm by Phaethon