Did flight evolve by accident?

New research casts doubt on three popular theories for how bird-like dinosaurs learned to fly. 

|
Joe Raedle/Getty Images/File
A black vulture flies in the Florida Everglades National Park. New research undermines three long-standing theories for the evolution of flight.

Did the first dinosaurs to fly evolve from two-legged ancestors whose jumps turned into flapping? Or did they just take off from the ground, and fly under their own power? Perhaps they ran up trees and cliffs before they graduated to the air?

A study published July 7 undermines these three long-standing theories for how flight evolved in bird-like dinosaurs. In fact, the research suggests dinosaurs developed wings for other purposes, and flight evolved accidentally, according to the study published in PeerJ, a peer-reviewed biology journal.

"The mosaic evolution of flight characteristics suggests the evolution of the flight stroke was not continuous [or] driven by a single overall driver," write the authors. "We suggest that future research not focus on any single event or 'pathway' to attempt to explain ... flight apparatus."

Lead author Alexander Dececchi, a postdoctoral fellow at Queen’s University, and his colleagues, Hans Larsson of McGill University and Michael Habib of the University of Southern California, reached this conclusion by examining 45 specimens from 24 species of bird-like therapod dinosaurs, in addition to five bird species. After they determined the animals’ body masses, wing sizes, and other flight variables, they used measurements from living birds to estimate the animals’ wing beats, flap angles, and muscular output, they explained in a press release from Queen's University.

Once they'd gathered all the data, they tested the three theories for the evolution of flight.

Scientists have long debated how and why flight evolved. Two of the most established hypotheses were that bird-like dinosaurs learned to fly either by jumping, or by simply taking off from the ground. In one of the theories, winged dinosaurs jumped to catch prey or escape predators. Over time, they leaped higher and farther, eventually gliding through the air. In the other theory, the winged dinosaurs powered their own flights, taking off from the ground.

A third theory, introduced just over a decade ago to explain gaps to the other two theories, argues that bird-like dinosaurs flapped their wings to scale trees and cliffs. Flapping would have assisted the dinosaurs by helping them stick to the side of a tree, much like a spoiler presses a race car to a track, as Scientific American wrote when biologist Kenneth Dial introduced the theory in 2001. As evolution favored dinosaurs that could escape predators by taking refuge in trees and cliffs, they began to apply the same mechanism to running on the ground, flapping their wings, and flying.

Dr. Dececchi and his team built a model to test if any of their samples could reach the biological threshold for flight according to the three theories.

None of them could.

They also found almost all of the behaviors they tested for turned out to do little to benefit the evolution of flight, except for the species that evolved right before the origin of birds.

“We know the dimensions and we know how modern birds' muscles and anatomy work,” said Dececchi in the press release. “Using our model, if a particular species doesn’t reach the minimum thresholds for function seen in the much more derived birds – such as the ability to take off or to generate a certain amount of power – it’s safe to say they would not have been able to perform these [behaviors] or fly.”

Instead, the team’s findings suggest that dinosaur wings, even those with large or colorful feathers, could have first served other purposes, such as signaling or sexual selection. Flying, then, could have evolved by accident.

For adherents of the three theories, all is not lost, Dececchi said. He emphasized that while different animals learned to fly at different times, there is some evidence they evolved in parallel.  

“There may be some differences in the details between how each taxon flew – but they tend to converge on these same answers,” he said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Did flight evolve by accident?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2016/0719/Did-flight-evolve-by-accident
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe