Re: [dinosaur] Archaeopteryx coloring

A brief history of research on *Archaeopteryx* coloration is as follows: Carney
et al. (2012) <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.nature.com_articles_ncomms1642&d=DwIFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=TBnf0srNv3JuTrBYhjmgRCO_LX4qPQOiwblU7XMbBi8&s=sAsb4T417-y_1eHGB6wXWKu1KWNcn9J1H66Zx5mYqzM&e= > sampled
melanosomes from the original isolated feather assigned to *Archaeopteryx*
and suggested that the entire feather was black based on melanosome
morphology. Manning et al. (2013)
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pubs.rsc.org_en_content_articlehtml_2013_ja_c3ja50077b&d=DwIFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=TBnf0srNv3JuTrBYhjmgRCO_LX4qPQOiwblU7XMbBi8&s=zsI7GT38_7TkaZN2qrptL0Cgj6WGe2oKt0arItw3gLY&e= > mapped
trace metals on the isolated feather as well as the Berlin and Thermopolis
specimens, and suggested that the tips of the wing feathers were more
heavily pigmented than their bases, under the assumption that the trace
metals are products of melanin breakdown and that their distribution
reflects original pigmentation patterns.

Naturally, all methods of paleocolor reconstruction have their caveats, but
the trace metal mapping method used by Manning et al. (2013) arguably
requires more layers of assumptions to draw conclusions about the original
pigmentation. As such, I personally would be inclined to trust the Carney
et al. (2012) results more where the two studies contradict each other. (Roy
et al., 2019 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__onlinelibrary.wiley.com_doi_full_10.1111_brv.12552&d=DwIFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=TBnf0srNv3JuTrBYhjmgRCO_LX4qPQOiwblU7XMbBi8&s=W5jcKi64wADEnXObadshRrIE6Rqk0Mn_4Qj9h1dMhpU&e= >
is a good summary of paleocolor research and the limitations of different
methods.)

However... Kaye et al. (2019)
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.nature.com_articles_s41598-2D018-2D37343-2D7&d=DwIFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=TBnf0srNv3JuTrBYhjmgRCO_LX4qPQOiwblU7XMbBi8&s=9YXSlWcjuWDunkl9Fa-1q6n1VxreaZgBtcQbwsX5Tdw&e= > recently reevaluated
the morphology of the isolated feather and argued that it may not belong to
*Archaeopteryx*, in which case the conclusions of Carney et al. (2012)
wouldn't actually apply to *Archaeopteryx* at all. That being said, Carney
and others presented a poster at the latest Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology meeting that maintains *Archaeopteryx* as the most likely
owner of the feather, so we probably haven't heard the last of this by a
long shot. (Unfortunately, I was not able to see that poster at SVP.)

Given all of that, my two cents is that there's currently enough ambiguity
to color *Archaeopteryx* almost any way you want. You could certainly
choose to depict it with dark wing feathers if you wanted to give a nod to
the relevant paleocolor studies; after all, there currently isn't any
evidence *against* black (or at least black-tipped) wing feathers in
*Archaeopteryx*, and it's a common color pattern among modern birds.
However, there also isn't enough of a consensus in my opinion that you
should feel beholden to doing so.

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 11:33 PM James Norton <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have taken up wood carving in my retirement, and am in the planning
> stages of a life-sized carving of a running Archaeopteryx.  The creature
> will have its fully-feathered wings and tail portrayed in a way that
> suggests that they have a stabilization function while Archie is making a
> sharp running turn.  The pose will be ambiguous, however, suggesting both a
> creature running in pursuit of a prey and a winged animal about to take
> flight at any time.  This ambiguity would be consistent with the current
> debates about the flight capabilities of Archaeopteryx.
>
> I am taking detailed measurements off a life-sized resin replica of the
> Berlin specimen, to make sure that the physical dimensions of the carving
> are correct, but here’s my question: What color should the finished carving
> be?  I have read a number of recent articles about melanosome distribution
> in Archie feathers, and there still seems to be debate about whether the
> wing feathers were completely black or had some color variation along their
> length.  A carving painted dark to resemble a raven, including some
> iridescence, would be dramatic enough, but I want to be as current and
> scientifically accurate as possible about what the actual coloration
> pattern might be.  Did Archie’s coloration resemble that of a raven, a
> hawk, maybe even a partridge?
>
> The audience for this carving, when it is finished, will be highly
> experienced bird carvers, but still folks who probably don’t have a lot of
> knowledge of paleontology or avian evolution.  I really can’t wait until
> the carving is done and I enter it in a carving competition in the category
> of “realistic birds, life-sized”.  The bony tail, the wing claws, and the
> teeth will certainly raise a few eyebrows!  I am also preparing some sort
> of a booklet that would have educational value at whatever venue I might
> eventually display the carving.
>
> Any opinions about Archaeopteryx coloration would be welcome and helpful
> for this project, including the suggestion that I simply indulge my own
> creative fantasies about what this fascinating creature might have looked
> like.  Thanks in advance, and wish me luck.
>
> James
>
>
> ____________________
> Sent from my iPad
>