To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.

Dinosaur intelligence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Skeletal cast of Troodon inequalis. Troodontids had some of the highest non-avian encephalization quotients, meaning they were behaviourally advanced and had keen senses.[1]
Skeletal cast of Troodon inequalis. Troodontids had some of the highest non-avian encephalization quotients, meaning they were behaviourally advanced and had keen senses.[1]

Dinosaur intelligence has been a point of contention for paleontologists. Non-avian dinosaurs were once regarded as being unintelligent animals but have largely been appraised more generously since the dinosaur renaissance. This new found optimism for dinosaur intelligence has led to highly exaggerated portrayals in pop-cultural works like Jurassic Park. Paleontologists now regard dinosaurs as being very intelligent for reptiles, but generally not as smart as their avian descendants. Some have speculated that if the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event had not occurred, the more intelligent forms of small theropods might have eventually evolved human-like levels of intelligence. Popular misconceptions of dinosaur neurology include the concept of a second brain in the pelvis of stegosaurs and sauropods.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    221 228
    837 641
    21 004
    70 742
    2 235
  • Where Are All the Dinosaur Brains?
  • 5 New Dinosaur Discoveries that Reveal What They Looked Like in Real Life
  • Dissecting a Dinosaur Brain (sort of)
  • Fossilised dinosaur brains
  • Brain and sensory structures of the therizinosauroid dinosaur Erlikosaurus


[♪ INTRO] When you picture a fossil, the first thing that comes to mind is probably a dinosaur bone. We’ve all seen those terrifyingly enormous skeletons that go all the way up to the museum’s ceiling. But what about their brains? And their blood vessels, and skin, and other organs? Most of the super-old fossils we’ve found are just bones, because it’s a lot easier to preserve bone than soft tissue for millions of years. But we have found some fossilized soft tissue from dinosaurs, as well as other animals that lived millions of years ago, including a fossilized piece of dinosaur brain. It’s just really rare. Before any part of an animal could start being fossilized, it first needed to, you know, die. And then, for most types of fossils, it needed to be buried. For the most part, that didn’t happen right away. Instead, the bodies would just sit out there in the open. Perfect targets for scavengers and microbes to come pick off and decay the soft tissue, so that by the time the animal was buried, only the bones were left. Over time, minerals would seep into where the bones were buried and harden them into the fossils we find today. Paleontologists can sometimes use these fossilized bones to indirectly study soft tissues using what are known as trace fossils: things like skin patterns left in the mud. But very, very rarely, they’ll find an animal fossil that includes actual fossilized soft tissue, because the animal was buried quickly enough for its soft tissue to fossilize before it decayed. Some of the most important examples of this are fossils from the Cambrian Explosion, a period of time about 550 million years ago that saw one of the most drastic increases in the number of species on Earth. But a lot of those species were soft-bodied, meaning that they had no bones. So normally, we wouldn’t expect to find fossils of them. Unfortunately for them, but lucky for us, some of these animals were buried almost instantly in events like underwater mudslides, so fossilization could start right away. Without the soft tissue fossils we’ve found from the Cambrian Explosion, there’s a lot we’d never know about one of the most exciting times in the history of life. We’ve also occasionally found soft tissue from a few other animals, including dinosaurs. In 2005, for example, researchers at North Carolina State University claimed to have found actual blood vessels and other soft tissues preserved in a T. rex fossil, meaning that they weren’t fossilized. They’d just been kept from decaying. The team suggested that the tissues were preserved because the iron in the dinosaur’s blood turned into formaldehyde, but the findings are still disputed because direct preservation of organic matter over millions of years really shouldn’t be possible. With or without formaldehyde. There have been other, less controversial findings, though. In late 2016, paleontologists found a 99 million-year-old dinosaur tail perfectly preserved in amber. And we’ve found a few dinosaur fossils that contain fossilized skin and feathers, like an Ornithomimus fossil discovered in 2009. We already knew that Ornithomimus was weirdly similar to the modern ostrich, but the new fossil showed us that it also had the same arrangement of feathers on its body and bare skin on its legs, probably to help regulate its body temperature. And, yes, we’ve found fossilized dinosaur brain. In 2016, researchers announced that they’d found a pebble-sized fossil that contained brain tissue. They don’t know exactly which dinosaur it came from, but it’s about 133 million years old. That’s the only dinosaur brain tissue we’ve ever found, but there are plenty more fossils waiting to be discovered. So who knows what we’ll learn about the softer parts of dinosaurs someday. Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow! If you’re interested in learning more about dinosaurs and the history of life on Earth in general, you can check out our new sister show Eons over at [♪ OUTRO]


Dinosaur brain volume and encephalization quotient

Traditional comparisons of brain volume to body mass in dinosaurs use the endocast as a proxy for brain volume.[2] However, the brain of the modern reptile genus Sphenodon fills only about half of its endocranial volume.[3] Some paleontologists used this fifty percent estimate in their estimates of dinosaur brain volume.[2] Other workers have observed that details on the endocranial surface indicates that some fossil reptiles had brains that occupied a much larger portion of the endocranium.[4] Hans Larsson notes that the transition from reptiles to birds prevents using a set ratio from being a valid approach to estimating the volume of the endocranium occupied by a dinosaur's brain.[4]

Theropod brains

In a 2001 study of a Carcharodontosaurus saharicus endocast, Hans C. E. Larsson found that both C. saharicus and Allosaurus had a ratio of cerebrum to brain volume that lay within the 95% confidence limits of non-avian reptiles.[5] By contrast, Tyrannosaurus lies just outside it in the direction of a more avian proportion.[5] Since tyrannosaurs are relatively basal coelurosaurs, this is evidence that the advent of the Coelurosauria marks the beginning of trend in theropod brain enlargement.[5]

Allosaurus fragilis

The brain of Allosaurus fragilis resembled that of the related form Carcharodontosaurus saharicus.[6] The shape resembles that of the modern day crocodile.

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus

In 2001, Hans C. E. Larsson published a description of the endocranium of Carcharodontosaurus saharicus.[7] Starting from the portion of the brain closest to the tip of the animal's snout is the forebrain, which is followed by the midbrain. Larsson found that the midbrain was angled downwards at 45 degrees towards the rear of the animal. This is followed by the hind brain, which was roughly parallel to the forebrain and itself forms a roughly 40 degree angle with the midbrain.[8] Overall, the brain of C. saharicus would have been similar to that of a related dinosaur, Allosaurus fragilis.[6] Larsson also examined the size ratio between the cerebrum of Carcharodontosaurus and the rest of the brain, finding that this ratio in C. saharicus was more like that of a traditional reptile than a bird.[5]


Tyrannosaurus lies just outside the 95% confidence limits of the nonavian reptile ratio of cerebrum volume to whole brain volume in the direction of a more avian proportion.[5] This is in contrast to Carcharodontosaurus saharicus and Allosaurus fragilis, which lie firmly within the reptilian range.[5]


Troodon's cerebrum-to-brain-volume ratio was 31.5% to 63% of the way from a nonavian reptile proportion to a truly avian one.[9]


Archaeopteryx had a cerebrum-to-brain-volume ratio 78% of the way to modern birds.[10]

Limosa gypsorum

One discrepancy is the ratio possessed by the Eocene bird Limosa gypsorum, which was only 63% of the modern bird ratio.[11] However, this may be explainable if the endocast was distorted, as it had been previously depicted in the past by Deschaseaux, who is described by Larsson as portraying the endocast "slightly anteroposteriorly sheared and laterally compressed."[10]


 Kea are known for their intelligence and curiosity, both vital traits for survival in the harsh mountain environment that is their home. Kea can solve logical puzzles, such as pushing and pulling things in a certain order to get to food, and will work together to achieve a certain objective.
Kea are known for their intelligence and curiosity, both vital traits for survival in the harsh mountain environment that is their home. Kea can solve logical puzzles, such as pushing and pulling things in a certain order to get to food, and will work together to achieve a certain objective.

Bird intelligence deals with the definition of intelligence and its measurement as it applies to birds. Traditionally, birds have been considered inferior in intelligence to mammals, and derogatory terms such as bird brains have been used colloquially in some cultures. The difficulty of defining or measuring intelligence in non-human animals makes the subject difficult for scientific study. Anatomically, a bird has a relatively large brain compared to its head size. The visual and auditory senses are well developed in most species, while the tactile and olfactory senses are well realized only in a few groups. Birds communicate using visual signals as well as through the use of calls and song. The testing of intelligence is therefore based on studying the responses to sensory stimuli.

"Two brains" myth

 Brain cavity of S. stenops marked with red
Brain cavity of S. stenops marked with red

Soon after describing Stegosaurus, Othniel Charles Marsh noted a large canal in the hip region of the spinal cord, which could have accommodated a structure up to 20 times larger than the famously small brain. This has led to the famous idea that dinosaurs like Stegosaurus had a "second brain" in the tail, which may have been responsible for controlling reflexes in the rear portion of the body. It has also been suggested that this "brain" might have given a Stegosaurus a temporary boost when it was under threat from predators.[12] More recently, studies have shown that the cavity did not contain nervous tissue.[13]

Speculations of anthropomorphic sapient dinosaurs

Toyota (1977)

Aritsune Toyota (豊田有恒), a Japanese science fiction writer was one of the earliest proposers of the idea of sapient dinosaurs.[14] Toyota was intrigued by the theory of the "Warm-blooded Deinonychus" (John Ostrom, 1964) and developed the idea that some kinds of dinosaurs would have evolved to acquire intelligence. He referred to The Hot-blooded Dinosaurs (Desmond, Adrian J., 1975, Rosemarie Buckman, Oxfordshire) and constructed a theoretical model of what they might have been like.[15] He first published his ideas as science fiction in the novel Kako no kageri (『過去の翳』, A shadow of the past) in 1977. In the story he described them as reptilian humanoids who use bone tools for hunting, speak a primitive language, and build a rudimentary society. The creature was supposed to have evolved from a dinosaur similar to dromaeosaurus.

A year later, Toyota received advice from Japanese zoologist Tatsuo Saneyoshi (實吉達郎), and began striving for more zoological authenticity on details. He then authored Zoku jikanhō keikaku (『続・時間砲計画』, Prospectus for the spatiotemporal cannon part 2). He continued to study theropoda, and serialized his novel as Dainosaurusu sakusen (『ダイノサウルス作戦』, The plan of the dinosaurs) in 1979.

Sagan (1977)

In his 1977 book, The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence, author Carl Sagan speculated about the related genus Saurornithoides evolving into ever more intelligent forms in the absence of any extinction event. In a world dominated by Saurornithoides, Sagan mused, arithmetic would be Base 8 rather than Base 10.

Jerison (1978)

American psychologist Harry Jerison suggested the possibility of sapient dinosaurs. In 1978, he gave a presentation titled "Smart dinosaurs and comparative psychology", at a meeting of the American Psychological Association. According to his speech, Dromiceiomimus supposedly could have evolved into a highly intelligent species like human beings.[15]

Russell (1982)

 A model of the hypothetical Dinosauroid, Dinosaur Museum, Dorchester
A model of the hypothetical Dinosauroid, Dinosaur Museum, Dorchester

In 1982, Dale Russell, curator of vertebrate fossils at the National Museum of Canada in Ottawa, conjectured a possible evolutionary path that might have been taken by the dinosaur Troodon had it not perished in the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago, suggesting that it could have evolved into intelligent beings similar in body plan to humans. Over geologic time, Russell noted that there had been a steady increase in the encephalization quotient or EQ (the relative brain weight when compared to other species with the same body weight) among the dinosaurs.[16] Russell had discovered the first Troodontid skull, and noted that, while its EQ was low compared to humans, it was six times higher than that of other dinosaurs. If the trend in Troodon evolution had continued to the present, its brain case could by now measure 1,100 cm3; comparable to that of a human. Troodontids had semi-manipulative fingers, able to grasp and hold objects to a certain degree, and binocular vision.[17]

Russell proposed that this "dinosauroid", like most dinosaurs of the troodontid family, would have had large eyes and three fingers on each hand, one of which would have been partially opposed. As with most modern reptiles (and birds), he conceived of its genitalia as internal. Russell speculated that it would have required a navel, as a placenta aids the development of a large brain case. However, it would not have possessed mammary glands, and would have fed its young, as birds do, on regurgitated food. He speculated that its language would have sounded somewhat like bird song.[17][18]

Russell's thought experiment has been met with criticism from other paleontologists since the 1980s, many of whom point out that his Dinosauroid is overly anthropomorphic. Gregory S. Paul (1988) and Thomas R. Holtz, Jr., consider it "suspiciously human" (Paul, 1988) and Darren Naish has argued that a large-brained, highly intelligent troodontid would retain a more standard theropod body plan, with a horizontal posture and long tail, and would probably manipulate objects with the snout and feet in the manner of a bird, rather than with human-like "hands"[18]

See also


  1. ^ Junchang Lü; Li Xu; Yongqing Liu; Xingliao Zhang; Songhai Jia; Qiang Ji (2010). "A new troodontid (Theropoda: Troodontidae) from the Late Cretaceous of central China, and the radiation of Asian troodontids" (PDF). Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 55 (3): 381–388. doi:10.4202/app.2009.0047. 
  2. ^ a b "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Page 25.
  3. ^ "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Pages 25-26.
  4. ^ a b "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Page 26.
  5. ^ a b c d e f "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Page 29.
  6. ^ a b "Description," Larsson (2001). Page 20.
  7. ^ "Abstract," Larsson (2001). Page 19.
  8. ^ "Description," Larsson (2001). Pages 20-21.
  9. ^ "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Pages 29-30.
  10. ^ a b "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Page 30.
  11. ^ Considered a Numenius species in "Allometric Comparison," Larsson (2001). Page 30.
  12. ^ Fastovsky DE, Weishampel DB (2005). "Stegosauria: Hot Plates". In Fastovsky DE, Weishampel DB. The Evolution and Extinction of the Dinosaurs (2nd Edition). Cambridge University Press. pp. 107–30. ISBN 0-521-81172-4. 
  13. ^ Switek, Brian (2 Aug 2012). "The Double Dinosaur Brain Myth". Smithsonian. Retrieved 30 July 2013. 
  14. ^ Saneyoshi, Tatsuo (2006). Hontō ni ita fushigina ikimono: Jinrui to dōbutsu no sosentachi [Unaccountable creatures that really existed: The ancestors of human and other animals] (in Japanese). Tokyo: PHP Kenkyūjo. pp. 41–48. ISBN 978-4-569-65442-3. 
  15. ^ a b Kaneko, Ryūichi (1997). Shin kyōryū densetsu : Saiko kyōryū eoraputoru kara kyōryū jinrui made kyōryūgaku no saisentan [New dinosaur book: The front-lines of dinosaurology, from Eoraptor as the earliest dinosaur to Sapient dinosaurs] (in Japanese). Tokyo: Hayakawashobō. pp. 204–206. ISBN 978-4-15-050211-9. 
  16. ^ Cosmos: Smartosarus Archived 2009-09-17 at the Wayback Machine.
  17. ^ a b Russell, D. A.; Séguin, R. (1982). "Reconstruction of the small Cretaceous theropod Stenonychosaurus inequalis and a hypothetical dinosauroid". Syllogeus. 37: 1–43. 
  18. ^ a b Naish, D. (2006). Dinosauroids Revisited Darren Naish: Tetrapod Zoology, April 23, 2011.


  • Larsson, H.C.E. 2001. Endocranial anatomy of Carcharodontosaurus saharicus (Theropoda: Allosauroidea) and its implications for theropod brain evolution. pp. 19–33. In: Mesozoic Vertebrate Life. Ed.s Tanke, D. H., Carpenter, K., Skrepnick, M. W. Indiana University Press.

External links

This page was last edited on 30 November 2017, at 23:02.
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.