![Figure 1. (A) Reconstructed Caudipteryx © Christophe Hendrickx. Used under the terms of the Creative Commons license (CC BY-SA 3.0). Licensing details: [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en]. (B) Robopteryx, imitating the morphology of Caudipteryx, positioned in front of a grasshopper in the field (marked by a red arrow). (C) Grasshopper tested in the experiments.](https://scienceblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/tiny-feathered-dinosaur.jpg)
Tiny dinosaurs with primitive wings may have used them to frighten prey from hiding spots, as per a study in Scientific Reports. The researchers created a robot dinosaur named Robopteryx to examine how grasshoppers reacted to various potential scaring behaviors. They speculate that this behavior could explain why feathered wings evolved before some dinosaurs could fly.
While many feathered dinosaur species have been found, only Pennaraptora dinosaurs have been discovered with pennaceous feathers necessary for flight. Fossils show these initially developed on weak proto-wings incapable of flight, with unknown functions.
Scientists, including Jinseok Park and colleagues, suggest that these proto-wings might have been used for ‘flush-pursuit’ foraging, a strategy observed in modern insectivorous birds like the greater roadrunner and northern mockingbird. This involves predators displaying contrasting-colored feathers to startle prey into fleeing, allowing for pursuit and capture.
To test their hypothesis, the researchers built Robopteryx, modeled after the pennaraptoran dinosaur Caudipteryx. The robot imitated various flush-pursuit display behaviors, observing grasshopper responses. Results showed a strong link between proto-wing use and grasshoppers fleeing, supporting the flush-pursuit hypothesis.
The study sheds new light on why feathered wings and tails may have evolved in dinosaurs, challenging previous assumptions about their purpose.
ScienceBlog.com has no paywalls, no sponsored content, and no agenda beyond getting the science right. Every story here is written to inform, not to impress an advertiser or push a point of view.
Good science journalism takes time — reading the papers, checking the claims, finding researchers who can put findings in context. We do that work because we think it matters.
If you find this site useful, consider supporting it with a donation. Even a few dollars a month helps keep the coverage independent and free for everyone.