▶ Your Answer :
Although the author of the reading
passage argues that Gastornis were meat-eating birds, the lecturer brings up
several points to contradict this argument.
First of all, the speaker maintains
that the assertion related to similarity between Gastornis and terror bidrd has
flaws. Although it is true that Gastornis had similar body structure with the
terror bird, other herbivorous birds had upright positions, too. This
contradicts the author’s claim that Gastornis had analogous body structure with
carnivorous birds.
Second, the lecture says that shape is
more important in defining whether an animal is herbivorous or carnivorous,
than size. The Gastornis had the straight bill, not curved one, meaning that
their beaks were more suitable to eat plants. Additionally, the bird had large
jaw muscles which were developed to consume tuff plants. This goes against the
author’s claim that Gastornis had huge beaks which were useful to prey on
animals.
The final point made by the professor
is that Gastornis’ feet indicate that they were plant eating animals. This is
because their footprints were not long and curved, but rather short and small,
which means that the shape was ineffective to catch animals. This contradicts
the reading passage’s assertion that Gastornis’ strong and long feet are strong
evidence to prove that they were meat-eating birds.
|