Cited by 77Paleontology and Evolutionary BiologyBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsFossil Insects in Amber

Aerodynamic performance of the feathered dinosaur Microraptor and the evolution of feathered flight

Open access
Dyke, Gareth, de Kat, Roeland, Palmer, Colin, van der Kindere, Jacques, Naish, Darren, Ganapathisubramani, Bharathram·2013·Nature Communications

Abstract

Understanding the aerodynamic performance of feathered, non-avialan dinosaurs is critical to reconstructing the evolution of bird flight. Here we show that the Early Cretaceous five-winged paravian Microraptor is most stable when gliding at high-lift coefficients (low lift/drag ratios). Wind tunnel experiments and flight simulations show that sustaining a high-lift coefficient at the expense of high drag would have been the most efficient strategy for Microraptor when gliding from, and between, low elevations. Analyses also demonstrate that anatomically plausible changes in wing configuration and leg position would have made little difference to aerodynamic performance. Significant to the evolution of flight, we show that Microraptor did not require a sophisticated, 'modern' wing morphology to undertake effective glides. This is congruent with the fossil record and also with the hypothesis that symmetric 'flight' feathers first evolved in dinosaurs for non-aerodynamic functions, later being adapted to form lifting surfaces.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ncomms3489

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Microraptor was capable of generating sufficient speed and flight forces for a ground-based takeoff, within the range of values estimated for an arboreal launch.

    “In all cases, we found that Microraptor was capable of generating sufficient speed and flight forces for a ground-based takeoff and were within the range of values estimated for an arboreal launch [19, 20, 22].”

    From Potential for Powered Flight Neared by Most Close Avialan Relatives, but Few Crossed Its Thresholds (2020) · cites this paper as [20]

    The Discussion (page unavailable in our copy) says an initial push-off would generate only a small horizontal velocity and that most necessary flight speed had to come from falling under gravity. The paper models glides from elevated positions, not a ground-based takeoff capable of generating sufficient speed and flight forces. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Walsh, S. & Milner, A. In Living Dinosaurs: the Evolutionary History of Modern Birds (eds Dyke, G. J. & Kaiser, G.) 282-305 (Wiley, 2011).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dyke, G., de Kat, R., Palmer, C., van der Kindere, J., Naish, D., & Ganapathisubramani, B.
Affiliations
  • National Oceanography Centre (GB)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Dyke, Gareth
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2013-09-18
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
2489-2489
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2119815062
Cited by
77
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/J501530/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fossil Insects in Amber
Keywords
Microraptor, feathered dinosaurs, aerodynamic performance, gliding flight, paravians, lift-to-drag ratio, wing morphology, leg position, Lower Cretaceous
MeSH terms
Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Biological Evolution, Feathers, Flight, Animal, Fossils, Models, Anatomic, Phylogeny, Wind, Wings, Animal, Dinosaurs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review