Cited by 253Paleontology and Evolutionary BiologyEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFossil Insects in Amber

Archaeopteryx and the Origin of Flight

Ostrom, John H.·1974·The Quarterly Review of Biology

Abstract

Reexamination of the specimens of Archaeopteryx, which constitute the only direct evidence pertaining to the habits and mode of life of the earliest stages of avian evolution, indicates that neither the highly favored arboreal theory nor the much critized cursorial theory offers adequate explanation for the origin of avian flight. The osteology of Archaeopteryx, in virtually every detail, is indistinguishable from that of contempraneous and succeeding coelurosaurian dinosaurs-especially in the details of the manus, forelimbs, and pectoral arch. It is proposed that these conditions reflect a highly predaceous mode of life for Archaeopteryx, rather than being arboreal adaptations. Plumage, in the form of contour feathers, is believed to have arisen in response to the need for controlling heat loss (and gain) and was secondarily modified on the fore limbs to enhance the prey-catching function of the hands. Enlargement of the primordial "primaries" and "secondaries" transformed the forelimbs of "proto-Archaeopteryx" into large, continous, trapping surfaces-natural insect nets-activated by powerful ventral adductor muscles (the pectoralis group). These adaptations were admirably preadaptive for active, flapping flight. The primordial insulative function of contour feathers and the predatory hypothesis for the enlargement of the remiges seem to account for the otherwise paradoxical presence in Archaeopteryx on essentially modern "flight" feathers in the absence of virtually all of the skeletal specializations that are associated with (or required for ?) modern bird flight, whereas those skeletal specializations that are present in Archaeopteryx are the same, or nearly the same, as those that are preserved in various (presumed) predaceous coelurosaurian dinosaurs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/407902

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The general structure of the Archaeopteryx hindlimb is very similar to other maniraptoran theropods.

    “The general structure of the hindlimb is very similar to other maniraptoran theropods [57, 58].”

    From The ecology of Archaeopteryx (2026) · cites this paper as [58]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ostrom, J. H.
Corresponding author
Ostrom, John H.
Venue
The Quarterly Review of Biology
Published
1974-03
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
27-47
ISSN
  • 0033-5770 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-7718
OpenAlex
W2085277132
Cited by
253
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
14.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Quarterly Review of Biology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fossil Insects in Amber
Keywords
Archaeopteryx, origin of flight, avian evolution, contour feathers, flight feathers, remiges, pectoralis muscle, manus

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