Paleocene Non-Avian Dinosaurs. Did They Actually survive?

Has Non-Avian Dinosaurs ever lived and survived the Paleocene.

  • Yes they have, but declined rapidly within the Paleocene.

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • Maybe they had, but were already extinct in the Paleocene.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They survived well into our time.

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • No they did not survive into the Paleocene.

    Votes: 3 37.5%
  • I just dont know.

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • Total voters
    8
Jan 2013
1,207
Anywhere
Hey guys I wanted to get this off my back, shoulders and chest.
I was reading an article about Non-Avian Dinosaurs that survived the K-Pg extinction boundary 66 million years ago (was 65 million years) and lasted well into the Paleocene epoch, which I found it completely absurd. Sure it'll be amazing to know that dinosaurs survived, but those are just childish dreams and wishes. Sure it'll look good on film like King Kong and Jurassic Park. But the thought of Non-Avian dinosaurs lasting after the Mesozoic is impossible. Of course Avian Dinosaurs (birds) are the only dinosaur species that managed to survive the boundary and successfully evolved afterward along with their Archosaurian cousins like the crocodilians (eusuchians, Dryosaurs, and Sebecosuchia) and the choristodera (but went extinct afterwards) that survived well into the cenozoic.

But!!! I also keep an open positive mind to everything. And if these so-called Paleocene. I for one need to see evidence and proof of the possibilities of them actually lasting well into the early epoch. Of course we see animals like Borealosuchus and champsosaurus lasting well into the Paleogene period and mosasauroids like Vallecillosaurus that lived until the 65 million year mark.
However will it be the same dinosaurs? Not likely, since species other Non-Avian Dinosaurs that lived side-by-side with their late cretaceous cousins yet somehow successfully outlived them could be a possibility. But they will surely be small to medium size, yet larger ones will have trouble in living in the paleocene. Lets say for the sake of humour, the problem will be competition of mammals like creodonts and crocodiles like ceratosuchus and the dryosaurs and by their siblings...the birds. They can live only within the Paleocene as they'll already be in decline. And the Paleocene epoch was the only epoch that has retain some late cretaceous climate, tough it was already changing into cooler temperature and the environment has changed. They will indeed adapt to it. But only thrive within that epoch and finally go extinct. Cause it'll just be highly, "HIGHLY" impossible for them to live afterwards. Birds (avian dinosaurs), crocodiles, mammals, insects, and other species have advanced forward through evolution and successfully adapted and replaced them from the Paleogene period. And the biggest disadvantage and flaw for Non-Avian Dinosaurs is that they are too primitive and won't sustain the changing environment and climate and ecology. Theropods will be out competed by creodonts, giant snakes like Titanoboa and giant birds like gastornis. And the lack of food will be a greater disadvantage for them. So if they did survive, they will already be in a fast approach in decline.

So what do all of you think and believe. Give your own reasonable and logical thoughts. And for the ones who have a higher and better degree (and expertise) than I do, I would love to read it. And don't let cryptozoologists get the better of you. ;)
 
Jan 2013
1,207
Anywhere
if snakes, lizards, and crocodiles/alligators count, then yes.
Yes that is true that Birds, Crocodiles, Lizards, and mammals have endured greatly in a post dinosaur world, but there are cretaceous survivors like Borealosuchus and Champsosaurus along with toothed birds. Heck even some mammals survived the extinction event. The Ojo Alamo formation in New Mexico and in Hell Creek Montana with some reports coming from China and New Zealand. However! We need evidence to whether or not they lived. But in a paleontological and paleobiological sense it must be studied. Though the problem with scientists today they don't take it serious and don't even bother just to look at it. They need to stop being stubborn and look at it with a open mind. But once thry do tend to look at it, then they will make their conclusions.

Sorry if I have to be a little upset, cause at first I thought it was a joke, but reading the article and remembering knowing other species has passed. Why not them. Sure i want them to only reside in the late cretaceous. But if we find out otherwise, then it'll just be bad.

Here's the articles
"Lost World" of Dinosaurs Survived Mass Extinction?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110127141707.htm
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
I voted that I don't know. But while not a single fossil of a non-avian dinosaur has yet to be found above the K-Pg extinction boundary does not mean that this will always be the case.

While to all intents and purposes, except a few finds on barely accessible mountains, Antarctica remains a closed book as regarding just what lived there and when they died out, the argument for all non-avian dinosaurs dying out at the K-Pg extinction cannot be closed just yet.

The seeming anomalies, such as why did Troodons die out when they seemed to be capable of surviving the extinction. Insulation against the cold, probably omnivorous, spread across a large area of the globe, better than average brain EQ. Why would they die out and a crocodile, confined to warm areas and not the smartest card in the deck, survive. Who knows? nobody. Going to be a while before we learn much from Antarctica, maybe, probably, not in the lifetime of anyone alive now, but perhaps Australia can provide some answers. Get digging diggers.
 
Aug 2013
956
Italy
I voted that I don't know. But while not a single fossil of a non-avian dinosaur has yet to be found above the K-Pg extinction boundary does not mean that this will always be the case.

While to all intents and purposes, except a few finds on barely accessible mountains, Antarctica remains a closed book as regarding just what lived there and when they died out, the argument for all non-avian dinosaurs dying out at the K-Pg extinction cannot be closed just yet.

The seeming anomalies, such as why did Troodons die out when they seemed to be capable of surviving the extinction. Insulation against the cold, probably omnivorous, spread across a large area of the globe, better than average brain EQ. Why would they die out and a crocodile, confined to warm areas and not the smartest card in the deck, survive. Who knows? nobody. Going to be a while before we learn much from Antarctica, maybe, probably, not in the lifetime of anyone alive now, but perhaps Australia can provide some answers. Get digging diggers.

I find it quite perplexing that the paravians...highly advanced, feathered theropod dinosaurs which were on the verge of evolving into birds...did not survive the K-Pg extinction, whereas the genuine birds did. How can this be explained scientifically? The physiological differences between the two groups cannot have been very great.
 

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,119
Connecticut
I voted that I don't know. But while not a single fossil of a non-avian dinosaur has yet to be found above the K-Pg extinction boundary does not mean that this will always be the case.
In fact a number of nonavian dinosaur elements have been found above the K-Pg. The problem is, they are almost certainly reworked. Fasset wrote that a hadrosaur bone in supposed Paleocene strata is evidence of survival post K-Pg. He claims the bone is in too good condition to have been reworked. That's debatable, though, and IIRC the basis for a "paleocene" age is an underlying reversed chron, assumed to the 29 R, but as some point out, could just as easily be 30 R or even 31R, well before the K-Pg.

While to all intents and purposes, except a few finds on barely accessible mountains, Antarctica remains a closed book as regarding just what lived there and when they died out, the argument for all non-avian dinosaurs dying out at the K-Pg extinction cannot be closed just yet.
I think it can be. What happened after the K-Pg? There was a scramble to fill all the vacant econiches. Even snakes, turtles and crocs got big in some cases. I once wrote a blog post "Boverisuchus and the abortive dinosaur comeback"--about how a croc was evolving to be more like a theropod dinosaur. None of this would've happened had nonavian dinosaurs survived.

The seeming anomalies, such as why did Troodons die out when they seemed to be capable of surviving the extinction. Insulation against the cold, probably omnivorous, spread across a large area of the globe, better than average brain EQ. Why would they die out and a crocodile, confined to warm areas and not the smartest card in the deck, survive. Who knows? nobody.
I think the problem with Troodon and other small theropods was in part dependence on larger dinosaurs. Troodonts seem to have raided hadrosaur nests. Oviraptorids are thought to have evolved to be dino egg eaters. The nest raider niche was very lucrative back then. Unlike modern mammal dominated ecosystems, all the dinos laid eggs.
Crocodiles had the advantage of ectothermy and birds, notably shorebirds, weren't dependent on dinosaurs.
As reitia wrote, the physiological differences between birds and troodonts weren't great. But the paleoecological differences were.



Going to be a while before we learn much from Antarctica, maybe, probably, not in the lifetime of anyone alive now, but perhaps Australia can provide some answers. Get digging diggers.
I very much doubt dinosaurs survived down there. Any survivors would've reradiated, while connections to other lands still existed.
Btw there's a new blog post on how a Stegosaurus really beat an Allosaurus:http://www.dinosaurhome.com/the-fatal-second-blow-15047.html
 
Last edited:

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
For both posts above.

The reworked hadrosaur fossils I'm familiar with, and personally, and this goes for what may or may not ever be found in Antarctica, I think all the non-avian dinosaurs did go extinct at the K-Pg, but would it not be interesting to find some evidence of a survival somewhere, even if only for a few millenia, just hanging on but getting fewer and fewer.

With Troodons I think it is not straight forward, well, nothing is. Certainly the amount of dinosaur eggs and hatchlings, particularly from the presumably vast herds of hadrosaurs and ceratopsians would have been able to support any number of animals like Troodon and it's maniraptoran relatives, and some of the bigger mammals. But if, as it's large eyes suggest, Troodon was nocturnal or crepuscular, and living on mammals and small lizards, as well as, maybe, vegetation, it should have had a better chance than many others of surviving somewhere. If it was nocturnal, would that really have been just to steal eggs and hatchlings, and not nocturnal mammals. Then would what Troodon lived on have itself been dependent on various ornithischians, with lizards and mammals taking the eggs. But everything is connected and we can go around in ever decreasing circles with this.

Why I mentioned Australia is that of course still being connected to Antarctica at the end of the Cretaceous, if there were any survivors then they could show up as fossils in Australia. But as work in Australia is progressing, there is a lot still to find, and no survivors so far, and I doubt ever, but hope.
 
Last edited:

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,119
Connecticut
I think all the non-avian dinosaurs did go extinct at the K-Pg, but would it not be interesting to find some evidence of a survival somewhere, even if only for a few millenia, just hanging on but getting fewer and fewer.
But if some dinosaurs survived the initial K-Pg conditions, why would they dwindle as the environment was recovering?

With Troodons I think it is not straight forward, well, nothing is. Certainly the amount of dinosaur eggs and hatchlings, particularly from the presumably vast herds of hadrosaurs and ceratopsians would have been able to support any number of animals like Troodon and it's maniraptoran relatives, and some of the bigger mammals. But if, as it's large eyes suggest, Troodon was nocturnal or crepuscular,
Large eyes aren't proof of nocturnal/crepuscular habits. Yellow bellied and black racers have big eyes but are diurnal.

and living on mammals and small lizards, as well as, maybe, vegetation, it should have had a better chance than many others of surviving somewhere.
Even some mammals, with lesser requirements, didn't make it. An endotherm the size of Troodon didn't have a chance, in its environment--virtually bereft of vegetation and dino eggs alike.



If it was nocturnal, would that really have been just to steal eggs and hatchlings, and not nocturnal mammals. Then would what Troodon lived on have itself been dependent on various ornithischians, with lizards and mammals taking the eggs.
Troodon remains have been found in association with hadrosaur nests. I don't know of any evidence for nondinosaurian nest raiders in North America at the time--late K (though there were some in India and elsewhere).
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
Dinosaur and Pterosaur speciation was falling by the K-Pg anyway, pterosaurs lungs were taking their last breaths even before being filled with ash. Ornithischian species in North America had fallen sharply, maybe not the total number of individuals, but, in very general terms, not much more than herds of Triceratops and Edmontosaurs, some others of course. So I think that if any did survive, they were, for unknown reasons, already on their way out, no matter if conditions were improving, and while perhaps able to carry on for a few thousand years, or maybe only a few generations, were the dinosaur living dead.

I'm only speculating on Troodon as we cannot and probably never will know for sure, but the possibility of it being nocturnal/crepuscular cannot be discounted. And as they did not survive, then clearly the conditions were just too severe for them. Was the Mesozoic night just filled with mammals hunting insects, or each other, I like to think not.

Off course huge numbers of other animals died out, the marine reptiles probably due to a lack of plankton causing a loss of sufficient fish for them. But it is interesting to play with the idea of just how much of the late Cretaceous fauna was dependent on a few species, but vast numbers of individuals, of hadrosaurs and ceratopsians. It seemed even without volcanoes and asteroids to have been a fragile world.
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
I had forgotten about the ornithopod Leaeallynasaura. Found in Australia, which was attached to Antarctica and within the Antarctic circle at that time. It had large eyes which can only have been an adaptation to the low light conditions present for many months of the year. This shows that in at least this dinosaur a low light vision capability evolved, so I think it makes the large eyes of Troodon more, rather than less likely to be a low light adaptation. More work needs to be done of course.