Could Pterosaurs Swim?

[Neosodon]

Eh, wouldn't they fold their wings if they dive, like birds do?

Yes they can fold their wings but unlike birds, pterasaurs cannot contract their wings. Birds can contract their wings by overlapping their feathers and diving birds are much smaller than the largest pterosaurs so they can pierce the surface of the water quiet easily. When pterosaurs fold their wings they are still rather bulky.

Even if a large pterosaur came in for a gentle landing, underwater it would be slow and awkward but just above the surface it was faster and deadlier than anything beneath the waves.

[BlueKrono]

The only birds I know of that are comparable to even medium-sized pterosaurs are albatrosses. Do wandering albatrosses dive? It seems to me that birds on the whole have much more robust pectorals muscles for flapping than any pterosaur depiction I've ever seen. What's up with that? And here's a link to the pterosaur book I think they were referring to:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/s/ref=is_s_ss_i_0_11?k=pterosaurs+witton&sprefix=pterosaurs+

[suspsy]

Here's a good blog entry by Witton on swimming pterosaurs:
http://markwitton-com.blogspot.ca/2015/09/the-life-aquatic-with-flying-reptiles.html?m=1

[stargatedalek]

Even if a large pterosaur came in for a gentle landing, underwater it would be slow and awkward but just above the surface it was faster and deadlier than anything beneath the waves.

Actually, not a single pterosaur species shows adaptations necessary for skimming or dip feeding, so they would have posed little threat to fish had they not been able to dive. Not a single pterosaur would have dip fed like your first image shows, it was physically impossible.

Also Dsungaripterus was definitely a diver, the current leading theory is that it ate freshwater shellfish as it didn't live on an ocean.

[BlueKrono]

Even if a large pterosaur came in for a gentle landing, underwater it would be slow and awkward but just above the surface it was faster and deadlier than anything beneath the waves.

Actually, not a single pterosaur species shows adaptations necessary for skimming or dip feeding, so they would have posed little threat to fish had they not been able to dive. Not a single pterosaur would have dip fed like your first image shows, it was physically impossible.

Also Dsungaripterus was definitely a diver, the current leading theory is that it ate freshwater shellfish as it didn't live on an ocean.

Pardon my anatomical ignorance, but why would it have been impossible to do what it shows in the picture? I find it hard to picture Dsung as a diver with that weird shaped bill. I always kinda thought of them as shallow marsh dwellers, walking more than flying, the ecological equivalent of an egret.

[ImADinosaurRARR]

The only birds I know of that are comparable to even medium-sized pterosaurs are albatrosses. Do wandering albatrosses dive? It seems to me that birds on the whole have much more robust pectorals muscles for flapping than any pterosaur depiction I've ever seen. What's up with that? And here's a link to the pterosaur book I think they were referring to:

The reason for the large pectorals isn't for flight but instead for getting air born. While birds basically need to get off the ground by flapping (Yes they can jump but that would mean increasing the leg muscles making the animal heavier), pterosaurs use a much more efficient pol-volting technique, so the time they flap their wings, their already in the air.

[Cloud the Dinosaur King]

It don't think any pterosuars could swim proficiently at least not the big ones.  Some smaller ones may have been able to dive for a fish just a little ways beneath the surface but a larger pterosaur like an Ornithocheirus would probably just brake its long fragile wings on the waters surface. Even if Ornithocheirus managed to dive into the ocean after a fish without breaking its wings it would still move slowly and awkwardly from the drag. Not to mention they would be a sitting duck for a passing mosasaur.  Birds have feathers which are strong and flexible and the water can flow in between them.  Pterosaurs were built for effortless soaring. Their long necks and beaks could easily snatch an unsuspecting fish just beneath the surface without having to submerge itself entirely.

Pterosaur wings were actually pretty thick. They were about as thick as the arms and less like leather. They also had tissue in them to help thicken them.

By brake I don't mean tear. If a large pterasaur tried to dive in the water at high speeds it's massive wings would be yanked back by the surface tension and the joints in the wing could become dislocated.

I see your point. I'm guessing smaller pterosaurs like Pterodactylus and possibly Pteranodon would be the ones diving, as azdarchids eat things on land.

[Dinoguy2]

It don't think any pterosuars could swim proficiently at least not the big ones.  Some smaller ones may have been able to dive for a fish just a little ways beneath the surface but a larger pterosaur like an Ornithocheirus would probably just brake its long fragile wings on the waters surface. Even if Ornithocheirus managed to dive into the ocean after a fish without breaking its wings it would still move slowly and awkwardly from the drag. Not to mention they would be a sitting duck for a passing mosasaur.  Birds have feathers which are strong and flexible and the water can flow in between them.  Pterosaurs were built for effortless soaring. Their long necks and beaks could easily snatch an unsuspecting fish just beneath the surface without having to submerge itself entirely.

Sorry mate, nothing in this post (including the awful shrink-wrapped picture) is even remotely close to accurate. This is a 1960s understanding of pterosaurs.

The second picture you posted with Dsungaripterus is even worse - shrink wrapped, no musculature, no air sac system innervating the wing tissue, the wing finger is even folded the wrong way. I suggest reading some pterosaur books or papers written during the last 15 years rather than relying on inaccurate google Image results. At least look up some *recent* Google Image results



The fact that there are people on this board, who are interested in prehistoric life, who still haven't gotten the memo that pterosaurs weren't just passive gliders (proved in the 1980s) proves how left behind pterosaur science has been compared to dinosaur science in terms of updated info reaching the public. Witton complains about this on his blog all the time.

[suspsy]

The fact that there are people on this board, who are interested in prehistoric life, who still haven't gotten the memo that pterosaurs weren't just passive gliders (proved in the 1980s) proves how left behind pterosaur science has been compared to dinosaur science in terms of updated info reaching the public. Witton complains about this on his blog all the time.

Gods, yes. Just the fact that "pterodactyl" is used all the time in popular literature instead of "pterosaur" proves this.

[stargatedalek]

Even if a large pterosaur came in for a gentle landing, underwater it would be slow and awkward but just above the surface it was faster and deadlier than anything beneath the waves.

Actually, not a single pterosaur species shows adaptations necessary for skimming or dip feeding, so they would have posed little threat to fish had they not been able to dive. Not a single pterosaur would have dip fed like your first image shows, it was physically impossible.

Also Dsungaripterus was definitely a diver, the current leading theory is that it ate freshwater shellfish as it didn't live on an ocean.

Pardon my anatomical ignorance, but why would it have been impossible to do what it shows in the picture? I find it hard to picture Dsung as a diver with that weird shaped bill. I always kinda thought of them as shallow marsh dwellers, walking more than flying, the ecological equivalent of an egret.

Apologies, I should have separated "diver" and "swimmer". Pteranodon was a diver, Dsungaripterus was a swimmer/wader.

The only reason the Dsungaripterus picture is impossible is that nautilus were not in its food chain (and it's shrink-wrapped).
I meant the other one with the longer necked pterosaur dipping its beak into the water was physically impossible. Even birds that are specifically adapted for doing that (all the necessary traits of which are absent from any pterosaur) often injure themselves, even fatally. There's good reason gannets and auks dive under, eagles use their feet, and gulls and pelicans land before reaching under.

*edit*

The fact that there are people on this board, who are interested in prehistoric life, who still haven't gotten the memo that pterosaurs weren't just passive gliders (proved in the 1980s) proves how left behind pterosaur science has been compared to dinosaur science in terms of updated info reaching the public. Witton complains about this on his blog all the time.

Gods, yes. Just the fact that "pterodactyl" is used all the time in popular literature instead of "pterosaur" proves this.

I will confess I often use the term pterodactyl. Most times I use it as shorthand for Pterodactyloidea, but sometimes I just treat it as a vernacular.

[Neosodon]

It don't think any pterosuars could swim proficiently at least not the big ones.  Some smaller ones may have been able to dive for a fish just a little ways beneath the surface but a larger pterosaur like an Ornithocheirus would probably just brake its long fragile wings on the waters surface. Even if Ornithocheirus managed to dive into the ocean after a fish without breaking its wings it would still move slowly and awkwardly from the drag. Not to mention they would be a sitting duck for a passing mosasaur.  Birds have feathers which are strong and flexible and the water can flow in between them.  Pterosaurs were built for effortless soaring. Their long necks and beaks could easily snatch an unsuspecting fish just beneath the surface without having to submerge itself entirely.

Sorry mate, nothing in this post (including the awful shrink-wrapped picture) is even remotely close to accurate. This is a 1960s understanding of pterosaurs.

The second picture you posted with Dsungaripterus is even worse - shrink wrapped, no musculature, no air sac system innervating the wing tissue, the wing finger is even folded the wrong way. I suggest reading some pterosaur books or papers written during the last 15 years rather than relying on inaccurate google Image results. At least look up some *recent* Google Image results



The fact that there are people on this board, who are interested in prehistoric life, who still haven't gotten the memo that pterosaurs weren't just passive gliders (proved in the 1980s) proves how left behind pterosaur science has been compared to dinosaur science in terms of updated info reaching the public. Witton complains about this on his blog all the time.

First off I can't believe people still have to complain about shrink wrapping. Practically every single piece of paleo art ever made is shrink wrapped. I wish everyone could just please learn to enjoy a classic piece of paleoart without having to get all worked up over the fact that the eye sockets and whatever are showing. They're made by artists not anatomy experts.

If a pterosaur like Quetzocatlus managed to adapt a strong enough wing joints to come crashing into the ocean at high speeds which I'm not saying is impossible it would still need the agility to actually catch the fish. Even if it could do all those things would it be worth it. The article said "This is not to say water launching was impossible for very large or giant pterosaurs, but that the energy demands make it an unlikely routine behavior." Simply plucking a fish out of the water from the air would only use a small fraction of the energy it would need to dive for one. The first picture you posted is not that realistic. The second and third I agree with. There were some small to medium sized pterosaurs that could dive for fish efficiently. Even a large pterosaur could likely pick selfish and crabs off of shallow sea and lake beds. What I was trying to say is a aerial water skimming hunting technique would be more efficient especially for large pterosaurs than an underwater diving one.

Even if a large pterosaur came in for a gentle landing, underwater it would be slow and awkward but just above the surface it was faster and deadlier than anything beneath the waves.

Actually, not a single pterosaur species shows adaptations necessary for skimming or dip feeding, so they would have posed little threat to fish had they not been able to dive. Not a single pterosaur would have dip fed like your first image shows, it was physically impossible.

Examples???

[BlueKrono]

If they ended up in the water, by diving etc., the pole vaulting technique wouldn't work to get airborne. Would they have flapped those massive wings at the surface to take off? With all that heavy water clinging to them? I'm just having a hard time picturing it.

[stargatedalek]

First off I can't believe people still have to complain about shrink wrapping. Practically every single piece of paleo art ever made is shrink wrapped. I wish everyone could just please learn to enjoy a classic piece of paleoart without having to get all worked up over the fact that the eye sockets and whatever are showing. They're made by artists not anatomy experts.

The Dsungaripterus art is fairly recent, so any complaints are valid. It's also very easy to find up to date depictions of pterosaurs, you clearly looked for ones to support your own claims which is why they're outdated and incorrect. Stop trying to shift blame.

If a pterosaur like Quetzocatlus managed to adapt a strong enough wing joints to come crashing into the ocean at high speeds which I'm not saying is impossible it would still need the agility to actually catch the fish. Even if it could do all those things would it be worth it. The article said "This is not to say water launching was impossible for very large or giant pterosaurs, but that the energy demands make it an unlikely routine behavior." Simply plucking a fish out of the water from the air would only use a small fraction of the energy it would need to dive for one. The first picture you posted is not that realistic. The second and third I agree with. There were some small to medium sized pterosaurs that could dive for fish efficiently. Even a large pterosaur could likely pick selfish and crabs off of shallow sea and lake beds. What I was trying to say is a aerial water skimming hunting technique would be more efficient especially for large pterosaurs than an underwater diving one.

No one ever said Quetzalcoatlus dived underwater, it lived inland so it obviously didn't. It also didn't skim or dip for fish, that would have killed it. The biomechanics however do show us that it was physically capable of taking off from the surface, so it certainly was capable of swimming if it really needed.

You also really need to get it into your head that dive =/= falling into the ocean, to dive is to swim beneath the waters surface. Very few pterosaurs were actually adapted to plummet into the water like gannets, but swimming underwater and taking off from the surface afterwards is easy.

Even if a large pterosaur came in for a gentle landing, underwater it would be slow and awkward but just above the surface it was faster and deadlier than anything beneath the waves.

Actually, not a single pterosaur species shows adaptations necessary for skimming or dip feeding, so they would have posed little threat to fish had they not been able to dive. Not a single pterosaur would have dip fed like your first image shows, it was physically impossible.

Examples???

http://markwitton-com.blogspot.ca/2013/07/rhamphomummies-and-zombie-skim-feeders.html
http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/05/27/terrestrial-stalking-azhdarchids/

If they ended up in the water, by diving etc., the pole vaulting technique wouldn't work to get airborne. Would they have flapped those massive wings at the surface to take off? With all that heavy water clinging to them? I'm just having a hard time picturing it.

Actually the vaulting would have worked well enough for water takeoffs, especially for larger pterosaurs. They have enough mass that all they really need to do is raise their wings and slam them down on the surface to launch clear of the water.

[suspsy]

First off I can't believe people still have to complain about shrink wrapping. Practically every single piece of paleo art ever made is shrink wrapped. I wish everyone could just please learn to enjoy a classic piece of paleoart without having to get all worked up over the fact that the eye sockets and whatever are showing. They're made by artists not anatomy experts.

1. Those three images Dinoguy2 shared are not shrink wrapped at all.

2. At least two of those images were done by Mark Witton, who as I already pointed out, is probably the foremost paleontological expert in the world as far as pterosaurs are concerned.

If a pterosaur like Quetzocatlus managed to adapt a strong enough wing joints to come crashing into the ocean at high speeds which I'm not saying is impossible it would still need the agility to actually catch the fish. Even if it could do all those things would it be worth it.

This is all pretty much moot given that Quetzalcoatlus wasn't a coastal animal. The current prevailing theory is that it was a ground hunter similar to a Maribou stork, walking along on all fours and plucking up small dinosaurs and mammals with its bill.

But other giant pterosaurs like Pteranodon and Ornithocheirus probably did at least occasionally dive into the ocean to catch prey.

[Dinoguy2]

My comments regarding shrink-wrapping are biomechanical, not just about outdated art (and specifically about the extreme shrink-wrapped wings, not eye sockets or whatever - you should not be able to see the outlines of the arms or wing finger due to layers and layers of muscle, connective tisssue, and inflated pneumatic air sacs). People have an image of pterosaurs as "frail", and in this thread several people are arguing that a pterosaur would break its wing joints or bones by diving. I am assuming people think this either because they don't know that pterosaur bones are pretty much equivalent to bird bones in terms of strength and mechanical resistance, or that they're so used to seeing shrink-wrapped, under-muscled pterosaurs that they just "look" frail and breakable. Pterosaurs were no more or less frail than birds and a diving pterosaur would have no more difficulty than a diving bird.

Most of the other arguments in this thread against swimming, diving, or water-launching pterosaurs are simply unaware of the published literature on the topic. All of these ideas have been empirically tested. Arguments from personal incredulity are worthless in the face of the data. This post gives a good overview of the current science. http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2015/03/how-ornithocheirus-simus-and-other.html

Anybody who thinks pterosaurs could have been skim feeders need to read this paper: http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050204

Here's an overview of the implications of the above research: http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050217

Note that both of those papers are a DECADE old! Why do people still think pterosaurs were skimmers in 2017? Because science media outreach has massively, spectacularly failed when it comes to pterosaurs.

[BlueKrono]

Thanks for those links. Especially the first one was very helpful in explaining what I had a hard time picturing. It was at a decent graspability level too. Some technical but not too much, though he definitely knows his stuff, but also includes phrase like "raw awesomeness sucked out of the universe itself" when describing azhdarchids.  I'll definitely have to pick up Witton's book.

[Neosodon]

Well thanks for all the interesting food for thought. I agree that the largest pterosaurs like Quetzocoatlus and Hatzegopteryx would most likely live like vultures rather than hunting fish. Skimming was most likely a non thing for most if not all pterosaurs. But we still have the question of how exactly did pterosaurs hunt fish. Since pterosaurs like Pteraodon and Dawndraco had pelican like beaks this is probably how they hunted.
https://youtu.be/wfLl26yzpk8

(And before the shrink wrapping police come for me.) Yes, I know it's shrink wrapped but it it is the best picture I could find of a pelican like bill on a pterosaur.

[Dinoguy2]

Well thanks for all the interesting food for thought. I agree that the largest pterosaurs like Quetzocoatlus and Hatzegopteryx would most likely live like vultures rather than hunting fish. Skimming was most likely a non thing for most if not all pterosaurs. But we still have the question of how exactly did pterosaurs hunt fish. Since pterosaurs like Pteraodon and Dawndraco had pelican like beaks this is probably how they hunted.
https://youtu.be/wfLl26yzpk8

(And before the shrink wrapping police come for me.) Yes, I know it's shrink wrapped but it it is the best picture I could find of a pelican like bill on a pterosaur.

What about Quetzalcoatlus is similar to a vulture? Consensus right now is that they probably hunted like storks.

What about Pteranodon is similar to a pelican? Pelicans have extremely specialized expandable bills that really don't look or act anything like pteranodont bills... I guess they're both long but that's about it.

[Neosodon]

What about Quetzalcoatlus is similar to a vulture? Consensus right now is that they probably hunted like storks.

Well a better way of putting it would be an opurtunist. Like a vulture, heron and hawk all wrapped up in one. This article says it well.
http://www.eartharchives.org/articles/quetzalcoatlus-the-largest-flying-animal-of-all-time/

"More recently, the azhdarchids were cast as stork-like terrestrial stalkers that picked up small animals while walking overland on dry ground. This model worked, with the animals swallowing up almost anything that could fit into their mouths. Thus the azhdarchids spent more time on land rather than close to the water. An animal the size of Quetzalcoatlus could consume victims as large as small dinosaurs, picking them up in its huge toothless jaws."

Such a large animal would not be confined to sitting in a lake waiting for a fish or turtle or something to swim buy. They were big enough to carry away small dinosaurs, carcasses and mammals. They could even eat from large carcasses and make an easy get away when the Rex's show up which was pretty much their only real threat.

(And before the shrink wrapping police come for me.) Yes, I know it's shrink wrapped but it it is the best picture I could find of a pelican like bill on a pterosaur.

What about Pteranodon is similar to a pelican? Pelicans have extremely specialized expandable bills that really don't look or act anything like pteranodont bills... I guess they're both long but that's about it.

They both had long scoop shaped bills designed for scooping and sucking fish into the back of their mouths. If pterosaurs like Pteraodon and Dawndraco had a pouch like the picture suggests they would work in a similar fashion.

[ZoPteryx]

Been on the sidelines for a while now, time to jump in. 

They both had long scoop shaped bills designed for scooping and sucking fish into the back of their mouths. If pterosaurs like Pteraodon and Dawndraco had a pouch like the picture suggests they would work in a similar fashion.

The problem with this is the mandibular symphysis.  In pelicans it's greatly reduced, allowing the jaws to bow outward and engulf groups of small prey.  In pterosaurs, especially pterodactyloids, it's very large, sometimes taking up over half the lower jaw's length.  That does not permit the jaws to expand much, pouch or no pouch.  And for what it's worth, just because an animal possesses a pouch doesn't mean it uses it like a pelican; just look at cormorants.

Pelican jaws vs azhdarchids:


Pteranodon sp jaw:


Now, it is true some studies have shown pterosaurs possessed quadrate bones that allow bowing of the jaws at their rear, but this nowhere near as extreme as in pelicans and it's a feature also present in disparate other animals, like Tyrannosaurus.  In most species, it seems to be an adaptation to swallowing large chunks of food without chewing, only pelicans incorporated it into their hunting behavior.


One final general note.  When speaking of plunge diving it's important to remember that there is a whole spectrum of "plunge divers", with gannets* on the very extreme end; Brown Pelican and other sulids* somewhere in the middle; and tubenoses*, terns and gulls on the lower end as they hit the water at relatively slow speeds.  Not sure where tropicbirds fall.  Point is, pterosaurs could have been plunge divers without being as specialized as gannets.

*To my knowledge, only these groups accentuate their plunges with active underwater swimming, sometimes for a great distance.