Are Birds Dinosaurs? | Live Science

Are Birds Dinosaurs?
In some birds, like this cassowary, the resemblance to extinct theropod dinosaurs is easy to see.(Image credit: Shutterstock)
What do sparrows, geese and owls have in common with a velociraptor or the mighty Tyrannosaurus rex? All can trace their origins to a bipedal, mostly meat-eating group of dinosaurs called theropods ("beast-footed") that first appeared around 231 million years ago, during the late Triassic Period.
The earliest birds shared much in common with their theropod relatives, including feathers and egg-laying. However, certain traits – such as sustained, powered flight – distinguished ancient birds from other theropods, and eventually came to define modern-bird lineage (even though not all modern birds fly).
Today, all non-avian dinosaurs are long extinct. But are birds still considered to be true dinosaurs?
"Birds are living dinosaurs, just as we are mammals," said Julia Clarke, a paleontologist studying the evolution of flight and a professor with the Department of Geological Sciences at the University of Texas at Austin.
In spite of the physical differences that distinguish all mammals from other species, every animal in that group — living and extinct — can trace certain anatomical characteristics to a common ancestor. And the same is true for birds, Clarke told Live Science.
"They're firmly nested in that one part of the dinosaur tree," she said. "All of the species of birds we have today are descendants of one lineage of dinosaur: the theropod dinosaurs."
What makes a bird, a bird?
Modern birds have feathered tails and bodies, unfused shoulder bones, toothless beaks and forelimbs that are longer than their hind limbs. They also have a bony plate near their tails called a pygostyle. Other types of extinct theropods had one or more of these features, but only modern birds have all of them, according to Takuya Imai, an assistant professor with the Dinosaur Research Institute at Fukui Prefectural University in Fukui, Japan.
In a primitive bird from Japan called Fukuipteryx — a 120-million-year-old avian that Imai described in November 2019 and the earliest known bird with a pygostyle — the preserved structure closely resembled the pygostyle of a modern chicken, Imai previously told Live Science. In other words, some structures in modern birds can be traced back to some of their earliest ancestors.
However, primitive birds still had much in common with non-avian theropods, said Jingmai O'Connor, a paleontologist specializing in dinosaur-era birds and the transition from non-avian dinosaurs, at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthroplogy in Beijing, China.
In fact, early birds were "very dinosaur-like" compared to modern birds, O'Connor told Live Science in an email. "Some had long, reptilian tails, teeth and claws on their hands," she said. And many theropod dinosaurs that were not birds had true feathers, "which are feathers that have a central part down the middle and branching barbs," according to Clarke.
Paleontologists distinguish between animal groups through precise measurements of subtle variations in bones and other fossilized body tissues, including "little bumps and tubercles [a rounded bulge on a bone] that are related to reorganizing different muscle groups," Clarke said. This morphological data is translated into numbers that are then processed by algorithms to pinpoint how animals are related, O'Connor explained. By using these algorithms in a system known as cladistics, experts can differentiate ancient birds from their theropod relatives.
Early birds
The earliest known bird is Archaeopteryx ("ancient wing"), which lived around 150 million years ago in what is now southern Germany. The creature weighed around 2 pounds(1 kilogram) and measured about 20 inches (50 centimeters) in length; fossil evidence shows that it sported plumage on its tail and body. The shape of its forelimbs and feathers also suggests that Archaeopteryx was capable of powered flight, a trait associated with most modern birds. However, unlike birds today, Archaeopteryx retained individual, clawlike fingers at the tips of its wings.
Fossils of birds from the early Cretaceous Period (145.5 million to 65.5 million years ago) have been found in northeastern China, such as Confuciusornis, which lived around 125 million years ago, and had a beak and long tail-feathers. Some Confuciusornis fossils, described in 2013, even included medullary bone, a spongy tissue found in female birds that are sexually mature, Live Science previously reported.
Another piece of fossil evidence links ancient birds to their modern relatives through their digestion, in the form of the earliest known bird pellet — a mass of indigestible fish bones coughed up by a Cretaceous avian in China around 120 million years ago.
Fly, robin, fly
One defining feature of birds is their ability to fly, requiring large forelimbs covered with asymmetrically-shaped feathers and roped in powerful muscles, O'Connor said.
"In the lineage evolving towards birds, most likely a lineage within the Troodontidae [a family of birdlike theropods], flight is what separates birds from their closest non-avian dinosaur (probable troodontid) kin," said O'Connor.
Then, after the evolution of flight, the small bones in birds' hands "become reduced and fused up to create this kind of stiffened structure that supports the feathers of the wing," Clarke said.
After the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous period, birds continued to evolve and diversify, developing more specialized features related to flight, such as an elongated structure in their breastbones (called a keel), and powerful pectoralis muscles to power the downstroke during flight, Clarke said.
"You see bigger and bigger pectoralis that are associated with this deep keel. And that evolved after the origin of flight and is present in living birds," she said.
Today, there are approximately 10,000 bird species worldwide. Birds might be as tiny as a hummingbird or as big as an ostrich; they might soar like an eagle or dive like a penguin. Nevertheless, they still belong to the same group of theropod dinosaurs that hatched Archaeopteryx 150 million years ago.
So, the next time you wonder what dinosaurs may have looked like when they walked the Earth, look no farther than the seagull eyeing your french fries at the beach, the crow scolding you from a fence, or the nearest pigeon pecking at crumbs on the sidewalk.
Live Science newsletter
Stay up to date on the latest science news by signing up for our Essentials newsletter.
Contact me with news and offers from other Future brandsReceive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsorsBy submitting your information you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy and are aged 16 or over.
Mindy Weisberger is a Live Science editor for the channels Animals and Planet Earth. She also reports on general science, covering climate change, paleontology, biology, and space. Mindy studied film at Columbia University; prior to Live Science she produced, wrote and directed media for the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. Her videos about dinosaurs, astrophysics, biodiversity and evolution appear in museums and science centers worldwide, earning awards such as the CINE Golden Eagle and the Communicator Award of Excellence. Her writing has also appeared in Scientific American, The Washington Post and How It Works Magazine.
Saying "Humans are mammals so birds are dinosaurs" shows a basic lack of understanding of taxonomy. Humans belong to the class Mammalia (all mammals). Dinosaurs belonged to the class Reptilia (all reptiles). Birds belong to a class of their own, Aves.
I am not disputing that birds evolved from dinosaurs, but that does not MAKE them dinosaurs - saying it does is essentially saying evolution never happened. Mammals evolved from reptiles too (though not dinosaurs, of course) - stating that birds are dinosaurs is like saying dogs are Dimetrodon. You could go one step further and say all vertebrates are fish, since we are all descended from them originally!
Also, to count as a bird it must have forelimbs longer than its hind limbs? By that definition ostriches, rheas, emus, kiwis, etc. are not birds!
It's absurd to call birds dinosaurs. This is a fad among paleontologists (and their science journalist hangers-on). This particular fad got its start a couple of decades ago with widespread adoption of the clade classification system in biology. Birds are descended from dinosaur species and so belong to the same clade as dinosaurs. But that doesn't make them "dinosaurs" any more than the fact that mammals are descended from ancient therapsids makes mammals therapsids....
Saying "Humans are mammals so birds are dinosaurs" shows a basic lack of understanding of taxonomy. Humans belong to the class Mammalia (all mammals). Dinosaurs belonged to the class Reptilia (all reptiles). Birds belong to a class of their own, Aves.
I am not disputing that birds evolved from dinosaurs, but that does not MAKE them dinosaurs - saying it does is essentially saying evolution never happened. Mammals evolved from reptiles too (though not dinosaurs, of course) - stating that birds are dinosaurs is like saying dogs are Dimetrodon. You could go one step further and say all vertebrates are fish, since we are all descended from them originally!
Also, to count as a bird it must have forelimbs longer than its hind limbs? By that definition ostriches, rheas, emus, kiwis, etc. are not birds!
I think this argument is making a mountain out of a proverbial molehill. Recent fossil finds from the Middle Jurassic of China demonstrate quite powerfully to many (including me) that birds, while closely related archosaurs, appear to have evloved from a separate lineage of non-dinosaurian archosaurs, not the one leading to theropods. Careful examination of the scansoriopterygids, small arboreal feathered proto-birds, show that they lack key theropodan functionally relevant anatomical characters (e.g., perforate acetabulum, supra-acetabular shelf, upright posture, etc.). The most logical and simplest explanation is that birds descend from a group of small archosaurs that found a niche in the trees, while the dinosaurs adopted a fully terrestrial life history and their adaptations for a cursorial life history reflect that. Again, it's only a matter of WHERE the branch point off the archosaur tree is, and tryng to "shoe-horn" basal birds into the theropoda ignores obvious and critical differences between the 2 groups. Just my informed opinion.
Part of the issue here is taxonomic terminology. In terms of a valid phylogenetic assessment, there is no such thing as a "reptile"--it is a useful but evolutionarily meaningless gradistic classification when you are referring to a cold-blooded scaly amniote that lacks either fur or feathers. Birds are archosaurs. The question is where on the archosaurian tree they actually belong...
When you roll them up according to cladistics, of course birds *are* dinosaurs. However, when you look at their anatomy and physiology in detail, birds are most definitely...BIRDS. The bony modifications of the tail and wings along with the loss of teeth are obvious significant diffences. However THE major difference between birds and theropod dinosaurs - that nobody ever seems to mention in all these discussions of birds and dinosaurs - is the arrangement of the pubic bones: theropods had joined pubic bones that pointed away from the hip region, while birds have bones that do not join and instead are parallel to each other as well as parallel to the sacral vertebrae. This difference is MAJOR: the joined pubic bones of the theropods (including Archeopteryx) restricted the size of their eggs while the parallel pubic bones of birds allow for an egg which is much larger per body mass. That's why - for as huge as dinosaurs got - the biggest vertebrate egg known is from the Elephant Bird/"Aepyornis". That's also why it's impossible to genetically alter a chicken into a dinosaur: while turning on a "finger" or "tooth" gene may seem simple (it's not - but that's a different discussion), to alter a chicken's reproductive system so that it even remotely resembles a theropod's is the equivalent of undoing some 90+ million years of evolution (the estimated origin of the earliest Neornithines).
Modern birds can trace their origins to theropods, a branch of mostly meat-eaters on the dinosaur family tree.
I have heard this before as well. This type of analysis of bone structures etc has now been overtaken the last five years with genetics. In fact few people now believe that life evolved as Darwin and his followers believed. Since it was discovered about five years ago that mechanisms in the genes prevent mutations from occurring, there is now no known mechanisms by which Darwin's idea of a tree of life could have developed whereby everything evolved from a simpler life form. All human female DNA has now also been traced back to a single individual. In the same way the only way of being able to confirm that birds are related to dinosaurs would be to trace markers in their DNA, tell tale unique indicators that confirm inheritance. This has never been done as far as I know. Not sure if you have any other information that could shed light on this.