The "beaks instead of teeth" might explain an advantage birds had, but why did all the other many and varied dinosaur species go extinct while lots of other things with teeth (mammals, fish, reptiles, amphibians) survive?
As the original paper ( https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)... ) says it suggests is a key trait, but its not the whole story?
The key is that birds are actually a special kind of dinosaur!
> After the asteroid struck Earth long ago, all birds with teeth went extinct. But many of the toothless ones kept living. Some scientists think not having teeth is what allowed these birds to survive.
My guess is that the article is oversimplified, but I have to ask why mammals with teeth survived?
The article says beaked birds were more fit for the new situation not because they had beaks per se, but because toothed birds were obligate carnivores and beaked birds evidently weren't.
What I've read up to now is that the mammals that survived the K-Pg extinction were largely small, ground-dwelling creatures. Those likely had a similar sort of omnivorous or herbivorous diet and the right kinds of teeth to match.
I guess being able to just fly away in case of imminent danger certainly helps survival.
It didn’t help the pterosaurs!
The jumped.
Teeth are a specialisation, but in such a disaster the generalists win, eat dead fish,then dead dino,then dead cannibals.
oh wait teeth would be ideal for that. so, island dwelling seed eaters, hiding away surplus and ready to hibernate for long times?