[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Regarding Spinosaurus
Fam Jansma wrote-
> As far as I know of the remains known from Carcharodontosaurus are very
> fragmentary, but are caudal vertebrae known of it? And actually what
> elements are known in the different specimens really referable to
> Carcharodontosaurus? I've been trying so find more info, but all the
search
> turns up is the skull discovered by Sereno which is way to large. But
thanks
> for the info!
Yes, caudal vertebrae are known (and distinctive, with pleurocoels and broad
kidney-shaped centra). These are the currently reported specimens of
Carcharodontosaurus (excluding a lot of teeth). It also assumes
Sigilmassasaurus is synonymous (after Sereno et al., 1998), which could turn
out to be wrong.
Holotype- (destroyed, holotype of Megalosaurus saharicus) two teeth
Referred- (CMN 4189) maxillary fragment (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41629) posterior cervical vertebra (150 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41772) dorsal vertebra (162 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41774) cervical vertebra (67 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41775) caudal vertebra (94 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41776) dorsal vertebra (~150 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41790) cervical vertebra (~127 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41817) tooth (54x27x12 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41818) tooth (67x36x22 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41819) tooth (69x34x16 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41850) dorsal vertebra (152 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41851) dorsal vertebra (157 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41853) caudal vertebra (110 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41854) caudal vertebra (110 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41855) caudal vertebra (59 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41856) cervical vertebra (146 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41857, holotype of Sigilmassasaurus brevicollis) cervical vertebra (121
mm)
(CMN 41858) dorsal vertebra (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41859) maxillary fragment
(CMN 41862) distal caudal vertebra (58 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41908) tooth (30x24x11 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 41910) tooth (23x19x6 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 50402) dorsal vertebra (Russell 1996)
(CMN 50407) dorsal vertebra (98 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 50428) dorsal vertebra (Russell 1996)
(CMN 50792) cervical vertebra (148 mm) (Russell 1996)
(CMN 50800) dorsal vertebra (88 mm) (Russell 1996)
(IPHG 1922 X45- holotype of Spinosaurus B) two teeth, cervical vertebra (117
mm), cervical vertebra (~140 mm), cervical vertebra (~135 mm), cervical
vertebra (140 mm), cervical vertebra (160 mm), caudal vertebra (96 mm),
caudal vertebra (88 mm), caudal vertebra (82 mm), caudal vertebra (89 mm),
caudal vertebra (86 mm), caudal vertebra, caudal vertebra (83 mm), femur
(700 mm), tibiae (595, 600 mm) (Stromer 1934, Russell 1996)
(IPHG 1922 X46) maxilla lacking nasal process, teeth, nasal, parietal,
cervical vertebrae, caudal vertebrae, manual ungual, ilium, pubis (>800 mm),
femur (1.26 m), fibula (880 mm) (Stromer 1931, Rauhut 1995)
(SGM-Din 1) (12.79 m) skull lacking premaxilla (~1.6 m) (Sereno, Dutheil,
Iarochene, Larsson, Lyon, Magwene, Sidor, Varricchio and Wilson 1996)
teeth (Lavocat 1954)
teeth (47 mm), dorsal vertebra (86 mm), four caudal vertebrae (70, 67, 80,
59 mm) (Lapparent 1960)
teeth (Sadleir 1998)
> Spinosaurus, Ouranosaurus, Rebbachisaurus, Nigersaurus, Suchomimus,
> Rayosaurus, Amargasaurus Spinosaurus sp. (the huge skulled Spinosaurus) I
> rest my case... South America was at the time around the same place on the
> globe so it to had sailed-creatures and a comparable fauna.
People really overstate the size of some dinosaurs' vertebral neural spines.
Sure, Spinosaurus, Ouranosaurus and Amargasaurus had impressive humps/sails,
but the others aren't that great. Rayososaurus' wasn't much higher than
Diplodocus and probably shorter than Dicraeosaurus. Rebbachisaurus' is said
to be high for a sauropod, but has it ever been illustrated even?
Nigersaurus' dorsal vertebrae haven't been described or illustrated.
Suchomimus doesn't have any noticeable hump/sail, just as much as
Ceratosaurus or sinraptorids. There's been no details released on the
supposed completish Spinosaurus skull, so calling it a new species is
unwarrented.
Mickey Mortimer