Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
About Digital Art / Student FranoysMale/Spain Groups :iconpaleo-nazis: Paleo-Nazis
Treu zu Hoher Paläokunst
Recent Activity
Deviant for 2 Years
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 45 Deviations 1,183 Comments 67,216 Pageviews
×

Newest Deviations

Jurassic World Evolution Dinosaurs chart. by Franoys Jurassic World Evolution Dinosaurs chart. :iconfranoys:Franoys 175 102 Majungasaurus crenatissimus skeletals. by Franoys Majungasaurus crenatissimus skeletals. :iconfranoys:Franoys 105 24 Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (AMNH 5027) by Franoys Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (AMNH 5027) :iconfranoys:Franoys 115 44 Shaochilong maortuensis skeletal diagram. by Franoys Shaochilong maortuensis skeletal diagram. :iconfranoys:Franoys 76 28 Galeamopus pabsti SMA 0011 skeletal restoration. by Franoys Galeamopus pabsti SMA 0011 skeletal restoration. :iconfranoys:Franoys 87 21 Zhuchengtyrannus magnus skeletal diagram. by Franoys Zhuchengtyrannus magnus skeletal diagram. :iconfranoys:Franoys 84 33 Tarbosaurus bataar adults skeletal diagrams by Franoys Tarbosaurus bataar adults skeletal diagrams :iconfranoys:Franoys 102 22 Tarbosaurus bataar PIN 551-2 skeletal diagram. by Franoys Tarbosaurus bataar PIN 551-2 skeletal diagram. :iconfranoys:Franoys 97 18 Tarbosaurus bataar PIN 551-1 skull restoration. by Franoys Tarbosaurus bataar PIN 551-1 skull restoration. :iconfranoys:Franoys 103 39 Tyrannosaurus rex LACM 23845 skeletal diagram. by Franoys Tyrannosaurus rex LACM 23845 skeletal diagram. :iconfranoys:Franoys 141 22 Suchomimus tenerensis skeletal reconstruction. by Franoys Suchomimus tenerensis skeletal reconstruction. :iconfranoys:Franoys 139 42 Eocarcharia dinops diagram and scaling by Franoys Eocarcharia dinops diagram and scaling :iconfranoys:Franoys 92 13 Acrocanthosaurus atokensis (NCSM 14345) skeletal by Franoys Acrocanthosaurus atokensis (NCSM 14345) skeletal :iconfranoys:Franoys 198 56 Daspletosaurus torosus skeletal reconstruction. by Franoys Daspletosaurus torosus skeletal reconstruction. :iconfranoys:Franoys 162 67 Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (BHI 3033) by Franoys Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (BHI 3033) :iconfranoys:Franoys 183 76 Diplodocids and guests: by Franoys Diplodocids and guests: :iconfranoys:Franoys 100 77

Favourites

Supreme chamber by GetAwayTrike Supreme chamber :icongetawaytrike:GetAwayTrike 40 0 Brachiosaurus altithorax Chart by bricksmashtv Brachiosaurus altithorax Chart :iconbricksmashtv:bricksmashtv 37 16 Some non-avian dinosaur speed estimates by randomdinos Some non-avian dinosaur speed estimates :iconrandomdinos:randomdinos 80 42 Popular 'Giant' Theropods except with L.africana by RizkiusMaulanae Popular 'Giant' Theropods except with L.africana :iconrizkiusmaulanae:RizkiusMaulanae 59 17 Mapusaurus roseae bonebed by randomdinos Mapusaurus roseae bonebed :iconrandomdinos:randomdinos 62 10 Dilophosaurus. by Plioart Dilophosaurus. :iconplioart:Plioart 104 6 Tyrannosaurus and Triceratops by Lucas-Attwell Tyrannosaurus and Triceratops :iconlucas-attwell:Lucas-Attwell 195 45 Welcome to paleontology in the 2010s by Paleop Welcome to paleontology in the 2010s :iconpaleop:Paleop 61 32 ''Obese''Spinosaurus aegyptiacus by GreatDragon10 ''Obese''Spinosaurus aegyptiacus :icongreatdragon10:GreatDragon10 11 5 Tyrant-related pun by Batavotyrannus Tyrant-related pun :iconbatavotyrannus:Batavotyrannus 116 40 Terrible Claws by bricksmashtv Terrible Claws :iconbricksmashtv:bricksmashtv 67 24 One Neck to Rule Them All by randomdinos One Neck to Rule Them All :iconrandomdinos:randomdinos 90 38 Trachednatodontotitan annectentalis confusiensis by Paleop Trachednatodontotitan annectentalis confusiensis :iconpaleop:Paleop 97 20 Alcovasaurus longispinus by bricksmashtv Alcovasaurus longispinus :iconbricksmashtv:bricksmashtv 57 34 Some giant amphibians by paleosir Some giant amphibians :iconpaleosir:paleosir 157 50 An Offering To The Storm Gods by Batavotyrannus An Offering To The Storm Gods :iconbatavotyrannus:Batavotyrannus 134 42

Groups

Activity


Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (CM 9380)
The rigurous and fully restored skeletals of CM 9380, originally labeled as AMNH 973 and described by Osborn in 1905 and 1906. It was sold to CM during second world war, in fear that a japanese attack to New York could destroy all Tyrannosaurus specimens. It is the holotypic specimen , so it is the one the species was named after and Tyrannosaurus rex by definition, all of the other specimens are referred to the species. The mounted skeleton is based to a great degree in AMNH 5027, and carries several innacuracies from the time it was assambled that are very hard to correct. It is exhibited at the Carnegie museum of Natural history.

Including GDI with top view of FMNH PR 2981 scaled down to match the measurements reported for CM 9380 in Osborn 1915.

12/11/2018: Updated basically everything. Mass will probably need to be tweaked in the future.

References: 

H.F. Osborn (1905) TYRANNOSAURUS AND OTHER CRETACEOUS CARNIVOROUS DINOSAURS. Bulletin American Museum of Natural History. Vol XXl.

Christopher A. Brochu (2003): Osteology of Tyrannosaurus Rex: Insights from a nearly complete Skeleton and High-Resolution Computed Tomographic Analysis of the Skull. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 22:sup4, 1-138

Bates KT, Manning PL, Hodgetts D, Sellers WI (2009) Estimating Mass Properties of Dinosaurs Using Laser Imaging and 3D Computer Modelling. PLoS ONE4(2): e4532. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0….

J.R Hutchinson , K.T Bates , J.Molnar , V. Allen , P.J Makovicky. (2011) A Computational Analysis of Limb and Body Dimensions in Tyrannosaurus rex with Implications for Locomotion, Ontogeny, and Growth. PLoS ONE 6(10): e26037.
Loading...
Just as predicted six years ago by Andcrea Cau in his blog, and four years ago by user :iconpalaeozoologist: , "Amphicoelias fragilimus" is now redescribed as a new rebbachisaurid taxon;  Maraapunisaurus fragillimus by no less than the renowned doctor in paleontology Kenneth Carpenter, the same sciencist that catapulted the 60 meters diplodocid version to fame in 2006.

The publication suggests that the morphological characters of AMNH 5777 show shared apomorphies (defining characters) with rebbachisauridae, and that thus should be considered to be part of said group. Going by this, Maraapunisaurus fragillimus would be the largest and oldest member known of this peculiar family; perhaps meaning that the clade could have originated in what today is north america in the upper Jurassic, archieving practically wordlwide distribution by the early cretaceous (exceptuating Asia and Antartica).

Carpenter2018-amphicoelias-fragillimus-is-maraapun by FranoysFragillimusrebbachisaurid by Franoys


To the left (shown above; original drawing by Cope (1878) labeled in Willson et al (2011). To the right, it compared with dorsal vertebrae of other rebbachisaurids (Rebbachisaurus grasbae and Histriasaurus boscarollii).

Maraapunisaurus fragillimus is known from a single partial neural arch of massive dimensions if we go by Cope's measurements (total elevation of neural arch preserved, 1500 mm; elevation of posterior zygapophyses, 585; transverse expanseof posterior zygapophyses, 190; vertical diameter of base of diapophysis, 390) . The older reconstruction by Carpenter of the complete vertebra was 2.7 m tall, and newer one is 2.4 m, just twice the height as the preserved dorsal vertebra of Limaysaurus tessonei (120 cm). This leaves us with an animal 2x the linear dimensions of Limaysaurus tessonei and 8x (2^3) it's mass asuming perfect isometry, although the distance between the neural canal and the postzygapophysis seems larger in proportion in Maraapunisaurus fragillimus than in Limaysaurus, meaning that this discrepancy could have been smaller and not a direct translation on how the vertebral heights correlate.

Asuming perfect isometry in reconstructed vertebral height, the length of Maraapunisaurus fragillimus would be between 28.6 and 30 m (going by the skeletal restorations of Limaysaurus by :iconpalaeozoologist: and Gregory S.Paul) and the mass between 56 and 61.6 metric tonnes ( mass of Limaysaurus is 7 t going by Greg Paul's estimate in the priceton field guide 2016, 7.7 t going by :iconspinoinwonderland: GDI of a slightly edited :iconpalaeozoologist: Limaysaurus restoration using my matlab script (specific gravities applied are 0.7 for the head, 0.6 for the neck, 0.9 for the torso, 1 for the tail and limbs).

Link to Limaysaurus GDI estimate.
i.imgur.com/Gkn1P7o.png

Diagram from Carpenter 2018, showing relative dimensions between the newer and the older version of his reconstruction of AMNH 5777. Old estimate involved a 2.7m high vertebra using a D.carnegii like body plan:

Amnh 5777 by Franoys

There is a posibility that the neck was slightly more elongated than what isometry predicts, as the neck length in several neosauropods scale with torso dimensions to the power of 1.35 as described by Parish (2006). This augments the posible linear dimensions up to 32 m, with mass increasing only slightly, as sauropod necks are not very massive in proportion and heavily pneumatized.

What happens with Amphicoelias as a whole, and with Amphicoelias altus specifically?


This would make it so M.fragillimus stops being closely related to Amphicoelias altus, and thus Amphicoelias altus survives as their own genus and species. Cope came to this conclussion in 1878 since A.altus was the only diplodocoid he had named, and while they still have the general resemblance expected in two diplodocoid taxa, M.fragillimus shares at least 2 apomorphies with all of rebbachisauridae, and other characters in common with some of them. Amphicoelias altus has been recovered within apatosaurinae according to Tschopp & Mateus 2017 analysis, and it's femoral dimensions (177 cm maximum length as indicated by Osborn & mook 1921) are close to that of B.louisae specimen CM 3018: with femoral length 178.5 cm and an estimated mass 22.4 tonnes by GDI analysis by myself using Scott Hartman's skeletal with a dorsal view by Gregory S.Paul ;Greg Paul's own estimate for this taxon is 18 tonnes) ,so despite the genus surviving, it now doesn't hold any record holder in terms of size.

Is M.fragilimus the largest sauropod dinosaur (and thus, largest terrestrial vertebrate) ever found according to this information?


Mazzeta et al 2004 proposed a mass of 73 t for Argentinosaurus huinculensis based on a referred femoral shaft using regression equations; an estimate close to a GDI done in :iconrandomdinos: 's Argentinosaurus reconstruction (in which I collaborated), that yielded between 71.4 and 75.4 metric tonnes depending on varying the ribcage width between plausible values. Patagotitan mayorum as described in Carballido 2017 could be slightly smaller than Maraapunisaurus fragillimus, with a convex hull +21% model of 55 t, though the maximum model (reconstructed with much more soft tissue than that applied to Limaysaurus mass estimates) yielded up to 77 tonnes.

Here is a comparison of M.fragilimus and A.huinculensis: (Argentinosaurus huinculensis by :iconrandomdinos:, Maraapunisaurus fragillimus silhouette by :iconrandomdinos: using Limaysaurus tessonei skeletal by :iconpalaeozoologist: as a base)
Fragilimuscomp by Franoys

Here is the great SVPOW post on the matter:

svpow.com/2018/10/21/what-if-a…

And the original publication, discussing certain matters much further than I and SVPOW members did.

www.utahgeology.org/publicatio…

Congratulations are in order for fellow deviantartist :iconpalaeozoologist: that has actually been acknowledged in the publication. 

Here is the original post that he made in this very same site:

Was Amphicoelias a rebbachisaur?Update (10/22/18): Dr. Ken Carpenter has recently published a new paper supporting the view below (and cites me favorably), but I would also be remiss to not recongize Dr. Andrea Cau for having thought up this idea 2 years before me. Sadly, he was not cited in Carpenter's paper. He and I both were unaware of Cau's work.
The last time I wrote about the size of Amphicoelias, I still used Diplodocus as a comparison. One of the comments that was made was that my size estimate was likely wrong, as Amphicoelias was probably a basal diplodocoid, not a diplodocid proper. After a little investigation, it turned out that two phylogenetic analyses have been published that included Amphicoelias, and both found Amphicoelias to be a basal diplodocoid. Whitlock (2011) was


References:

Jurassic World Evolution Dinosaurs chart.
I have had this on my computer for a long time but somehow didn't find the time for the upload. Anyway, here are all the dinosaurs in the recently released Jurassic World Evolution game, a tycoon similator in which you attempt to create your own Jurassic world. One thing that every paleo enthusiast will notice is that the scaling and the vital statistics of the dinosaurs feel very rushed and not very throughly studied. Sometimes it feels like they are picked from the highest estimate posible listed in english wikipedia, and other times they feel outright made up.

For example the mass estimate for Tyrannosaurus is 18 t ; that estimate is obtained from a grotesquely obese model from Hutchinson et al 2011; and one can't seriously argue the maximum model is as likely as the minimum for a healthy predator. The Giganotosaurus and Spinosaurus masses (14 and 21 t) were obtained in a very questionable manner from an allometric regression that plots skull legnth vs body mass, without considering the proportions of the postcrania (the regression of Therrein and Hendersson 2007 had many values plotted wrong as well), and some animals like Pentaceratops, Camarasaurus, or Mamenchisaurus are ridiculously oversized when compared to the real specimens.

The proportions of many of the animals are not based on rigorous skeletal reconstructions; and have proportions very different from the real life counterparts. This is specially true of the dinosaurs that have appeared in the films. For example, the ceratopsians have their manuses and feet based on rhinoceros rather than in ceratopsian fossils and the sauropods have clawed hands, the ankylosaurus has rows of spikes in the lateral surfaces of the torso and too long legs, the Deinonychus a head restored wrong and not after it's closest relatives like Velociratpor; between a really long etcetera (like the theropods having totally pronated hands, and ornithomimids and dromaeosaurids lacking feathering).

Here I tried to base each animal on rigorous skeletal reconstructions made after the fossils; made by :iconscotthartman:, Greg Paul, :icongetawaytrike: :iconrandomdinos:, and myself. They are scaled to the measurements of the largest specimens I have been able to find across the published scientific literature. The masses were obtained from volumetric models from mass studies, and from GDIs done on the skeletals used as reference. A few of them were scaled from closely related animals with similar body plans.

Credits:
Skeletals of Velociraptor, Deinonychus, Gallimimus, Dilophosaurus, Ceratosaurus, Allosaurus, Styracosaurus, Maiasaura, Parasaurolophus, Edmontosaurus, Kentrosaurus, Huayangosaurus, Stegosaurus, Apatosaurus, Diplodocus, and Brachiosaurus by :iconscotthartman: .
Skeletals of Struthiomimus, Camarasaurus , Chasmosaurus, Pentaceratops, Triceratops, Corythosaurus, Tsintaosaurus, Pachycephalosaurus, Giantspinosaurus, Sauropelta, by Gregory S.Paul, from the Priceton Field Guide to Dinosaurs 2016.
Skeletals of Sinoceratops and Nodosaurus by  :icongetawaytrike: .
Skeletal of Mutaburrasaurus by :iconplastospleen:
Skeletal of Mamenchisaurus by :iconrandomdinos:
Polacanthus schematic by :iconalternateprehistory:
Chungkingosaurus schematic by :iconrizkiusmaulanae:
Crichtonpelta schematic by :iconlythronax-argestes:
The rest of the skeletals have been produced by myself or edited/scaled from the aforementioned ones.

The list of references is extremely huge for me to post, but you can ask about them in the comments.
Loading...
Majungasaurus crenatissimus skeletals.
**White shows preserved bones, gray infered.

Majungasaurus was a derived abelisaurid theropod that lived in Mahajanga Basin, northwestern Madagascar; 70 million years ago; in a semiarid enviroment that shared with other dinosaurs like Rapetosaurus and Masiakasaurus, between other taxa. The taxon was first diagnosed based on very partial remains of 6 individuals; and was named Megalosaurus crenattisimus by Deperet (1896);which didn't asign a type specimen and neither a type locality. It wasn't until almost 60 years later than Lavocat found a partial dentary (MNHM MAJ.1), and argued that it was the same taxon that the specimens described by Deperet, and also argued that it belonged to a different genus; which he named Majungasaurus . Since then it much more material has been recovered. MNHM MAJ.4 was originally thought to be a a pachycephalosaur and named Majungalothus (Sues & Taquet 1979). For some time it was argued that Majungasaurus was a nomen dubium because the dentary was undiagnostic and that Majungalothus should become the new generic name (Sampson et al 1998), but recent examination of the material concluded that the dentary was diagnostic and that Majungasaurus had priority (Sampson & Witmer, 2008), 

The skeleton is almost completely known if all individuals are considered, although no complete individual exists. The most complete skull, the most complete axial skeleton,and the most complete hindlimbs are each from a different specimen. The specimen with the best skull (FMNH PR 2100) overalps in a single caudal vertebra with the one with the most complete axial skeleton (UA 8768);

FMNH PR 2100 is an adult individual, and UA 8678 a subadult based on neurocentral sutures closure along the vertebral series. The caudal 5 of FMNH PR 2100 is a 12.9% longer than that of UA , although it is much taller (over a 50%). Here the proportionally taller vertebra considered a product of ontogenic development, and the greater centrum height is also a result of centra being weigh bearing elements and centrum diameter scaling faster than centrum length. Therefore they are cross scaled based solely on the length of the centrum.

The forelimb has been only partially known for a long time, but recently a complete forelimb was ilustrated and figured in Burch et al 2017 (a study about the miology of Majungasaurus forelimb). This is the first complete and articulated abelisaurid forelimb described in the literature, Aucasaurus manus was articulated but incomplete; and Carnotaurus' manus was both disarticulated and incomplete. Therefore many reconstructions made prior to this paper have incorrect phalangeal formulae.

There are no overlapping elements between UA 8678 and FMNH PR 2868 measured or reported in the descriptions of the animal, even if some overlap seems to exist. To cross scale the limbs with the axial skeleton, I used the scaling between theese specimens according to the results of the equations of Grillo&Delcourt 2016, which are surprisingly close to those obtained here . For example, FMNH PR 2100 is estimated at 5.58 m based on their equations, basically a perfect match for the estimate that I arrived to (5.59 m). Same goes for FMNH PR 2868 (5.40 m vs 5.39 m in Grillo & Delcourt 2016), and for UA 8678 (4.94 m vs 4.74 m in Grillo & Delcourt 2016)

FMNH PR 2100 doesn't represent the upper end of the size spectrum of the species even if it is a fully matured individual (as neurocentral sutures on the vertebrae and fussion patterns in the skull show), MHNM MAJ.4 is a partial skull roof about a 25% larger than that of FMNH PR 2100.
Loading...
Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (AMNH 5027)
Another Tyrannosaurus rex adult specimen, and the last one I'm going to make for a really long time (if not ever),since the rest are extremely poorly reported in the literature (so don't ask for more specimens, I beg you!)

AMNH 5027 is the archetypical Tyrannosaurus, as the looks of the animal (including the head the torso and the tail) have been based on this specimen for almost a century,until other specimens have been found and reconstructed, or described. Every media portrayal of the dinosaur, like King Kong, or Jurassic Park, are mainly based on this specimen. The malformation in the back has made it so most representations of the animal are humpy, something that seems to be a characteristic of this single specimen (it has been mostly corrected for this restoration, which also made the torso change in shape and size a bit).

The big uncertainly on the size of the tail has led to much debate and different interpretations, the original reconstruction of the animal as ilustrated in Osborn 1917 was 13.4 m long, with the missing caudals restored very big, and with 53 of them. In 1988, Paul proposed the tail length of the mount was inmensely exaggerated and reconstructed the missing elements after a juvenile Gorgosaurus, arriving to 37 caudals and re arranging the positions of the known caudals,which yielded a length of 10.7 m with a tail less than half of the body length, which is like the animal is portrayed on films like Jurassic park, giving it a very compact look. Now the finding of more complete specimens like FMNH PR 2081 and BHI 3033 allow us to know that it is imposible that Tyrannosaurus had only 37 caudals and allow us to arrange the few posterior caudals and restore the size of the missing portions correctly, arriving to something in the middle of what the original reconstruction and Paul suggested (almost 12 m in length).

The specimen is exhibited at the saurischian hall in the American Museum of Natural history. It was originally posed in a raised posture reaching 5.35 m tall to the head, dragging it's tail, and with three functional fingers on each hand. The 5-6 m height figures for Tyrannosaurus are based on the skeletons posed in this manner, as in a regular posture it is not posible for the animal to reach this height. Posterior fidings have confirmed the animal only had two functional fingers and not three, althouth it did have a vestigial metacarpal lll. The specimen as mounted still has the exaggerated tail, and is therefore still the longest carnivorous dinosaur mount that includes real remains in the world, even if it is not the largest specimen when one compares the preserved material with the corresponding of the others. The legs in the mounted skeleton are casts of the holotype specimen, and the feet and hands are completely sculpted and not directly based on any Tyrannosaurus rex specimen because they were still unknown when the mount was updated; in fact, the feet are scaled up Allosaurus feet.

References:

H.F. Osborn (1905) TYRANNOSAURUS AND OTHER CRETACEOUS CARNIVOROUS DINOSAURS. Bulletin American Museum of Natural History. Vol XXl.

H.F.Osborn (1912) Crania of Tyrannosaurus and Allosaurus. Memoirs American Museum of Natural History. N.S Vol l Part l.

H.F.Osborn (1917)Article XLIII. SKELETAL ADAPTATIONS OF ORNITHOLESTES, STRUTHIOMIMUS, TYRANNOSAURUS. Bulletin American Museum of Natural History. Vol. XXXV.

Paul GS. 1988b. Predatory dinosaurs of the world: a complete illustrated guide. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Christopher A. Brochu (2003): Osteology of Tyrannosaurus Rex: Insights from a nearly complete Skeleton and High-Resolution Computed Tomographic Analysis of the Skull, Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 22:sup4, 1-138

Tyrannosaurus rex the Tyrant king (2008) ISBN: 978-0-253-35087-9. (Larson, Carpenter, Paul, Horner, 2008).

Loading...

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconmarktaylor46:
MarkTaylor46 Featured By Owner Oct 7, 2018
Someone ripping you off

Reply
:icondinopithecus:
Dinopithecus Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2018
So uhh, what's shaking?

I had a brief conversation about Deinosuchus size and bite force with randomdinos here.

Tick Tock Mk.II

I ended up with a question there. Do you have an answer for it?

Thanks so much for your time!
Reply
:icondeinocheirusmaster:
deinocheirusmaster Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
 Can I use the Mapusaurus skeletal as a reference for my picture of a Skorpiovenater being harassed by some mapusaurs?
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Feb 18, 2018
Haha.

Guess my my time has come.
Reply
Add a Comment: