ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Description
The holotype of Giganotosaurus , Mucpv Ch1. Originally described by Coria and Salgado in 1995. It's colosal size, comparable to Tyrannosaurus Rex, captivated a massive amount of attention. It was the first theropod ever to rival the size of Tyrannosaurus, and also the first super giant theropod discovered in the southern hemispher
Only another specimen is known, a fragmentary dentary catalogued as Mucpv 95.
Giganotosaurus is today classified as a Gondwanan Carcharodontosaurid, and as such is included in the subfamily Carcharodontosaurinae with Carcharodontosaurus, Tyrannotitan, and Mapusaurus. Tyrannotitan, Giganotosaurus and Mapusarusus also conform the tribe Giganotosaurini, with Tyrannotitan being the most basal member of the tribe. Giganotosaurus lived in what today is Argentina, between 100 and 97 million years ago (Cenomanian period, late cretaceous)
12/23/2016: Changed the posture, to allow better visibility and solve some aesthetic concerns. Revised the size of the metatarsals, and the skull length.
01/ 23/ 2017: Corrected and augmented the size of the ilium.
-Lengthened the scapula and restored the coracoid correctly.
-Shortened the skull.
-Shortened the pubis.
-Corrected the length values.
MK3 changes 22/06/2018:
-Redrew the whole skull after discovering an error in the scalebar of the original publication.
-Redrew the dorsal series.
-Redrew the dorsal ribs.
-Redid the arms after Tyrannotitan and Acrocanthosaurus.
-Redrew the ischion.
-Rearragned and redrew most of the tail based on Acrocanthosaurus.
-Redid the feet after Acrocanthosaurus and Tyrannotitan.
-Changed the stance.
-Updated rigorous skeletal.
MK4 changes: 23/12/2021:
Huge update. The first of a series of updates regarding the Carcharodontosaurids. Hopefully not other than the mass might change in the future.
-Updated and improved the skull, using data from the latest Kem-Kem beds monograph that helped a lot articulating and studying Carcharodontosaurine crania. (More on that with future updates).
Redrew the cervical centra and ribs, corrected the dorsal vertebrae proportions (now the centra is shorter in hight, but they have higher neural arches, over double the centrum height as described by Cuesta (2018).
-Changed the vertebral formula from 9 cervicals /14 dorsals to 10 cervicals and 13 dorsals, like Concavenator's description and Harris 1998 suggest, contra Stoval 1950 and Canale et al 2014. The original mounted skeleton also shows 10 cericals with 10 cervical ribs.
-Redrew the femora and updated the pelvic girdle.
-Rearranged the tail (I updated the whole Carcharodontosaurid composite tail, changing slightly the assigned positions of the perserved Acrocanthosaurus's caudal centra, in a way coherent with Cuesta's thesis about Concavenator corcovatus and BHI reports) augmented the intervertebral cartilague between caudal centra, and redrew and re scaled the posteriormost end of the tail using Concavenator instead of Allosaurus. As a result the animal now is slightly longer (a bit over the 12.2 m length listed in Currie & Carpenter (2000) and Coria & Currie (2006).
-Removed the caudal pleurocoels since Giganotosaurus lacks them even if they were said to be observed in Acrocanthosaurus. All other Carcharodontosaurids seem to lack them (Coria 2003, Cuesta 2018).
-Updated the mass estimation with the higher densities proposed by Larramendi& Paul( Used the roughly median value of 0.97 SG). It also takes into account the slightly deeper torso, however a full new GDI will have to be performed to make sure it checks after the changes made.
1)Stromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen.
2)Paul C. Sereno, Didier B. Dutheil, M. Larochene, Hans C. E. Larsson, Gabrielle H. Lyon, Paul M. Magwene, Christian A. Sidor, David J. Varricchio, Jeffrey A. Wilson (1996): Predatory Dinosaurs from the Sahara and Late Cretaceous Faunal Differentiation. Science, New Series, Vol. 272, No. 5264 (May 17, 1996), pp. 986-991
3)F. E Novas, S.Valais, Pat Vickers-Rich, T.Rich (2005): A large Cretaceous theropod from Patagonia, Argentina, and the evolution of carcharodontosaurids.
4)Juan Ignacio Canale, Fernando Emilio Novas & Diego Pol , Historical Biology (2014): Osteology and phylogenetic relationships of Tyrannotitan chubutensis Novas, de Valais, Vickers-Rich and Rich, 2005 (Theropoda: Carcharodontosauridae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia, Argentina, Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology.
tromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen.
5)Rodolfo A.Coria, Leonardo Salgado (1995) A new giant carnivorous dinosaur from the Cretaceous of Patagonia. Nature, Vol 377 (September 21 1995)
6)Coria RA, Currie PJ. 2002. The braincase of Giganotosaurus carolinii (Dinosauria: Theropoda) from the Upper Cretaceous of Argentina. J Vert Paleontol. 22(4):802 – 811.
7)Coria RA, Currie PJ. 2006. A new carcharodontosaurid (Dinosauria, Theropoda) from the Upper Cretaceous of Argentina. Geodiversitas. 28(1):71 – 118.
8) J.W Stoval, W.Langston (1950): Acrocanthosaurus atokensis, a New Genus and Species of Lower Cretaceous Theropoda from Oklahoma. The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 43, No. 3 (May, 1950), pp. 696-728
Only another specimen is known, a fragmentary dentary catalogued as Mucpv 95.
Giganotosaurus is today classified as a Gondwanan Carcharodontosaurid, and as such is included in the subfamily Carcharodontosaurinae with Carcharodontosaurus, Tyrannotitan, and Mapusaurus. Tyrannotitan, Giganotosaurus and Mapusarusus also conform the tribe Giganotosaurini, with Tyrannotitan being the most basal member of the tribe. Giganotosaurus lived in what today is Argentina, between 100 and 97 million years ago (Cenomanian period, late cretaceous)
12/23/2016: Changed the posture, to allow better visibility and solve some aesthetic concerns. Revised the size of the metatarsals, and the skull length.
01/ 23/ 2017: Corrected and augmented the size of the ilium.
-Lengthened the scapula and restored the coracoid correctly.
-Shortened the skull.
-Shortened the pubis.
-Corrected the length values.
MK3 changes 22/06/2018:
-Redrew the whole skull after discovering an error in the scalebar of the original publication.
-Redrew the dorsal series.
-Redrew the dorsal ribs.
-Redid the arms after Tyrannotitan and Acrocanthosaurus.
-Redrew the ischion.
-Rearragned and redrew most of the tail based on Acrocanthosaurus.
-Redid the feet after Acrocanthosaurus and Tyrannotitan.
-Changed the stance.
-Updated rigorous skeletal.
MK4 changes: 23/12/2021:
Huge update. The first of a series of updates regarding the Carcharodontosaurids. Hopefully not other than the mass might change in the future.
-Updated and improved the skull, using data from the latest Kem-Kem beds monograph that helped a lot articulating and studying Carcharodontosaurine crania. (More on that with future updates).
Redrew the cervical centra and ribs, corrected the dorsal vertebrae proportions (now the centra is shorter in hight, but they have higher neural arches, over double the centrum height as described by Cuesta (2018).
-Changed the vertebral formula from 9 cervicals /14 dorsals to 10 cervicals and 13 dorsals, like Concavenator's description and Harris 1998 suggest, contra Stoval 1950 and Canale et al 2014. The original mounted skeleton also shows 10 cericals with 10 cervical ribs.
-Redrew the femora and updated the pelvic girdle.
-Rearranged the tail (I updated the whole Carcharodontosaurid composite tail, changing slightly the assigned positions of the perserved Acrocanthosaurus's caudal centra, in a way coherent with Cuesta's thesis about Concavenator corcovatus and BHI reports) augmented the intervertebral cartilague between caudal centra, and redrew and re scaled the posteriormost end of the tail using Concavenator instead of Allosaurus. As a result the animal now is slightly longer (a bit over the 12.2 m length listed in Currie & Carpenter (2000) and Coria & Currie (2006).
-Removed the caudal pleurocoels since Giganotosaurus lacks them even if they were said to be observed in Acrocanthosaurus. All other Carcharodontosaurids seem to lack them (Coria 2003, Cuesta 2018).
-Updated the mass estimation with the higher densities proposed by Larramendi& Paul( Used the roughly median value of 0.97 SG). It also takes into account the slightly deeper torso, however a full new GDI will have to be performed to make sure it checks after the changes made.
1)Stromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen.
2)Paul C. Sereno, Didier B. Dutheil, M. Larochene, Hans C. E. Larsson, Gabrielle H. Lyon, Paul M. Magwene, Christian A. Sidor, David J. Varricchio, Jeffrey A. Wilson (1996): Predatory Dinosaurs from the Sahara and Late Cretaceous Faunal Differentiation. Science, New Series, Vol. 272, No. 5264 (May 17, 1996), pp. 986-991
3)F. E Novas, S.Valais, Pat Vickers-Rich, T.Rich (2005): A large Cretaceous theropod from Patagonia, Argentina, and the evolution of carcharodontosaurids.
4)Juan Ignacio Canale, Fernando Emilio Novas & Diego Pol , Historical Biology (2014): Osteology and phylogenetic relationships of Tyrannotitan chubutensis Novas, de Valais, Vickers-Rich and Rich, 2005 (Theropoda: Carcharodontosauridae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia, Argentina, Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology.
tromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen.
5)Rodolfo A.Coria, Leonardo Salgado (1995) A new giant carnivorous dinosaur from the Cretaceous of Patagonia. Nature, Vol 377 (September 21 1995)
6)Coria RA, Currie PJ. 2002. The braincase of Giganotosaurus carolinii (Dinosauria: Theropoda) from the Upper Cretaceous of Argentina. J Vert Paleontol. 22(4):802 – 811.
7)Coria RA, Currie PJ. 2006. A new carcharodontosaurid (Dinosauria, Theropoda) from the Upper Cretaceous of Argentina. Geodiversitas. 28(1):71 – 118.
8) J.W Stoval, W.Langston (1950): Acrocanthosaurus atokensis, a New Genus and Species of Lower Cretaceous Theropoda from Oklahoma. The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 43, No. 3 (May, 1950), pp. 696-728
9) J.D. Harris (1998) A reanalysis of Acrocanthosaurus atokensis, its phylogenetic status, and paleobiogeographic implications, based on a new specimen from Texas. New Mexico Museum of Natural History
10) Currie P. J. & Carpenter K. 2000. — A new specimen of Acrocanthosaurus atokensis (Theropoda, Dinosauria) from the Lower Cretaceous Antlers Formation (Lower Cretaceous, Aptian) of Oklahoma, USA. Geodiversitas 22 (2) : 207-246.
11) Eddy DR, Clarke JA (2011) New Information on the Cranial Anatomy of Acrocanthosaurus atokensis and Its Implications for the Phylogeny of Allosauroidea (Dinosauria: Theropoda). PLoS ONE 6(3): e17932. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0…
12)Cuesta Fidalgo, E. (2017). Concavenator corcovatusTheropoda, Dinosauria) from Las Hoyas fossil site (Early Cretaceous, Cuenca, Spain): taphonomic, phylogenetic and morphofunctional analyses.
13)Ibrahim, N., Sereno, P. C., Varricchio, D. J., Martill, D. M., Dutheil, D. B., Unwin, D. M., ... & Kaoukaya, A. (2020). Geology and paleontology of the upper cretaceous Kem Kem group of eastern Morocco. ZooKeys, 928, 1.
12)Cuesta Fidalgo, E. (2017). Concavenator corcovatusTheropoda, Dinosauria) from Las Hoyas fossil site (Early Cretaceous, Cuenca, Spain): taphonomic, phylogenetic and morphofunctional analyses.
13)Ibrahim, N., Sereno, P. C., Varricchio, D. J., Martill, D. M., Dutheil, D. B., Unwin, D. M., ... & Kaoukaya, A. (2020). Geology and paleontology of the upper cretaceous Kem Kem group of eastern Morocco. ZooKeys, 928, 1.
Image size
6301x3634px 4.21 MB
© 2016 - 2024 Franoys
Comments131
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Hey mate this is phenomenal work! I have one question- would you happen to know how much of the nasal bone of Giganotosaurus was found? It's referred to quite a bit in various papers but I haven't been able to track the original source to determine if it's substantial (in the sense of getting clear idea of anatomical structure) or just fragmentary (and conveying skin surface)?