ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Promoted Deviations
Suggested Deviants
No preview available
Early Access
Boosted
Hey! I've been being core just on the Feb 25 so please subcribe to me! The more I raise the better I will be at on core or my drawings! Ty for you support!
$2/month
Suggested Collections
Featured in Groups
Description
Here is a further revision of Futalognkosaurus dukei, re-sized and re-proportioned to the measurements in Jorge Calvo's 2014 abstract (something that still has yet to lead to a full-length paper, but at least the measurements make sense). Here's what Futa would look like if Calvo's measurements of the individual bones turn out to be, in fact, correct. Since his scale bars and original size estimate were far in excess of the sizes indicated by the published measurements in both the original paper and the 2014 abstract, I don't know which is more reliable. However if the published measurements are to be trusted, the resulting tubby limb proportions do match up pretty well with Dreadnoughtus, so there's that.
It turns out another 3 meters would have to be chopped off this animal since the last version paleo-king.deviantart.com/art/… , if Calvo's measurements are correct. And a mass of just 40 tons would be more likely for the holotype than the higher estimates previously proposed. Now it's obvious - this animal was NOT breaking any sort of records, and was not significantly more massive than the largest known specimens of Giraffatitan. However, there are still several larger titanosaurs that may be the largest dinosaur known (i.e. the Chubut Monster, Puertasaurus, the referred Alamosaurus material form Mexico, and of course Argentinosaurus).
But none of those are known from egg fossils (or at least none were found in the same locale as referable egg fossils). So Futa is still unique among giants, if those are indeed its eggs (and not from some other sauropod). We don't see too many sites with both skeletons and eggs - probably because adult and even half-grown titanosaurs could survive the magnitude of flooding events that usually buried nests and eggs.
While I'm not impressed by how much smaller the real animal seems to be than Calvo's own colossal estimates of 34m back in 2007, there is a plus side: now with using Calvo's measurements, the proportions look a lot closer to Dreadnoughtus than before, especially the short lower limbs. Since Dreadnoughtus is known from more complete limbs and tail, the proportions make lognkosauria much better understood. This family of big, chubby, and generally very tall titanosaurs suddenly got a lot less bizarre and a lot more consistent in their looks. It may even be the case that some of the odder members of this group, like the squat-necked Puertasaurus, may have had necks more like Dreadnoughtus if not Futalognkosaurus (with Puertasaurus the neck neural spine is incomplete and reconstructed with plaster; the idea that it was short and squat as reconstructed by Novas, 2005, is speculative at best.)
Futalognkosaurus dukei (Calvo, et. al. 2007)
Taxonomy: Saurischia; Sauropodomorpha; Sauropoda; Macronaria; Titanosauria; Lognkosauria
Meaning of name: "Great Chief Lizard of Duke Energy Company"
Time: Late Cretaceous (Turonian-Coniacian epochs, ~ 90-87 million years ago)
Length: ~24m (79 ft)
according to Jorge Calvo's measurements of the type fossils, perhaps more depending on maturity
Probable Mass: ~ 40 tons, perhaps more depending on maturity (
).
It turns out another 3 meters would have to be chopped off this animal since the last version paleo-king.deviantart.com/art/… , if Calvo's measurements are correct. And a mass of just 40 tons would be more likely for the holotype than the higher estimates previously proposed. Now it's obvious - this animal was NOT breaking any sort of records, and was not significantly more massive than the largest known specimens of Giraffatitan. However, there are still several larger titanosaurs that may be the largest dinosaur known (i.e. the Chubut Monster, Puertasaurus, the referred Alamosaurus material form Mexico, and of course Argentinosaurus).
But none of those are known from egg fossils (or at least none were found in the same locale as referable egg fossils). So Futa is still unique among giants, if those are indeed its eggs (and not from some other sauropod). We don't see too many sites with both skeletons and eggs - probably because adult and even half-grown titanosaurs could survive the magnitude of flooding events that usually buried nests and eggs.
While I'm not impressed by how much smaller the real animal seems to be than Calvo's own colossal estimates of 34m back in 2007, there is a plus side: now with using Calvo's measurements, the proportions look a lot closer to Dreadnoughtus than before, especially the short lower limbs. Since Dreadnoughtus is known from more complete limbs and tail, the proportions make lognkosauria much better understood. This family of big, chubby, and generally very tall titanosaurs suddenly got a lot less bizarre and a lot more consistent in their looks. It may even be the case that some of the odder members of this group, like the squat-necked Puertasaurus, may have had necks more like Dreadnoughtus if not Futalognkosaurus (with Puertasaurus the neck neural spine is incomplete and reconstructed with plaster; the idea that it was short and squat as reconstructed by Novas, 2005, is speculative at best.)
Futalognkosaurus dukei (Calvo, et. al. 2007)
Taxonomy: Saurischia; Sauropodomorpha; Sauropoda; Macronaria; Titanosauria; Lognkosauria
Meaning of name: "Great Chief Lizard of Duke Energy Company"
Time: Late Cretaceous (Turonian-Coniacian epochs, ~ 90-87 million years ago)
Length: ~24m (79 ft)

Probable Mass: ~ 40 tons, perhaps more depending on maturity (



Image size
9288x6720px 10.04 MB
© 2017 - 2025 Paleo-King
Comments17
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Just curious, where did you get this ribcage width estimate?
Some people have been casting their doubts on uberwide titanosaurs based on some narrower-bodied mounts. I'm still agreeing with you on the ribcage thing since mounts sort of have this bad history of being, well, wrong in many departments, but just asking for clarification and stuff.
Some people have been casting their doubts on uberwide titanosaurs based on some narrower-bodied mounts. I'm still agreeing with you on the ribcage thing since mounts sort of have this bad history of being, well, wrong in many departments, but just asking for clarification and stuff.