|
Post by Infinity Blade on Oct 1, 2014 2:19:02 GMT 5
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Oct 1, 2014 2:32:14 GMT 5
|
|
|
Post by spinosaurus1 on Oct 1, 2014 2:38:00 GMT 5
awesome find
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Oct 1, 2014 18:47:38 GMT 5
I would like to know how bug the killer of the 8-9 m specimen was… Awesome find!
|
|
blaze
Paleo-artist
Posts: 766
|
Post by blaze on Oct 1, 2014 20:28:12 GMT 5
Femur length of ~57-60cm, if it's build anything like Postosuchus is only 10-15% larger than the type specimen so around 5m long, their 8-9m estimates appears to come (based on the supplementary material) from a regression equation based on American alligators. edit: Link to the paper in Academia.eduMore on size, quote: Fasolasuchus PVL 3850 has a femur 700mm long according to Bonaparte (1981) not 750mm, they (Drumheller et al, 2014) even have 700mm in their supplementary material, Nesbitt (2011) mentions both the limb bones and the maxilla (PVL 3851) as the reason why he estimated Fasolasuchus at 8-10m, when I did my skull reconstruction I used Batrachotomus to get the relative sizes of PVL 3851 compared to PVL 3850, I reckon it was at least 20% bigger so maybe Nesbitt (2011) is estimating 8m for PVL 3850 and 10m for PVL 3851? who knows but I'll like to see how he arrived at them, following the proportions of Postosuchus PVL 3850 would be ~6m long and PVL 3851 would be ~7.4m long, with a femur approaching 90cm long. Sillosuchus, the specimen with the 47cm femur is the holotype, PVSJ 85, PVL 2267 is known from cercival vertebrae 250% bigger so we would expect PVL 2267 to have a femur approaching 120cm in length. So there's no reason to think GR 264 was anything bigger than 5m long (assuming a long-ish tail 54% of body length). It just took minutes to check this, oh well size was just a little side thing for the overall topic of this paper so I can't complain.
|
|
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Oct 4, 2014 6:44:57 GMT 5
Cool!
|
|