Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 22:25:22 GMT 5
Estemmnosuchus uralensis
Estemmenosuchus uralensis ("Crowned Crocodile of the Ural Mountains") is the second most primitive therapsid after the Biarmosuchia. The species was found with the biarmosuchians Eotitanosuchus olsoni and Biarmosuchus tener and with Estemmenosuchus mirabilis in channel flood deposits of the young Ural Mountains. The species are characterised by horns which project upward and outward on the side of the head. The mouth contained large canines with small molar teeth. The animal had a sprawling posture as indicated by analysis of its shoulder joints. It has been suggested that the animal had a fairly constant internal temperature. Its large size (~4-5 meters long) and compact build gave a small surface to volume rate and suggests it would not gain (or lose) temperature quickly. This phenomenon is called gigantothermy and was probably an important factor in temperature regulation in most therapsids. It has been also suggested that it was a carnivore, but the majority opinion as of now is that Estemmenosuchus was a herbivore.
--------------------------vs--------------------------
Common Eland - Taurotragus oryx
The common eland (Taurotragus oryx, meaning "Bull-goat pickaxe"), also known as the southern eland or eland antelope, is a savannah and plains antelope found in East and Southern Africa. It was first described by Peter Simon Pallas in 1766. An adult male is around ~1.6 meters tall at the shoulder (females are ~20 centimeters shorter) and an average mass of ~500–600 kilograms (~340–445 kilograms for females). It is the second largest antelope in the world, being slightly smaller on average than the giant eland.
|
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267 
|
Post by Derdadort on Aug 12, 2013 23:58:39 GMT 5
Are there any mass estimates for E.uralensis? At the first sight it seems to be more massive than the eland.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 0:17:14 GMT 5
Are there any mass estimates for E.uralensis? At the first sight it seems to be more massive than the eland. I don't know, to be honest. Maybe a size comparison can be made to give an idea. |
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267
|
Post by Derdadort on Aug 13, 2013 20:39:41 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 13, 2013 21:15:13 GMT 5
Bob Strauss, and his weight figures in particular, are incredibly unreliable. In fact, they are completely made up, leading to them being a mess in all the cases I know (eg. Deltadromeus significantly heavier than Carcharodontosaurus at lenght parity).
I even wrote a mail to him to adress those issues, but it doesn't appear he changed much of his site, it simply remains an absolutely non-professional source.
The Yahoo-groups-site doesn't look convincing either, altough I presume it's weight figure may really come close for a 4-5m Dinocephalian.
|
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267
|
Post by Derdadort on Aug 13, 2013 22:09:27 GMT 5
I agree that both sites are unprofessional and nothing I would referre to in a scientific work (especially because of the missing references...), but I also think calling Bob Strauss website "completely made up" goes a bit too far.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 22:58:32 GMT 5
~226.8 kilograms(~500 pounds) is way too low. The second one is actually much better, for an animal of such build, bulkiness, and size. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Aug 13, 2013 23:02:28 GMT 5
It's supposed to be the size of an adult Spanish bull. It rips this eland to shreds (unless its UPs eland then it's reversed)
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 14, 2013 0:50:08 GMT 5
I agree that both sites are unprofessional and nothing I would referre to in a scientific work (especially because of the missing references...), but I also think calling Bob Strauss website "completely made up" goes a bit too far. Not necessarily the whole site (tough much of it is), but his weight figures. Apart from that, dinosaurs.about.com is about the quality of the average children's dinosaur book. It loosely bases on the facts but omits most of the detailed information and instead amplyfies it with a lot of guesswork and exagerations (going in either direction). |
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Aug 14, 2013 1:35:19 GMT 5
I agree that both sites are unprofessional and nothing I would referre to in a scientific work (especially because of the missing references...), but I also think calling Bob Strauss website "completely made up" goes a bit too far. I have uploaded a YouTube video, where I have shown some weights where I am sure that they are made up. We also posted a link in the Megalodon vs Livyatan thread, where you can see a relatively bad article.. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 14, 2013 1:47:44 GMT 5
He doesn't appear unlikeable and he admitted his errors, but it's important to keep in mind whom that site is made for. Sure, I'd feel more comfortable if I knew only real quality information was provided to the masses, but that's likely asking for too much. At least we shouldn't rely on it, there are better sources around, and be it our own guesses on the weight.
I've got the strong impression a dinocephalian that size would be comparable to a rhino in weight, at least a ton, perhaps more. A visual comparison with an animal we know the weight of could help (when making some assumptions you can analyse them surprisingly well), but precise measurements would be needed to make sure the size is right.
I know accounts of relatively poorly known animals being estimated at completely wrong sizes and nobody noticing because...well...nobody knew them or had a good impression of their size, and no scientist bothered working on it.
PS: At least once younger relatives of mine come into their dinosaur phase I make them my apprentices (mad laughter and vader breath), so they won't be reliant on such information...
|
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267
|
Post by Derdadort on Aug 14, 2013 14:46:59 GMT 5
He doesn't appear unlikeable and he admitted his errors, but it's important to keep in mind whom that site is made for. Sure, I'd feel more comfortable if I knew only real quality information was provided to the masses, but that's likely asking for too much. At least we shouldn't rely on it, there are better sources around, and be it our own guesses on the weight. That's the point. Admittedly I shouldn't just post links from Google, but forget about it. I've got the strong impression a dinocephalian that size would be comparable to a rhino in weight, at least a ton, perhaps more. A visual comparison with an animal we know the weight of could help (when making some assumptions you can analyse them surprisingly well), but precise measurements would be needed to make sure the size is right. Yeah, something like that. Personally I would prefer more than a ton, but that's just a guess. For a comparison I would take some larger dinocephalians like Moshops or Tapinocephalus, even though there are no estemmenosuchids, but they should be very similar. What size do you mean? The size of E.uralensis? |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 14, 2013 14:51:51 GMT 5
^Yes, E. uralensis' exact size. Often (as with Inostrancevia, or Redondasaurus) one can be completely off with those estimates nobody knows where they really came from. The problem with Moschops and Tapinocephalus is we'd first need estimates for them too. Why not make a comparison with an eland we know the dimensions and weight of? PS: You can use links from Google, but they should be from Google Scholar  |
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Aug 14, 2013 19:01:35 GMT 5
He doesn't appear unlikeable and he admitted his errors I have read the mail and I did not try to belittle him with my last post. P.S. About google scholar, there can be bad results in google scholar as well, for example some of the books aren't very reliable. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 14, 2013 21:28:32 GMT 5
You're right, and I know you didn't.
You'll never, ever, find only 100% reliable stuff anywhere. Even in JVP you will find the "My theropod is bigger than yours..."-study. However most that you'll find is pretty good.
|
|
