|
|
Post by Grey on Nov 20, 2014 22:54:59 GMT 5
That's no official reconstruction, and seems quite inaccurate. There is no reasonably complete Mapusaurus individual, let alone one exactly the same size as MUCPv-ch1, because the remains are disarticulated. The myth that it was more slender may have come from the big fibula that's longer but more gracile than Giganotosaurus', but that's obviously not compelling. Yes, that one. The ghost outline is an extrapolation for the specimen in question. It's probably inaccurate as it's quite old but are you sure it is not in the original Mapusaurus description ? Why it is not compelling ? This is quite large bone if anything. The point is "is that mentionned in the original description". About your reconstruction, we have the same problem than with some of the larger T. rex specimens known by nothing from the skull, quid of the individual proportions. I may have read that carcharodontosaurids have less variable body proportions than T. rex but not sure if that's true at all. But from what we have and by sheer deduction we can say that Mapusaurus specimen represents at least the largest carcharodontosaurid individual we know of, right ? |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 21, 2014 1:41:47 GMT 5
That's no official reconstruction, and seems quite inaccurate. There is no reasonably complete Mapusaurus individual, let alone one exactly the same size as MUCPv-ch1, because the remains are disarticulated. The myth that it was more slender may have come from the big fibula that's longer but more gracile than Giganotosaurus', but that's obviously not compelling. Yes, that one. The ghost outline is an extrapolation for the specimen in question. It's probably inaccurate as it's quite old but are you sure it is not in the original Mapusaurus description ? Why it is not compelling ? This is quite large bone if anything. The point is "is that mentionned in the original description". About your reconstruction, we have the same problem than with some of the larger T. rex specimens known by nothing from the skull, quid of the individual proportions. I may have read that carcharodontosaurids have less variable body proportions than T. rex but not sure if that's true at all. But from what we have and by sheer deduction we can say that Mapusaurus specimen represents at least the largest carcharodontosaurid individual we know of, right ? Look for yourself, there is no skeletal in the description. I forgot when and by whom that skeletal was done, how do you know about it's age? And what does it matter? There haven't been any discoveries that would have major impacts on it. It's rather the showcasing of extreme, exagerated proportions that there simply is no evidence for. All the bone measurements of these Mapusaurus specimen are from coria & currie 2006, where else should we take them from? The original descriptions. The point is that a gracile fibula is not compelling evidence of a gracile body. Not even a femur necessarily is, but it's at least consistently weight-bearing. But I don't recall the original description stating anything about how gracile or robust it was, that was made up by the media. "The largest that without a doubt we don't have any better estimate for" would be the least debatable phrasing imho. It's posssible to arrive at larger estimates for the neotype of Carcharodontosaurus, but those are debatable, while 10% larger than MUCPv-ch1 is the only figure there is for the pubic shaft in question (and that's a figure that is at least as reliable as comparing femur diameters among the two, which in turm is way better than comparing them among distantly related animals or using a generalized regression like Campione et al. 2014). About the body proportions: not sure how we could know that, the only carcharodontosaurs known from more than a single associated skeleton are Acrocanthosaurus and [/i] Tyrannosaurus (we have more individuals of Mapusaurus, but they are all so disarticulated there's currently no way of studying its proportions. All the others are at best known from a single partial skeleton and some isolated material, or less), and even these have tiny sample sizes. |
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 30, 2015 8:06:43 GMT 5
|
|
blaze
Paleo-artist 
Posts: 766
|
Post by blaze on May 30, 2015 9:22:02 GMT 5
Dunkleosteus at only 6m in a mainstream TV show? a Leedsichthys that is not a ripoff of the WWD one? am I dreaming? when is it airing? this next monday?
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on May 30, 2015 9:54:35 GMT 5
Yes indeed^^
Also referred to the Jurassic World release.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Jun 1, 2015 3:28:54 GMT 5
Awesomebro compilation :  |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 1, 2015 3:53:25 GMT 5
You guys think Rhizodus could really have been "orca-sized" (~4t) as they said on the program?
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jun 1, 2015 4:31:33 GMT 5
I haven't searched for very long, but I could find no evidence for or against it. So this is basically Schrödinger's rhizodont at the moment (popular oversimplification intended).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2015 16:08:06 GMT 5
A size comparison showing the possible size of the owner of the giant 2014 Argentinian titanosaur femur:  That Apatosaurus looks awfully puny, and it's already a large sauropod in itself! Apatosaurus louisae and Argentinian titanosaur(based on Futalognkosaurus) reconstructions from Scott Hartman. |
|
Deathadder
Junior Member
aspiring paleontologist. theropod enthusiast.
Posts: 240 
|
Post by Deathadder on Jun 4, 2015 16:36:13 GMT 5
What a beast! How much do you say it weighs?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2015 16:44:11 GMT 5
What a beast! How much do you say it weighs? Well I haven't really measured the result yet so any mass calculation will have to wait. But I think that it's likely anywhere between ~70-90 tonnes. |
|
Deathadder
Junior Member
aspiring paleontologist. theropod enthusiast.
Posts: 240
|
Post by Deathadder on Jun 4, 2015 16:52:11 GMT 5
Wow pretty heavy, it has such a thick neck and bulky body.
|
|
|
|
Post by spinodontosaurus on Jun 4, 2015 17:17:11 GMT 5
Broly is probably on the money with his 70 - 90 tonne guestimate, most of the largest known sauropods currently reside in that size range and one of them - Argentinosaurus - has a femur just as long as the one belonging to the unnamed giant in Broly's chart (which was reported as 240 cm long, compared to Argentinosaurus' 250 cm).
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jun 4, 2015 17:57:36 GMT 5
|
|
Creeper
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 39
|
Post by Creeper on Jun 4, 2015 18:57:19 GMT 5
Wow that kneck looks almost cartoonishly massive! A size comparison showing the possible size of the owner of the giant 2014 Argentinian titanosaur femur: That Apatosaurus looks awfully puny, and it's already a large sauropod in itself! Apatosaurus louisae and Argentinian titanosaur(based on Futalognkosaurus) reconstructions from Scott Hartman. |
|
