177 image(s) · 16 Actualités
Main evolutionary steps proposed for the morphofunctional and postural changes of the sauropod pedes. (A) Sauropod body mass through time (in metric tons) based on the sauropod body mass estimations of (41) (NB: data lacking for the second half of the Upper Cretaceous so illustrated here faded, in continuity with the data recorded in the Cretaceous). Schematic outlines of selected large specimens illustrated in the curve, including (from left to right) P. engelhardti, Vulcanodon karibaensis, R. brownei, G. brancai, Cedarosaurus weiskopfae, and Notocolossus gonzalezparejasi. (B) Projected evolutionary changes occurring in the sauropod pes associated with trend in body mass, including 1, skeletal and functional digitigrade pedal posture among basal non-sauropod sauropodomorphs with an incipient soft tissue pad (ISP) (see figs. S34 and S35); 2 and 3, expansion of a well-developed soft tissue pad beneath the elevated pedal bones (SP), resulting in a functionally plantigrade pes + retention of skeletal posture within a range of digitigrady; 4, retention of a soft tissue pad and yet undetermined trend toward more elevated bones; 5, conservation of the neomorphic soft tissue pad within all lineages. Selected examples of well-preserved non-sauropod sauropodomorph and sauropod pedal tracks illustrated above the trends, including (from left to right) Evazoum siriguii; Pseudotetrasauropus bipedoida, Eosauropus isp., Lavinipes cheminii; Kalosauropus pollex, Liujianpus shunan, Polyonyx gomesi; Parabrontopodus mcintoshi; Brontopodus birdi; Titanopodus mendozensis; and unnamed Asian sauropod track. Source of adapted drawing and notes are listed in table S9 and data S2.
Main evolutionary steps proposed for the morphofunctional and postural changes of the sauropod pedes. (A) Sauropod body mass through time (in metric tons) based on the sauropod body mass estimations of (41) (NB: data lacking for the second half of the Upper Cretaceous so illustrated here faded, in continuity with the data recorded in the Cretaceous). Schematic outlines of selected large specimens illustrated in the curve, including (from left to right) P. engelhardti, Vulcanodon karibaensis, R. brownei, G. brancai, Cedarosaurus weiskopfae, and Notocolossus gonzalezparejasi. (B) Projected evolutionary changes occurring in the sauropod pes associated with trend in body mass, including 1, skeletal and functional digitigrade pedal posture among basal non-sauropod sauropodomorphs with an incipient soft tissue pad (ISP) (see figs. S34 and S35); 2 and 3, expansion of a well-developed soft tissue pad beneath the elevated pedal bones (SP), resulting in a functionally plantigrade pes + retention of skeletal posture within a range of digitigrady; 4, retention of a soft tissue pad and yet undetermined trend toward more elevated bones; 5, conservation of the neomorphic soft tissue pad within all lineages. Selected examples of well-preserved non-sauropod sauropodomorph and sauropod pedal tracks illustrated above the trends, including (from left to right) Evazoum siriguii; Pseudotetrasauropus bipedoida, Eosauropus isp., Lavinipes cheminii; Kalosauropus pollex, Liujianpus shunan, Polyonyx gomesi; Parabrontopodus mcintoshi; Brontopodus birdi; Titanopodus mendozensis; and unnamed Asian sauropod track. Source of adapted drawing and notes are listed in table S9 and data S2.
Figure 28: Dorsoventral vertebral proportions on the anterior caudal vertebrae of selected ornithopods. (A) Neural arch height ‘a’ (=height from dorsal tip of the spinal process to top of the centrum, or centre of transverse process base) relative to vertebral height ‘b’ (=vertebral height without haemal arch). (B) Neural arch height ‘a’ relative to vertebral height ‘c’ (=vertebral height including haemal arch). Distances ‘a’ and ‘b’ shown in Figs. 9 and 33 and distance ‘c’ shown in Fig. 9. Data sources, see Table S1. Tabulated data, vertebral positions and specimen numbers, see Table S2.
Complete specimen, excellent mineralization. Presented with a base (exceptional, very good condition)). Skull length 18,9 inch ( 28,3 inch with vertebras)
Precious opal replacing Ichthyosaur backbone; display specimen, South Australian Museum. Original filename = P2211104.JPG
Heterodontosaurus tucki life restoration. Integument based on the related Tianyulong, proportions based on photos of specimen SAM-PK-K1332 and skeletal reconstruction by Gregory S. Paul (The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, 2010, p. 240).
Life restoration of the mosasaurine mosasaurid Eremiasaurus, with unknown portions and soft tissues based primarily on Prognathodon and supplemented with Mosasaurus where needed. References Leblanc, A.R.H.; Caldwell, M.W.; Bardet, N. (2012). "A new mosasaurine from the Maastrichtian (Upper Cretaceous) phosphates of Morocco and its implications for mosasaurine systematics". Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 32 (1): 82–104. Lindgren, J.; Kaddumi, H.; Polcyn, M. (2013). "Soft tissue preservation in a fossil marine lizard with a bilobed tail fin". Nature Communications 4: 2423. DOI:10.1038/ncomms3423. Konishi, T.; Brinkman, D.; Massare, J.A.; Caldwell, M.W. (2011). "New exceptional specimens of Prognathodon overtoni (Squamata, Mosasauridae) from the upper Campanian of Alberta, Canada, and the systematics and ecology of the genus". Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 31 (5): 1026–1046. Russell, D.A. (1967). "Systematics and morphology of American mosasaurs". Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History 23: 1–241.
Pleuroceras solare, Amaltheidae; Pyritic specimen; Diameter 3.2 cm; Upper Pliensbachian, Lower Jurassic; Little Switzerland, Bavaria, Germany. own collection, therefore not geocoded.
Pleuroceras solare, Amaltheidae; Pyritic specimen; Diameter 3.2 cm; Upper Pliensbachian, Lower Jurassic; Little Switzerland, Bavaria, Germany. own collection, therefore not geocoded.
A hypothetical life restoration of Ampelosaurus atacis • Ampelosaurus is known from hundreds of fossil specimens which show most of the dinosaur's osteological details, however, there are few articulated remains or reconstructions of the material so its overall proportions and life appearance are uncertain. • Ampelosaurus is known to have supported osteoderms, only four are currently known. The number of these osteoderms that an individual Ampelosaurus would have supported in life and their and position on the body is not currently known. It's thought that due to the rarity of titanosaur osteoderms that they would be quite sparse on the body. The position and layout of the osteoderms has been loosely based on this interpretation, which is based on the work of Vidal et al 2015. [1]
A hypothetical life restoration of Ampelosaurus atacis • Ampelosaurus is known from hundreds of fossil specimens which show most of the dinosaur's osteological details, however, there are few articulated remains or reconstructions of the material so its overall proportions and life appearance are uncertain. • Ampelosaurus is known to have supported osteoderms, only four are currently known. The number of these osteoderms that an individual Ampelosaurus would have supported in life and their and position on the body is not currently known. It's thought that due to the rarity of titanosaur osteoderms that they would be quite sparse on the body. The position and layout of the osteoderms has been loosely based on this interpretation, which is based on the work of Vidal et al 2015. [1]
A hypothetical life restoration of Ampelosaurus atacis • Ampelosaurus is known from hundreds of fossil specimens which show most of the dinosaur's osteological details, however, there are few articulated remains or reconstructions of the material so its overall proportions and life appearance are uncertain. • Ampelosaurus is known to have supported osteoderms, only four are currently known. The number of these osteoderms that an individual Ampelosaurus would have supported in life and their and position on the body is not currently known. It's thought that due to the rarity of titanosaur osteoderms that they would be quite sparse on the body. The position and layout of the osteoderms has been loosely based on this interpretation, which is based on the work of Vidal et al 2015. [1]
A hypothetical life restoration of Ampelosaurus atacis • Ampelosaurus is known from hundreds of fossil specimens which show most of the dinosaur's osteological details, however, there are few articulated remains or reconstructions of the material so its overall proportions and life appearance are uncertain. • Ampelosaurus is known to have supported osteoderms, only four are currently known. The number of these osteoderms that an individual Ampelosaurus would have supported in life and their and position on the body is not currently known. It's thought that due to the rarity of titanosaur osteoderms that they would be quite sparse on the body. The position and layout of the osteoderms has been loosely based on this interpretation, which is based on the work of Vidal et al 2015. [1]
A hypothetical life restoration of Ampelosaurus atacis • Ampelosaurus is known from hundreds of fossil specimens which show most of the dinosaur's osteological details, however, there are few articulated remains or reconstructions of the material so its overall proportions and life appearance are uncertain. • Ampelosaurus is known to have supported osteoderms, only four are currently known. The number of these osteoderms that an individual Ampelosaurus would have supported in life and their and position on the body is not currently known. It's thought that due to the rarity of titanosaur osteoderms that they would be quite sparse on the body. The position and layout of the osteoderms has been loosely based on this interpretation, which is based on the work of Vidal et al 2015. [1]
Lower Triassic fossil footprint (ichnite) of the ichnogenus Chirotherium, probably caused by an early archosaur, and first discovered 1833 in Hildburghausen (Thuringia, Germany). This specimen, however, ist from the Helsby Sandstone of the Storeton Quarry near Liverpool. Its species name is Chirotherium storetonense.[1]