You can support the Dinosaur Toy Forum by making dino-purchases through these links to Ebay and Amazon. Disclaimer: these and other links to Ebay.com and Amazon.com on the Dinosaur Toy Forum are often affiliate links, so when you make purchases through them we may make a commission.

avatar_Ajax88

Saurophaganax holotype material is a Sauropod!

Started by Ajax88, October 21, 2024, 02:48:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sim

Good to see this cleaned up well.  The Saurophaganax holotype is so poor it can basically be forgotten about.  I think it's for the best that the allosaurid species was named within Allosaurus.  I just hope it doesn't take attention away from the smaller but much more complete Allosaurus species.


Protopatch

Quote from: Turkeysaurus on December 22, 2024, 05:54:05 PMI can get used to Allosaurus anax quickly but a sauropod named Saurophaganax maximus will take some time.
In the light of this new study, Saurophaganax maximus might well become a nomen dubium : "Additionally, the
holotype neural arch cannot be confidently assigned to a theropod, making Saurophaganax maximus a nomen
dubium."

Protopatch

Quote from: SenSx on October 21, 2024, 05:58:21 PMNooooo

Does it mean I should throw my PNSO Saurophaganax into the bin ?
No, but it should be probably "rechristened"...

Sim

The PNSO "Saurophaganax" turned into the Allosaurus people wanted it to be.  Seems like a cause for celebration to me :)

thomasw100

Quote from: Sim on December 22, 2024, 07:25:48 PMThe PNSO "Saurophaganax" turned into the Allosaurus people wanted it to be.  Seems like a cause for celebration to me :)


The story highlights the risks involved in making figures or models of fragmentary species. But the off ramp of the large Allosaurus has always been around.

Sim

It's not the first time a figure has become outdated, and in this case it's fortunately only its species that has changed.  CollectA's first Deinocheirus, several Dacentrurus, many Utahraptor are all other cases where the anatomy changed a lot.  I generally think fragmentary species should be avoided when choosing what to make into a figure.

Faelrin

Naming aside it was pretty clearly sculpted off of A. fragilis and should probably be treated as such. All this means now is that the figure should be relabled for future production runs, but I doubt they'll do that.
Film Accurate Mattel JW and JP toys list (incl. extended canon species, etc):
http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=6702

Every Single Mainline Mattel Jurassic World Species A-Z; 2025 toys added!:
https://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=9974.0

Most produced Paleozoic genera (visual encyclopedia):
https://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=9144.0

Amazon ad:

GnastyGnorc

Quote from: Sim on December 22, 2024, 07:45:53 PMIt's not the first time a figure has become outdated, and in this case it's fortunately only its species that has changed.  CollectA's first Deinocheirus, several Dacentrurus, many Utahraptor are all other cases where the anatomy changed a lot.  I generally think fragmentary species should be avoided when choosing what to make into a figure.

While for the most part I agree. Paleo toys have a fun side effect of showing a history of how our understanding evolves.

Maybe a few years down the line there is a sauropod version of Saurophaganax. I think it's kind of cool we can potentially show off steps in that discovery through figure form.

And like others said it's still an excellent large allosaurus figure (which evidence strongly points to have existed).
So I am still very satisfied with my allosaurus anax and I say bring on Saurophaganax the sauropod!

crazy8wizard

I'd be willing to argue that it's okay to make fragmentary genera into a figure for two reasons:
-Just because it has less bones doesn't mean it isn't at least one person's favorite, so somebody would probably want a figure representation. I've met people whose favorite dinosaurs were Haplocanthosaurus, Metriacanthosaurus, and even Altispinax.
-Having any fossils at all means an animal was abundant in its ecosystem so to act like they're lesser because we know less about them seems very human focused.

Now repeatedly making figures of very scrappy genera can get annoying for sure, but sometimes the underdogs could use a figure or two instead of the eight hundredth Tyrannosaurus or Velociraptor.

GojiraGuy1954

Quote from: Faelrin on December 22, 2024, 09:13:03 PMNaming aside it was pretty clearly sculpted off of A. fragilis and should probably be treated as such. All this means now is that the figure should be relabled for future production runs, but I doubt they'll do that.
Never. They still produce 'Logan the Nanotyrannus'
Shrek 4 is an underrated masterpiece

Turkeysaurus

Quote from: GojiraGuy1954 on December 23, 2024, 02:18:30 AM
Quote from: Faelrin on December 22, 2024, 09:13:03 PMNaming aside it was pretty clearly sculpted off of A. fragilis and should probably be treated as such. All this means now is that the figure should be relabled for future production runs, but I doubt they'll do that.
Never. They still produce 'Logan the Nanotyrannus'

I think Nanotyrannus might come back soon as it's own genus and not a juvenile T.rex. I don't know if PNSO model would still hold up though.

suspsy

No big deal for me. I only own the CollectA toy and I'll just call it Allosaurus.
Untitled by suspsy3, on Flickr

Sim

#52
Quote from: crazy8wizard on December 23, 2024, 01:02:16 AM-Having any fossils at all means an animal was abundant in its ecosystem so to act like they're lesser because we know less about them seems very human focused.
There's nothing wrong with being human focused.  Our understanding of prehistoric animals is inevitably human focused, as is making figures of them.  And some prehistoric species consist of bones that could belong to more than one species e.g. Timurlengia.

Quote from: crazy8wizard on December 23, 2024, 01:02:16 AMNow repeatedly making figures of very scrappy genera can get annoying for sure, but sometimes the underdogs could use a figure or two instead of the eight hundredth Tyrannosaurus or Velociraptor.
Velociraptor has few accurate figures.  There's still a need for a small figure of it that's accurate and not articulated.


MLMjp

The only thing I have to say is that Allosaurus anax doesn't sound as good as Allosaurus maximus.


crazy8wizard

I thought the same at first until Matt Wedel mentioned that it has parallels to Tyrannosaurus rex without directly seeming derivative.

Newt

Also, Anax is a genus of dragonfly and dragonflies are cool. So there.

Also also, the word "anax" is pretty common in the Homeric poems, and is even found in documents of Linear B, the script used by the Mycenaean Greeks of the Bronze Age. So in its written form at least, it predates "rex" by a cool millennium. And as we all know, older = better.

Apparently in early Greek it was pronounced "wanax" and spelled with the initial letter digamma or wau, which looked like the letter F in the Roman alphabet but was pronounced like English W. Both sound and letter had disappeared from most Greek dialects by the Classical period.  Personally I think Allosaurus wanax has a nice ring to it, but it's too late now. Nobody ever consults me on these things!

Stegotyranno420

Quote from: Newt on December 28, 2024, 12:03:33 AMAlso, Anax is a genus of dragonfly and dragonflies are cool. So there.

Also also, the word "anax" is pretty common in the Homeric poems, and is even found in documents of Linear B, the script used by the Mycenaean Greeks of the Bronze Age. So in its written form at least, it predates "rex" by a cool millennium. And as we all know, older = better.

Apparently in early Greek it was pronounced "wanax" and spelled with the initial letter digamma or wau, which looked like the letter F in the Roman alphabet but was pronounced like English W. Both sound and letter had disappeared from most Greek dialects by the Classical period.  Personally I think Allosaurus wanax has a nice ring to it, but it's too late now. Nobody ever consults me on these things!
Going on bit of a tangent here, are you of the opinion (W)anax is of Pre-Greek substrate origin (like Beekes always says for every wierd greek term 😤) or has an Indo european etymological root?

Anyways, if I had to give Sauro new name, I will call it Allosaurus maximus. But seriously why did we have to remove the coolest theropod name 😭

Newt

I'm afraid I'm not enough of a linguist to have an opinion on the topic. It wouldn't surprise me if it were non-Greek at least, as the Mycenaeans certainly borrowed a lot of elements of their civilization from the Minoans, possibly by way of the Minoanized late Cycladic civilization, and very likely they borrowed from their less-well-known neighbors in Anatolia and the Balkans as well. It seems plausible that they would borrow government terms along with government concepts. 

Something something Pelasgians.

Back on topic: Does anyone know if there has been a specimen-level analysis of all the Allosaurus (in the broad sense) material from the Morrison? I know such studies have been done on Morrison diplodocids and camarasaurids and that these have at least provided a basis tobegin untangling the diversity and range of variation of these abundant (by dinosaur standards) animals. A similar study for allosaurs might prove helpful.

SidB


Turkeysaurus

Saurophaganax maximus, Epanterias amplexus, Edmarka rex...


Disclaimer: links to Ebay and Amazon are affiliate links, so the DinoToyForum may make a commission if you click them.


Amazon ad: