Meet Ceratosuchops and Riparovenator

[suspsy]

Two new spinosaurs from jolly old England!

https://tetzoo.com/blog/2021/9/27/two-new-spinosaurid-dinosaurs-from-the-english-cretaceous?fbclid=IwAR2VAT4iM_D7GMFmFG4BU_IMlaHzCk2KDqnmxlDaQVMDV1WocV3VVzCXZug

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

You mean meet 2 future junior synonyms of Baryonyx

[Concavenator]

You mean meet 2 future junior synonyms of Baryonyx

That will probably be the case. 

[Duck]

The horned-crocodile-faced heck heron!

[suspsy]

You mean meet 2 future junior synonyms of Baryonyx

Naish and Hone undoubtedly took that possibility into consideration when they wrote their paper.

Both animals differ in numerous ways from Baryonyx walkeri, both possess diagnostic features of their own, and both group away from Baryonyx walkeri on the cladogram and, surprisingly, on the same lineage as the baryonychine Suchomimus tenerensis* from Niger (Barker et al. 2021).

As stated in the paper, we remain open to the possibility that both might represent growth stages of the same taxon: the problem is that we lack appropriately comprehensive information on the changes that spinosaurids underwent as they matured (Barker et al. 2021). Furthermore, the features that make both different from each other and from Baryonyx don't look like the sorts of changes that would occur during growth and exhibit a degree of variation that exceeds that seen within other theropod genera. Also leaning against the growth stage idea is that both specimens are similar in size, similar in size to the Baryonyx holotype as well, and exhibit similar degrees of skeletal fusion.

[ITdactyl]

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2291743-hell-heron-dinosaur-is-new-species-found-on-isle-of-wight/

Art by Anthony Hutchings:


Dr. David Hone's writeup:
https://archosaurmusings.wordpress.com/2021/09/29/ceratosuchops-and-riparovenator-two-new-british-baryonychines/

Link to the paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-97870-8

Link to supplementary materials detailing the differences between Baryonyx, Ceratosuchops and Riparovenator fossil material:
https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41598-021-97870-8/MediaObjects/41598_2021_97870_MOESM3_ESM.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1-LHWrNmoqWqMplkLjLeZSVWa2Njtz1apEzyCmEvRXZrXs6c9Tficd1-E

[DerbesSchuhwerk]

David Hone, Darren Naish and Chris Barker also did a podcast on their paper.

https://terriblelizards.libsyn.com/tls05e01-riparovenator-and-ceratosuchops

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

I am pleased these are unique animals, I'm guessing it's it's similar thng to tye Terminocavus and Najavoceratops relation to Pentaceratops, only I heard these new Baryonichinae are closer related to Suchomimus than Baryonyx. 
Good to know about the brain cases of these animals. Would be interested to know what their niche partitioning is.
Also great names, especially Ceratosuchops.

A new Chasmosaurine has been named today as well.

[Duck]

I am pleased these are unique animals, I'm guessing it's it's similar thng to tye Terminocavus and Najavoceratops relation to Pentaceratops, only I heard these new Baryonichinae are closer related to Suchomimus than Baryonyx. 
Good to know about the brain cases of these animals. Would be interested to know what their niche partitioning is.
Also great names, especially Ceratosuchops.

A new Chasmosaurine has been named today as well.

@Gothmog the Baryonyx Could you send me a link to a paper or article about that Chasmosaurine? I've not heard of that one yet.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

@Duck Sierraceratops turneri https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0195667121002822

[Duck]

@Gothmog the Baryonyx Interesting, the remains are a lot more complete than I thought they would be for the first fossil of a new genus.

[Shane]

You mean meet 2 future junior synonyms of Baryonyx

Naish and Hone undoubtedly took that possibility into consideration when they wrote their paper.

Both animals differ in numerous ways from Baryonyx walkeri, both possess diagnostic features of their own, and both group away from Baryonyx walkeri on the cladogram and, surprisingly, on the same lineage as the baryonychine Suchomimus tenerensis* from Niger (Barker et al. 2021).

As stated in the paper, we remain open to the possibility that both might represent growth stages of the same taxon: the problem is that we lack appropriately comprehensive information on the changes that spinosaurids underwent as they matured (Barker et al. 2021). Furthermore, the features that make both different from each other and from Baryonyx don't look like the sorts of changes that would occur during growth and exhibit a degree of variation that exceeds that seen within other theropod genera. Also leaning against the growth stage idea is that both specimens are similar in size, similar in size to the Baryonyx holotype as well, and exhibit similar degrees of skeletal fusion.

I'm no paleontologist, but it seems strange to me that one could cite numerous differences from such fragmentary remains. More than just the possibility of different growth stages, how would you be certain that the differences aren't just normal differentiation between individuals? With nothing more than just nose-tips and some bits around the eye, how can you really be certain about numerous differences?

But maybe that's why they're the paleontologist and I'm not.