PNSO "Sea Monsters" Exhibition in Shanghai

[acro-man]

PNSO's new exhibition featuring sea monster art works and sculptures.
It is a collaborative work by Zhao Chuang & Yang Yang.
And rather than museums, it is held in a shopping mall.

Earlier this year, PNSO's exhibition featuring Chinese dinosaurs brought several purchasable models along with it.
This time we believe new models are very possible to be released.

Click to see the reviews by 3 visitors to the exhibition:
http://tieba.baidu.com/p/4650665220
by 還是會微笑

http://tieba.baidu.com/p/4649028139
by ledcl1

http://tieba.baidu.com/p/4649841133
by dinolover

[ceratopsian]

I wish that British shopping malls hosted things like this exhibition!

[Flaffy]

I hope PNSO will be smart and release smaller and more durable figures for sale.

[Silvanusaurus]

Oh wow, if some of those 'sea monster' models are mass produced I may not be able to resist picking one up, they look stunning.

[Lanthanotus]

Woah, these models look great, ...... Japanese really like their mosasaurs tongue flicking, eh? Did this species had a hyoid bone or apparatus, I mean, a 12 m plus "lizard" would probably have some difficulties flicking a tongue without such...

[Halichoeres]

Woah, these models look great, ...... Japanese really like their mosasaurs tongue flicking, eh? Did this species had a hyoid bone or apparatus, I mean, a 12 m plus "lizard" would probably have some difficulties flicking a tongue without such...

You seem like you'd be a good person to ask about this. Mosasaurs are nested within a clade whose other members all have forked tongues that they flick out for chemosensation, correct? But it seems that if you're swimming around in an ocean, you can just open your mouth a bit and the water flowing in will carry all that chemical information and more, rendering a protruding tongue at best extraneous and at worst a hydrodynamic hindrance. What do you think?

edit
Also, yes please to seeing these sculpts made into figurines!

[Lanthanotus]

Woah, these models look great, ...... Japanese really like their mosasaurs tongue flicking, eh? Did this species had a hyoid bone or apparatus, I mean, a 12 m plus "lizard" would probably have some difficulties flicking a tongue without such...

You seem like you'd be a good person to ask about this. Mosasaurs are nested within a clade whose other members all have forked tongues that they flick out for chemosensation, correct? But it seems that if you're swimming around in an ocean, you can just open your mouth a bit and the water flowing in will carry all that chemical information and more, rendering a protruding tongue at best extraneous and at worst a hydrodynamic hindrance. What do you think?

An interesting question indeed but I am not sure if can answer it sufficiently...

... at least some animals that flick their tongue on dry land and also do when submerged, as the (semi) aquatic monitor lizards and snakes, but also sea snakes flick their tongue more or less constantly, but usually not for a great extent (maybe because of the hydrodynamic hinderance you mentioned). However, they did not loose or alter this sensorial behaviour during their evolution, so it probably has its positives against other methods even when submerged.

A general problem for the method to open the mouth and let water flow in would be to get rid of this water again. While fish can just discard this water via their gill openings, a lung breathing animal would need to spout the water out the same way it came in, resulting into a small, but directly opposite force against the forward movement. In addition this spouted water would disturb any incoming and odor carrying water.

[Halichoeres]

Woah, these models look great, ...... Japanese really like their mosasaurs tongue flicking, eh? Did this species had a hyoid bone or apparatus, I mean, a 12 m plus "lizard" would probably have some difficulties flicking a tongue without such...

You seem like you'd be a good person to ask about this. Mosasaurs are nested within a clade whose other members all have forked tongues that they flick out for chemosensation, correct? But it seems that if you're swimming around in an ocean, you can just open your mouth a bit and the water flowing in will carry all that chemical information and more, rendering a protruding tongue at best extraneous and at worst a hydrodynamic hindrance. What do you think?

An interesting question indeed but I am not sure if can answer it sufficiently...

... at least some animals that flick their tongue on dry land and also do when submerged, as the (semi) aquatic monitor lizards and snakes, but also sea snakes flick their tongue more or less constantly, but usually not for a great extent (maybe because of the hydrodynamic hinderance you mentioned). However, they did not loose or alter this sensorial behaviour during their evolution, so it probably has its positives against other methods even when submerged.

A general problem for the method to open the mouth and let water flow in would be to get rid of this water again. While fish can just discard this water via their gill openings, a lung breathing animal would need to spout the water out the same way it came in, resulting into a small, but directly opposite force against the forward movement. In addition this spouted water would disturb any incoming and odor carrying water.

That's a good point about discarding the water. I didn't know that sea snakes retained that behavior, either. Thanks for the information!

[DinoLord]

2016 has been a good year for dinosaur models from my ancestors' country. Looks like the Japanese monopoly on good dinosaur figures distributed in Asia is ending...

[Dinomike]

That Spinosaurus! ♡♡♡

[SBell]

Woah, these models look great, ...... Japanese really like their mosasaurs tongue flicking, eh? Did this species had a hyoid bone or apparatus, I mean, a 12 m plus "lizard" would probably have some difficulties flicking a tongue without such...

You seem like you'd be a good person to ask about this. Mosasaurs are nested within a clade whose other members all have forked tongues that they flick out for chemosensation, correct? But it seems that if you're swimming around in an ocean, you can just open your mouth a bit and the water flowing in will carry all that chemical information and more, rendering a protruding tongue at best extraneous and at worst a hydrodynamic hindrance. What do you think?

edit
Also, yes please to seeing these sculpts made into figurines!

See, the question I've always had--and never had answered--is that, unless something changed, snakes are nested in a clade with the venomous (or 'toxoferan) lizards.

So are mosasaurs.

So were mosasaurs likely venomous as well? I like to think that a 10 metre Tylosaurus just needed that little edge in the Cretaceous seas.

Is there any physical evidence? I never worked much with reptile physiology, so I don't know if there would be some sort of fossilizable markers.

[spinosaurus1]

theres little to no evidence to support venomous mosasurs other then phylogenetic bracketing, and even thats pretty shady due to the extreme specialized adaptions seen in mosasaurs. although it is worth noting that it is a possibility and to be honest, it wouldn't surprise me. you'll be surprise that a lot of people are not aware that green iguannas do retain a mild venom as a basal and vestigial trait of their ancestry. at most, all it causes is a little inflation in the bite wound however. theoretically,  venom could aid in digestion with mosasaurs

[Lanthanotus]

The whole taxonomy, evolution and relation of snakes, monitor lizards and other lizard species is under debate, so also is the taxon Toxicofera. As with all taxonomy it depends on which evidence you'd like to follow and which trait/attribute you'd like to rate higher (DNA, morphology, ...). After all, "venomous" as in Toxicofera does not mean as venomous as a rattle snake or a gila monster, in fact this clade associates a great bunch of squamate reptiles of which a fair lot are possibly not closely related.

Well, for mosasaurs I think a starting question would be, how could a 10 m plus animal profit from evolving venomous glands? Could it sneak up to a prey that is way to fast to be chased, but still could manage to nip it? Or could it use venom to overthrow a prey that is way bigger and stronger than itself? In my opinion, a venomous bite would make no sense on a species with the supposed lifestyle (and size and morphology).

On the other hand mosasaurs could for sure retained such a trait from their ancestors, as a form of atavism, but I deem it highly unlikely that such organs could be fossilized in any form. Most venoms themselves are not very stable when in contact with water/air/etc. and the glands themselves are generally delicate structures that leave no trace on the bones where they are located. Just the specialized teeth with their channels or trenches fossilize well, however, in varanoid lizards - which are regarded venomous - the teeth lack any of this features.

Last but not least the Paleontology Online Course about Marine Reptiles by the University of Alberta (Coursera) did not mention any venmous traits for mosasaurs.

[Sim]

Woah, these models look great, ...... Japanese really like their mosasaurs tongue flicking, eh? Did this species had a hyoid bone or apparatus, I mean, a 12 m plus "lizard" would probably have some difficulties flicking a tongue without such...

This page has a photo of a Tylosaurus skull where part of its hyoid apparatus can be seen and says the hyoid apparatus is rarely preserved in mosasaurs: http://oceansofkansas.com/strnbrg22.html

[Halichoeres]

See, the question I've always had--and never had answered--is that, unless something changed, snakes are nested in a clade with the venomous (or 'toxoferan) lizards.

So are mosasaurs.

So were mosasaurs likely venomous as well? I like to think that a 10 metre Tylosaurus just needed that little edge in the Cretaceous seas.

Is there any physical evidence? I never worked much with reptile physiology, so I don't know if there would be some sort of fossilizable markers.

In addition to what Lanthanotus said, it seems to me that whereas it might be possible for some of the earlier, smaller mosasaurs to have had use for venom, an animal like Tylosaurus wouldn't have. Small prey for Tylosaurus shouldn't require venom to subdue, and anything large enough to require venom might require such a large quantity that the cost of its synthesis might not be worth it. The ocean today is crowded with some of the most venomous animals alive, of course, but none of them is an apex predator. Granted, our present oceanic apex predators don't have any phylogenetic inertia favoring venom, but still, useless, costly things aren't often maintained in new ecological contexts. I think of venom in mosasaurs as sort of analogous to eyes in cavefish--any mutation that saves you the energy of making them ought to be favored.

[BlueKrono]

I agree with Halichoeres - there are no apex marine predators today that are venomous. Venomous marine animals tend to be highly so and lack other means of subduing food, such as sea snakes, small jellyfish, small octopuses and cone snails. One look at the powerful jaws of a mosasaur should show you that venom had no reason to be in the equation.

[stargatedalek]

All this being said you guys are only talking about the apex mosasaurs, there were many others, presumably the majority of the group, that weren't apex predators (and some lived in the shadow of far large animals). I think it's safe to say that if a mosasaur was in a niche where venom could have been helpful, than odds are it had the genetic predisposition to develop it.

Another point is scorpionfish, they hunt prey much smaller than themselves and yet are highly venomous, venom plays as crucial if not more crucial a role in defense as in hunting. "Small" mosasaurs had to contend with sharks, pliosaurs, large bony fish, and their own larger relatives.

All of these look great, it seems to me the only one that might end up being a new figure in disguise is the Mosasaurus. It's paintwork, base, and (seemingly) articulated jaw are very similar to the Basilosaurus.

[Silvanusaurus]

Just noticed looking through these images; the Spinosaurus appears to me to have an articulated jaw aswell. Could that suggest that it may too be mass produced?