Which Brachiosaurus figures are actually Brachiosaurus?

[CityRaptor]

Since most are based on Giraffatitan, back when it was considered a species of Brachiosaurus, I wonder which ones are actually Brachiosaurus.

So far I know:
Carnegie Brachiosaurus ( 2012 Version )

But which else?

[Horridus]

Arguably, the newer Wild Safari also represents Brachiosaurus altithorax.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

  That one is a good question, since the seperation of the two species itself is still somewhat debateable. A few things that make it a very difficult question are the mount in Berlin itself is a composite, with pieces from several animals being used to create.The dinosaur itself might well have been made from various growth levels.
  The North American version has given such a paucity of remains that attempting to suggest two seperate animals from what is there for the North American versus what has been composited for the African piece, becomes a complicated tapestry.
  I believe it was Michael Taylor that did the study and stated that every comparable bone between the two dinosaurs showed differences however, and that was his basis for suggesting the seperate species for the two animals.
  My question would be is there a single version of Brachiosaurus Branchai mounted to compare with the Berlin Mount to give some concept of the differences it would visibly make in the animal? I had understood that many of the differences were somewhat simple to the internal structure or shape of verts.

[Horridus]

That one is a good question, since the seperation of the two species itself is still somewhat debateable.

It's the generic separation that's debatable, rather than the specific separation; I don't think anyone's ever argued that they're the same species [/pedantry].

Here's part of the abstract from Mike Taylor's paper:

"Detailed study of the bones of both species show that they are distinguished by at least 26 characters of the dorsal and caudal vertebrae, coracoids, humeri, ilia, and femora, with the dorsal vertebrae being particularly different between the two species. These animals must therefore be considered generically separate, and the genus name Giraffatitan Paul 1988 must be used for "Brachiosaurus" brancai, in the combination Giraffatitan brancai...The American Brachiosaurus is shown to be somewhat different from Giraffatitan in overall bodily proportions: it had a longer and deeper trunk and probably a longer and taller tail, carried a greater proportion of its mass on the forelimbs, and may have had somewhat sprawled forelimbs."

Full paper here (open access, wahey!): http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/pubs/taylor2009/Taylor2009-brachiosaurus-and-giraffatitan.pdf

Happily, skeletal master Scott Hartman has gifted us this: