Fossil identification

[Funk]

I have a habit of searching for free images of fossils and casts to add to Wikipedia articles, as many of them have few or no images. I often find photos of such in places like Flickr, but many times the photographer does not identify them, so I have to do it myself. But once in a while, I come across some photos I have no idea what show. There used to be a thread for fossil identification on the Dinodata forum, but it seems to have closed.

So after reading the Dinotoy blog for some years, I decided to take a look at the forum, and there seem to be quite some knowledgeable people here, so I figured it would be a good idea to have such a thread here... So I'll start off with some interesting photos of dinosaur skeletons I don't know what are, but in some cases they may not even be named yet...

Stegosaur in China: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stegosauria_1.jpg

Small theropod in Italy: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Theropod_mount.jpg

Leaping Laelaps posed theropods in Japan: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Laika_ac_Dino_Kingdom_2012_%287882288828%29.jpg

Abelisaur in Brazil: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abelisaur_skeleton.jpg

"Iguanodon" from China: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iguanodon_skeleton.JPG

American "hypsilophodon": https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hypsilophodont.jpg

Small theropod in China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Feathered_theropod.jpg

More here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Unidentified_Dinosauria

There are dozens of other images of mammals, plesiosaurs, fish, etc, on Wikimedia Commons that have not been identified, have a look at the categories here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Unidentified_fossils_of_Vertebrata

[amargasaurus cazaui]

The picture under unidentified dinosauria named baby louie is just that.....An american collector purchased this block from a Chinese geologist, and as it was prepped, it was determined there were three or more eggs present in the matrix, as well as a newly hatched chick. The animal was tenatively identified as a segnosaur, therizinosaurus and a famous sculpture was made of the chick within its egg, with the mandatory claws for a theri. As the specimen was further prepped it was determined the dinosaur was in reality a massive form of Oviraptor....Gigantaraptor !!!The baby was named for Louie Psyios (sp) the national geographic photographer that first photgraphed the specimen and the model. So it is correctl named Baby Louie, and is a specimen of a freshly hatched massive oviraptorid.

The charting for the Howe Quarry, discovered and worked by B. Brown is likely the original location where Barosaurus was recovered. " Big Al " was located very close to the Howe quarry as well. The chart shows the original locations of the bone bed, when discovered.

[Funk]

Does it belong to Gigantoraptor itself, or is it of some other unknown giant form?

[DinoToyForum]

The abelisaurid skeleton is listed on Wikipedia as a "restored skeleton of Pycnonemosaurus": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abelisauridae
This may or may not be reliable, but it is a lead to follow up.

Dinosaurs aren't my forte but if you have any plesiosaurs in need if identification I could probably help

[Funk]

Oh yeah, that identification was made on one of the talk pages on rather questionable grounds, caption should be adjusted!

As for plesiosaurs, there's a bunch here (though I realise several are yet undescribed): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Unidentified_Plesiosauria

And even more ichthyosaurs, since I have a hard time telling them apart: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Unidentified_Ichthyosauria

[DinoToyForum]

Oh yes, as your rightly say, most of them are undescribed and/or indeterminate specimens so there isn't much to add, other than:


'Plesiosaurus dewalquii', referred to Elasmosauridae intet. by Godefroit (1995).


Possibly a referred specimen of Callawayasaurus

I'll may update this post later...

[Funk]

Interesting with the first one, seems weird it would be indeterminate, when genera based on much scrappier remains are still considered valid. But that backstory and context at least makes the photo more "valuable".

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Does it belong to Gigantoraptor itself, or is it of some other unknown giant form?

Baby Louie was found with three to four eggs which compare well to Gigantaraptor "supposed" eggs and Baby Louie, although an infant is suggestive of the adult species.There has surprisingly been no firm connection I am aware of made between the two that can be proven however likely it might seem.
That being said, the eggs found with baby louie were eighteen inches long and were from the largest Oviraptor so far known to have existed based on this measurement.Citipatti eggs measure between 7 and nine inches in length and oviraptor eggs run smaller in length....
   http://www.stonecompany.com/dinoeggs/study/detectives/page9.html
http://mcclungmuseum.utk.edu/exhibits/dinosaur-eggs/

http://www.wataugalakemagazine.com/grayfossilbabies.html

[Ikessauro]

The Abelisaur from Brazil is a generic reconstruction, not a specific genus. I'm from Brazil and I asked a paleontologist I know who has seen it up close and that's what he said.

[DinoToyForum]

Interesting with the first one, seems weird it would be indeterminate, when genera based on much scrappier remains are still considered valid. But that backstory and context at least makes the photo more "valuable".

Well, things have changed a lot since 1995, so a reanalysis of the specimen might find the material diagnostic after all.  The concept of Elasmosauridae has also changed, it is far more restrictive now, so this skeleton is almost certainly not an elasmosaurid.

[Funk]

Anyone know what this is?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

A unicorn?

[Patrx]

It looks like this cast in the Morrison Natural History Museum in Colorado.

It's identified in the museum itself as Ceratops, but that genus is regarded as dubious. Anyway, it's some kind of big chasmosaur skull.

[Funk]

Interesting, so it may actually be some unnamed animal?

Found this: http://thenaturalworld1.blogspot.dk/2013/11/no-i-did-not-mean-triceratops-i-meant.html

Nomen dubium pretty much means that the material is too fragmentary for it to be diagnostic, and can't really be used in the future to determine whether new specimens are the same as the original or not.  Whether or not the newly discovered Judith specimen currently on display at the Morrison Museum is, indeed, Ceratops is still up in the air, as the paper has not been published yet.  Almost all of my Ceratops knowledge is out on the table for all to see, so I am not going to speculate or attempt to draw conclusions about something that I don't really know enough about to have an informed opinion on.  Guess we will just have to wait and see!  In the meantime, come on by the Morrison Natural History Museum and the Best Western Denver Southwest to see Judith, and much more!

And through the Wikipedia site: http://www.judiththedinosaur.com/

So there seems to be some disagreement on whether it is new, or "just" Ceratops"...

[Funk]

Anyone know what this is? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dinosaur_fossil_%281%29.jpg

It was apparently labelled as Chirostenotes, but that seems uncertain in light of recent revisions.