Spinosaurus new look!

[Concavenator]

 I could see a Carcharodontosaurus killing a Deltadromeus,but I wouldn't see a Carcharodontosaurus killing a Spinosaurus,or viceversa.

[amanda]

Why? Push come to shove, ya gotta eat. I think a Spino would be at a disadvantage should a Carcharodontosaurus be hungry enough to try. I am not pondering a "status quo: situation. I am wondering about an extreme dry spell, nothing else to eat situation. And, it may have been aquatic, but it does not seem suited to open water. Ungainly and an easy target there too.

[Balaur]

I was thinking more of shallow ocean waters, and then come ashore onto the beach. Safe from pliosaurs in the shallows, safe from land predators who would probably show no interest in each other, and it has food. I find that more plausible than the crocodile-squeeze scenario. I'm not sure a bank would hold so many huge predators. Also, assuming it is endothermic, unless it hibernated I don't see it surviving for long in a drought. Right now I think the most likely options are it migrated to the shallow ocean or it hibernated. Wouldn't you find evidence of hibernation by doing histiological analysis?

[Gwangi]

I could see a Carcharodontosaurus killing a Deltadromeus,but I wouldn't see a Carcharodontosaurus killing a Spinosaurus,or viceversa.

Why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu1by5-BpTA

And this is not predation but interaction that very well could have led to predation. The point is, predators do interact and prey on each other. Just because their specific niche was not the same does not mean they didn't live in the same overall ecosystem and cross paths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6xjNt-ZB60

And on the subject of drought. I agree with Stargate, Spinosaurus probably didn't live in habitats that would have left it dry and stranded. Coastal mangroves, deltas, shallow bays, inland seas and lakes. Cretaceous north Africa was a very different place.

[DinoLord]

The next saga in the Spinosaurus limb scaling controversy

[Megalosaurus]

So it seems spinosaurus was a crocodile with a sail in the back.
I'm sure we're going to be laughing at this reconstructions in the years to come when new material will be found.

[DC]

I just went to the National Geographic Spinosaur exhibit in DC.   Rather sparse display mostly large video screens with different presentations.  Some older Carcharnontosurus, Rugops and Deltadromeus displays were brought out.  The bare bones seemed to be a new fossil spinosaur was donated to the Milan museum by an unnamed Italian fossil dealer.  It was 40% of the skeleton and included limb material. Additional material was found when they tracked to where in Morocco it came from.
A reconstructed skeleton was mounted as if swimming and looked convincing.   The back legs are short giving it an archaic archosaur posture (Postosuchus), the sail is an irregular oblong.  It was suggested that the actual shape would vary by individual.   There is a prominent crest between the eyes.  The docent says Serano compared it to a duck using back legs to swim with tail.  It has the head of a croc with a long neck on the body of a duck.  The dull flat claws were noted and the webbed feet were suggested.   They presented it as possibly bipedal but a strong four footed animal.
Strohmers problem was mentioned, lots of meat eaters for the number of plant eaters.  Really big fish coelacanths, sawfish and lung fish to feed the spinosaurs.  Could not tell how much actual limb material there was in the new fossils.  Serano is doing a talk their next month.

[amanda]

So it seems spinosaurus was a crocodile with a sail in the back.
I'm sure we're going to be laughing at this reconstructions in the years to come when new material will be found.

Why? In other areas, folks here are all about current evidence, all about JUST the evidence. Yet here, everyone wants to buck the evidence and stick to what they think is more likely. I read the author's response, and am inclined to go with that for the time. So a silly duck-o-dile it is for now. It looks rather graceful in water though.....

[Carnosaur]

"I could see a Carcharodontosaurus killing a Deltadromeus,but I wouldn't see a Carcharodontosaurus killing a Spinosaurus,or viceversa."


I think it's entirely possible especially if Carcharodontosaurus hunted in groups as some scientists suggest.
that video with the lions attacking the crocodile is a perfect example.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Myself I would not be too quick to dismiss this revision of Spinosaurus, most people that study dinosaurs could look at the previous incarnation and how it was derived and find quite a few problems with the science and anatomy involved.Aside from that, Sereno himself has seldom been shown wrong in his discoveries, and is generally a rather solid paleontologist.

[Balaur]

Why? In other areas, folks here are all about current evidence, all about JUST the evidence. Yet here, everyone wants to buck the evidence and stick to what they think is more likely. I read the author's response, and am inclined to go with that for the time. So a silly duck-o-dile it is for now. It looks rather graceful in water though.....

I agree. I am with the original paper right now.

[HD-man]

In other areas, folks here are all about current evidence, all about JUST the evidence. Yet here, everyone wants to buck the evidence and stick to what they think is more likely. I read the author's response, and am inclined to go with that for the time. So a silly duck-o-dile it is for now. It looks rather graceful in water though.....

How do you figure that? As others here have pointed out, the proportions of the reconstruction don't match the measurements from the paper & the forelimbs are incompatible with quadrupedal walking. Last I checked, that IS the current evidence. As for the authors' response, IDT they really said anything ("I do think that parts of their response utilize an argument from authority in place of providing data. Of course with other papers in progress there may be limits to what can be shared without compromising their ability to publish it. While that is an understandable position to be in, I naturally find those parts to be unpersuasive, and in particular I remain unconvinced that they have properly scaled the hind limbs and pelvis (elsewhere Mark Witton has already anticipated part of why that is": http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/aquatic-spinosaurus-the-authors-responsd9182014 ).

[DinoLord]

I think a major point in the authors' response was differences in scaling methods they and Hartman used

[docronnie]

As my professor said, what maybe true today, may not be true tomorrow.

Will wait for this new Spinosaurus interpretation in figure.
At the moment, I have Happinet, Kabaya and Furuta versions. 😊

[amanda]

.

[HD-man]

Simply put I find the authors credible for now, and others to be too quick to refute without first hand access to the actual evidence yet. The authors have said there is much more detail and support forthcoming. I will await that, and more peer reviews before making a final personal decision. But I find no problem with this new image.

I get what you're saying & probably wouldn't have thought much of it if was just some random ppl saying that the new reconstruction looks off. The problem is that Hartman actually showed that said reconstruction probably IS off. The combination of that & what Hutchinson said about "the reliability of cobbling together different specimens to create a single picture of an animal" ( http://www.nature.com/news/swimming-dinosaur-found-in-morocco-1.15901 ) makes me doubtful of said reconstruction at best.

The issue of locomotion is the main sticking point, but if this animal truly stayed in water for all but laying of eggs, that is not a huge block for me. For...ME.

I'd say it's a pretty huge block, given that it would've been unable to move on land. I mean, if it couldn't walk quadrupedally, flop along like pinnipeds (See the 1st 4 comments: http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/theres-something-fishy-about-spinosaurus9112014 ), or belly slide like crocs (See the 1st 4 comments: http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/there-may-be-more-fishiness-in-spinosaurus9132014 ), what could it do?

I think it unlikely the authors made a measuring error that remained undetected throughout the process.

Scaling error, not measuring error.

[amanda]

.

[DinoToyForum]

Hartman stated in his opinion it is off. That does not mean it IS off. The authors state it is NOT off. That doesn't mean it isn't. I choose to allow the authors the benefit of the doubt for now. It has not been disproved outright. It is NOT a huge block if you decide to go with a nearly entirely aquatic animal. It is only if you persist on it being a land dwelling, occasionally aquatic beast that is becomes a huge problem.  I love the use of difinitives in this extremely undifinitive area. It WAS this, it WASN'T that. I could do this, but not that. The authors are "wrong", Hartmen "proved", measurements/scale "are".  This is all improper language for this animal. Could, might, may, perhaps are the BEST you can say.

This is coming off rude and aggressive. The all caps don't help. So this is a warning. 

[amanda]

.

[DinoToyForum]

Sure. It is not all caps, and not rude. I will now go back to never ever interacting with folks. Much like others, I find the atmosphere inhospitable. I am sorry I ever tried.

I'm telling you, as an outsider looking into this conversation, parts of that post are rude. It may not have been intentional, but in my opinion, that sort of post is exactly what causes the inhospitable atmosphere you are complaining about. It puts people on the defensive. I'm telling you because I'd rather give a warning in advance than let it get out of hand and be forced to ban another member. Stay and interact, but please refrain from aggressive accusatory tones and all caps. That's not what this forum is about.  Thanks for your understanding.