Anything Psittacosaurus

[Ultimatedinoking]

Psittacosaurus' quills should bee limited to its tail and hips, not covered with them as if it were a mammal.

I am not so sure I accept that argument. The fossil that displays quills only preserved the tail quills, but we cannot say for sure if the entire animal may or may not have been covered. There may have been some preservational bias that favored the tail over the rest of the dinosaur. Another argument that lends some support to the debate is the fossil evidence for Tianyulong , which was indeed entirely covered. I would suggest if anything the current evidence implies the dinosaur had more than just tail quills.

But now people are covering triceratops with non existent quills, and it's possible that psittacosaurus lost most of its covering, only keeping a few tufts. Like humans.

The evidence for Triceratops is at best speculative and mostly based on the skin impressions of Triceratops Lane, which are suggetive of quills but provide no solid evidence at this point. So yes, it is a bit early to start giving all Triceratops quills....It is also quite possible that Psittacosaurus had less quills, or no quills at all for that matter. We have a single specimen that displays quills....which could be an analomy, or limited to the one genus. We just do not have enough evidence to say anything either way.

Did you mean species, psittacosaurus has a lot of them.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Species might be a better term........given the similarities between the quilled dinosaur and it's cousins. However given it is the only species so far found with quills, within the psittacosaurus family,  it could be a different genus altogether. There are so many similar dinosaurs with slight differences here...and so very many proposed psittacosaurus species already, many based on simple geographic differences....and then there are animals like Koreaceratops based on very minimal remains, and yet placed in seperate genus. It is a family tree that seems to change daily

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Saw something tonight that gave me a pause to consider....was wandering around Ebay and noticed the lab that I purchased my Psittacosaurus has apparently sold out of dinosaurs !!! They are offering psittacosaurus lifelike skeletal replicas, and they are asking the same prices as they did for the actual dinosaurs. I had always hoped to revisit the topic and acquire another smaller dinosaur, more well preserved, however it appears that I have run out of time.As the lab always acquired their specimens from other countries than China, it is suggestive the supply of these dinosaurs has begun to taper off, at least as far as legally obtainable specimens on the market. On the one hand I can be happy my piece will likely gain quickly in value now, on the other I am a bit sad that I missed obtaining a second one .

[Dinoguy2]

Species might be a better term........given the similarities between the quilled dinosaur and it's cousins. However given it is the only species so far found with quills, within the psittacosaurus family,

Only one found so far within the Psittacosaurus genus that preserves skin of any kind, right?

Just to nitpick/clarify the confusion of terminology... The quilled specimen is:

Species: P. lujiatunensis. One of many species within the...
Genus: Psittacosaurus. One of a couple genera within the...
Family: Psittacosauridae

I sincerely doubt the evidence for quills in Triceratops is valid. Quills grow from follicles, not the tips of pointy scales! In P. lujiatunensis, the quills clearly arise from in between scales on the tail, not from the scales themselves. It's entirely possible Triceratops was covered in quills, even a full, shaggy coat. The problem with follicular integument is that it tends to fall out quickly during rotting if not anchored deeply, especially when soaked in water for a while, like most skin impression bearing fossils were. I would not be surprised if future finds show P. lujiatunensis was totally covered in feathers/quills, and most just happened to fall out in the single known skin specimen, the ones on the tail re clearly very deeply rooted in thick skin. It would be expected that any quills rooted closer to the surface would fall off much faster. But those pointy scales in triceratops are not evidence for quills. Spines, maybe.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Species might be a better term........given the similarities between the quilled dinosaur and it's cousins. However given it is the only species so far found with quills, within the psittacosaurus family,

Only one found so far within the Psittacosaurus genus that preserves skin of any kind, right?

Just to nitpick/clarify the confusion of terminology... The quilled specimen is:

Species: P. lujiatunensis. One of many species within the...
Genus: Psittacosaurus. One of a couple genera within the...
Family: Psittacosauridae

I sincerely doubt the evidence for quills in Triceratops is valid. Quills grow from follicles, not the tips of pointy scales! In P. lujiatunensis, the quills clearly arise from in between scales on the tail, not from the scales themselves. It's entirely possible Triceratops was covered in quills, even a full, shaggy coat. The problem with follicular integument is that it tends to fall out quickly during rotting if not anchored deeply, especially when soaked in water for a while, like most skin impression bearing fossils were. I would not be surprised if future finds show P. lujiatunensis was totally covered in feathers/quills, and most just happened to fall out in the single known skin specimen, the ones on the tail re clearly very deeply rooted in thick skin. It would be expected that any quills rooted closer to the surface would fall off much faster. But those pointy scales in triceratops are not evidence for quills. Spines, maybe.

I agree basically with the points you made, other than a few minor points i wished to comment towards. Your indications are the quilled specimen is (sp)  P. lujiatunensis then? I have the paper originally done on the specimen however it was accepted some time ago, back in 2002. In the paper the author of record clearly states this about the specimen.
                 

Derived features supporting an assignment to the genus Psittacosaurus are the presence of a bulbous primary ridge on the dentary crown and the reduction of
the fourth and fifth manual digit (Sereno 1990). As in
Psittacosaurus sinensis there is a strongly laterally protruding
horn on the jugal. From Liaoning Province, three
species of the genus Psittacosaurus have been reported;
Psittacosaurus mongoliensis, P. meileyingensis, and an
as yet unnamed taxon (Sereno et al. 1988; Sereno 1990;
Xu and Wang 1998). Unfortunately, the skull is exposed
from its ventral side and since important diagnostic species-
level characters are thus not clearly visible, a reliable
assignment to any of the fairly similar psittacosaurid
species is difficult and depends on further preparation

Here is a link to the paper for your own perusal.

http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/tmp/papers/gmayr43.pdf


Has there been anything further released then for the specimen indicating exact species? I am watching this discussion in particular closely for somewhat obvious reasons. The most commonly known and populous species of Psittacosaurs appears to be  P.meileyingensis, which is what I have sitting in the case across from my desk smiling at me. His species of one of three candiates named as potential quilled species in the paper !!!! Obviously I would consider it possible all three species from this area might have been quilled however.
  I agree with your thoughts about "Lane" and the quills, and I myself do believe the quilled specimen of Psittacosaurus was likely quilled much more than the fossil indicates. I do wonder this however....
       If you observe modern birds and look carefully I am certain there are dozens of species that can be picked out easily, based on coloration, behavior or nesting behavior etc. If you were to view this same grouping of animals within the fossil record you would notice far less species due to the fact so many of the factors we use to determine species do not fossilize well. Many of the types we easily identify as seperate species given coloration or behavior, would be considered the same species as their skeletal remains would be close to , if not identical in many cases.
    Given this basic logic, what then of Psittacosaurus that we believe may have anywhere from a high guess at sixteen species or the low end at perhaps nine? Would not the given example I provided imply a much larger number of species than we currently accept?
   Is it possible there are more than one genus of animal represented here, within the family  Psittacosauridae? If each then had attending species within this might help explain the proliferation. Consider the large number of basal ceratopsians that are known. I have always wondered and perhaps you might wish to add some ideas but....
   What would happen if another specimen of psittacosaurus is exhumed, and this specimen is preserved with feathers? At this point in the debate it has not been proven that feathers and quills are analgous as I understand. The shafts on feathers are hollow, whereas those for quills are apparently solid. Supposing this specimen were found, would this indicate two seperate genus or still seperate species? I have always pondered that one....thoughts?

[Dinoguy2]

Has there been anything further released then for the specimen indicating exact species?

A major one, which I had in mind when saying this was lujiatunensis, is this: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0069265

Basically this paper finds that all the Lujiatun psittacosaurs including Hongshanosaurus and presumably including the one with skin impressions are referable to a single species, which would be lujiatunensis. Because the lujiatun bed is roughly coeval with the Jianshangou bed where the quilled specimen was found, and absent any further diagnostic info, it should probably be considered lujiatunensis until further evidence suggests otherwise.

P. meileyingensis is from the overlying Jiufotang formation, about 3 million years younger, so it is unlikely to be that species.

Given this basic logic, what then of Psittacosaurus that we believe may have anywhere from a high guess at sixteen species or the low end at perhaps nine? Would not the given example I provided imply a much larger number of species than we currently accept?

I agree, but this is nothing but idle speculation until further evidence is found. If we had a systematic study of color patterning, it may be possible to identify cryptic species. But I think only a sample size similar to that for Anchiornis would allow this, so for most species we can never know.

What would happen if another specimen of psittacosaurus is exhumed, and this specimen is preserved with feathers?

It would mean one of three things:

1. (more likely) the quill-like appearance of the first specimen was a taphonomic artifact. I say more likely because this happens all the time. Going only by the original holotype of Anchiornis, for example, it looked like it had a short pelt of downy feathers. A few of the hundreds of subsequent specimens showed a body covered entirely in thick, pennaceous contour feathers. Taphonomy not only lies, wee have hard evidence that it is biased toward underestimating degree and complexity of integument nearly 75% of the time.

2. Its a new, probably more basal species, and the mostly scaly, quill bearing species derived from ancestors with more and more complex feathers. This would be a pattern seen today in modern mammals that reduce hair covering and/or evolve more specialized hair (e.g. pangolin, porcupines). Whether its also a new genus would be a completely subjective opinion because genera aren't natural, they're bookkeeping labels.

3. The new specimen feathers are merely non-homologues that conversantly evolved, from quills, to look like feathers. This would be the most unlikely and require the strongest evidence to accept.

The discovery of branched feathers in "kulindadromeus" could be used to support either of these possibilities, too, depending on how good a cad can be made for them s feather homologues.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

    I scanned through the paper you provided and wanted to say thanks for sharing this. I had not seen that data and it is contains serious implications for many genus' of dinosaurs if the work is done. I admit I was not suprised that the data supported folding the single other genus aside from Psittacosaurus from the family, into a known species instead.
     I had not realized they were specifying the quilled specimen was from this bed or formation. My understanding was it was purchased at the Tuscon mineral show, by a German Museum and eventually repatriated to the Chinese authorities. The papers offered for the specimen were unsure of the original locality or formation for the dinosaur , as it had such a "sketchy" background. It had been suspected of being from the Xixian basin due to the preservational bias those beds tend towards with such stunning preservation and ability to retain features such as feathers and quills. It would be my question what has been presented to link the fossil with the stated formation used in the paper you provided? Perhaps there is another paper i have not seen as yet...which would be of great interest for me . At the time the original paper was provided it was accepted the quilled specimen was indeed one of the three species from the newer formation.
    Indeed my other questions were pure speculation although I am not sure I would call them idle. There have already been efforts to suggest an aquatic lifestyle for Psittacosaurus, albeit not that well founded. (ie the tail was designed for swimming, the feet were adaptions for swimming, the location of the eyes in the upper corner of the skull were designed for swimming lifestyle and finally that gizzard stones were actually ballast !!)  The original lifestyle given for the dinosaur at some point was even suggested as tree dwelling.  I believe it only a  matter of time before there are further species of this animal given its widespread temporal and geographic range. Aside from this, species of this animal that are known already range from three feet to a suspected length of over 7 feet for the largest. It was a remarkable dinosaur .
  I enjoyed the thorough and well stated answer for my question regarding the feathered specimen were it ever to be found. I had not considered all the possibilities of such a thing myself apparently well enough. I believe your first answer would be correct , more or less depending on formation and location of the suggested newer find that I was hypothesizing. Great answers and thanks for offering them
     

[amargasaurus cazaui]

And we now have coloring and patterning for Psittacosaurus apparently !!!! Have to love this information......http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20354675?report=abstract

Would love to get my little psitto-claws on the full version of this if anyone knows how or where.....Dinoguy or HD man perhaps?


Fascinating.

[Patrx]

And we now have coloring and patterning for Psittacosaurus apparently !!!! Have to love this information......http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20354675?report=abstract

Would love to get my little psitto-claws on the full version of this if anyone knows how or where.....Dinoguy or HD man perhaps?


Fascinating.

Whoah! Very interesting indeed.

[Balaur]

Wow! That's awesome! I disagree with the last part of the paper, suggesting that Sinosauropteryx may not have feathers.

[Gwangi]

Wow! That's awesome! I disagree with the last part of the paper, suggesting that Sinosauropteryx may not have feathers.

That's not really what it seems to be suggesting, rather that the feathers don't have to be feathers in order to preserve color. Or something like that.

Very cool news though, thank for sharing. This is the first I've heard of it. I expect some illustrations shortly attached to the news stories but also a newly released model showing us the proper coloration.

[Patrx]

Yeah, that's worded a bit oddly. It's not as though anyone still believes they might have been "collagen fibers", right?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Yeah, that's worded a bit oddly. It's not as though anyone still believes they might have been "collagen fibers", right?

One thing to make note of, the paper at the link I posted states a release date of 2010. How and where this paper has been hiding all this time I do not understand, I would have thought someone would have noticed, but if the date is accurate it would explain the collagen fibers comment well.
  @ Gwangi, yes, I was glad to find this and get it up here. I always watch out for my psittacosaurus friends, so I was delighted to find this. Makes them one of very few dinosaurs and especially non-theropods we have patterning, coloration and so forth for.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

For me a step forward from that news might be to begin lobbying Aaron to offer this psittacosaurus model or even offer it as a private sale one time, at a scale of 1/6 or twice as large as it is now . Then I could grab one and see if Martin could offer the correct paint and patterning to fit this view of the colors and scales for the dinosaur....

[Raptoress]

He's absolutely beautiful. A real treasure.

[Aaron Doyle]

For me a step forward from that news might be to begin lobbying Aaron to offer this psittacosaurus model or even offer it as a private sale one time, at a scale of 1/6 or twice as large as it is now . Then I could grab one and see if Martin could offer the correct paint and patterning to fit this view of the colors and scales for the dinosaur....

Sounds like a good idea.  Let me know if you had any specific requests other than just sizing it up.  I would love to read the entirety of this new paper to get a better idea of the actual scale patterns.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

For me a step forward from that news might be to begin lobbying Aaron to offer this psittacosaurus model or even offer it as a private sale one time, at a scale of 1/6 or twice as large as it is now . Then I could grab one and see if Martin could offer the correct paint and patterning to fit this view of the colors and scales for the dinosaur....

Sounds like a good idea.  Let me know if you had any specific requests other than just sizing it up.  I would love to read the entirety of this new paper to get a better idea of the actual scale patterns.

What I think I will do is post /repost some of your models to the other psittacosaurus thread and ask the growing group of members here, as well as those who have been here, how they feel the model holds up for accuracy and perhaps their ideas about poses and what not....it isnt like I dont have a few of them to share that are well painted now...right?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

A link to a paper demonstrating herding behavior in a group of Psittacosaurus, the most basal known herding proof from the ceratopsian family to date !!
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00709.x/full


Both the abstract and the full paper can be reviewed at this link....interesting paper too.

[Cammy]

I just came across this:
http://phys.org/news/2014-08-paleontologists-dinosaur-young-babysitter.html

[Ultimatedinoking]

No ones talking about the AOE psittacosaurus?