Gallimimus June 15, 2011

Filed under: Theropoda

With a short, light body and long back legs, Gallimimus was a fast-running dinosaur. It took very long strides and could outrun most predators. It looked like a large ostrich with its long neck and toothless beak. Its stiff tail helped it to balance when running.

The ornithomimid featured in the film Jurassic Park was Gallimimus. It was a fairly good representation, except that it is now thought that these animals were covered in feathers, which would make sense if they were to be as active as they were portrayed in the film. There are skeletons of juveniles that have allowed scientists to study the growth pattern of ornithomimids in general.

Factbox//Name: Gallimimus, meaning ‘chicken mimic’ Size: 6m long and 3m high Food: plants, eggs, insects and lizards  Lived: about 70 million years ago in the Cretaceous Period in Mongolia

Gallimimusis the largest known type of ornithomimid, but it has shorter arms in proportion to the other species. The hands, too, are quite small and the fingers are not very flexible. The head is quite long and graceful and, as in nearly all ornithomimids, the jaws have no teeth. The beak of the lower jaw is shovel-shaped, and the big eyes are situated on the sides of the head, so it did not have binocular vision.Like the other ostrich mimics and modern birds, Gallimimus had hollow bones. This device allowed for a reduction of weight in the body, without reducing the strength, and enabled the animal to move quickly. The main difference between the two known Gallimimus species is the shape of the fingers. G. mongoliensishad shorter hands and would not have grasped as well.Gallimimus had short arms with three claws on its hands. The claws were sharp, but Gallimimuscould not grasp things very well and did not eat meat because it could not tear it up.Gallimimus’claws came in very useful, however, because it used them to scrape away at the soil to dig up eggs for food. It ate mostly plants, but it also fed on small insects, which it grabbed in its beak, and even chased lizards.


Ornithischia Thyreophora Ankylosauria Ankylosauridae?
Subfamily: Polacanthinae?
Genus: Gargoyleosaurus
Species: G. parkpinorum

Fossil range: Late Jurassic

Posted Image

Gargoyleosaurus (meaning “gargoyle lizard”) is one of the earliest ankylosaurs known from reasonably complete fossil remains. Its skull measures 29 centimetres (11 in) in length, and its total body length is an estimated 3 to 4 metres (9.8 to 13 ft). It may have weighed as much as 1 tonne (2,200 lb). The holotype was discovered at the Bone Cabin Quarry West locality, in Albany County, Wyoming in exposures of the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian to Tithonian stages) Morrison Formation.

The type species, G. parkpinorum (originally G. parkpini) was described by Ken Carpenter et al. in 1998. A mounted skeletal reconstruction of Gargoyleosaurus parkpinorum can be seen at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. Gargoyleosaurus was present in stratigraphic zone 2 of the Morrison Formation.

Posted Image

The holotype specimen of Gargoyleosaurus parkpinorum was collected by Western Paleontology Labs in 1996 and is currently held in the collections of the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, Denver, Colorado. Besides the holotype, two other partial skeletons are known (although not yet described) The holotype consists of most of the skull and a partial postcranial skeleton. The specimen was originally described as Gargoyleosaurus parkpini by Carpenter, Miles and Cloward in 1998, then renamed G. parkpinorum by Carpenter et al. in 2001, in accordance with ICZN art. 31.1.2A.

Posted Image

Much of the skull and skeleton has been recovered, and the taxon displays cranial sculpturing, including pronounced deltoid quadratojugal and squamosal bosses. The taxon is further characterized by a narrow rostrum (in dorsal view), the presence of seven conical teeth in each premaxilla, an incomplete osseous nasal septum, a linerarly arranged nasal cavity, the absence of an osseus secondary palate, and, as regards osteoderms, two sets of co-ossified cervical plates and a number of elongate conical spines.

Vickaryous et al. (2004) place Gargoyleosaurus parkpinorum within the Family Ankylosauridae of the Ankylosauria and are in agreement with most previous phylogenetic hypotheses, which place the genus as the sister group to all other ankylosaurids (i.e., members of the Ankylosauridae). These studies however, only utilized the skull, whereas many of the distinctive features of the family Polacanthidae are in the postcranial skeleton.


This great photo of the holotype of Gargoyleosaurus parkpini, DMNH 27726, was taken by Jim Puckett in the Dinosaur Hall of “Prehistoric Journey” at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science.

dmnhanka.jpg (13974 bytes)  Reconstructed skeleton of the Jurassic ankylosaur (Gargoyleosaurus parkpini) in the Denver Museum of Science and Nature. Note scutes dermal covering the head and upper body.)

  • GarudimimusGarudimimus is een geslacht van theropode dinosauriërs, behorend tot de groep van de Maniraptoriformes, dat tijdens het late Krijt leefde in het gebied van het huidige Mongolië. De enige benoemde soort is Garudimimus brevipes


Garudimimus brevipes Barsbold, 1981
Garudimimidé du Cenomanien/Santonien (99.6-83.5 MA) de Mongolie (Ömnögov’); identifié par un squelette partiel (crâne, os des bras, vertèbres, pubis …).

Garudimimus, meaning “Garuda mimic”, is a genus of ornithomimosaur dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Period. It was found in sedimentary deposits in Bayshin Tsav, Mongolia.

Garudimimus was about 13 feet in length and was possibly an omnivore. It is believed that this dinosaur was not built for speed, unlike most ornithomimosaurs. It had short legs and heavy feet. The muscles of the legs were not as developed as in more derived ornithomimosaurs. Each foot had four toes, also unlike the typical three-toed relatives. The skull was rounded and the eyes would have been large. It was previously thought that this dinosaur had a horn at the top of the skull, however, recent studies show that the horn was a misplaced skull bone.

  • Gasparinisaura   Gasparinisaura is een geslacht van plantenetende dinosauriërs, behorend tot de groep van de Euornithopoda, dat tijdens het late Krijt leefde in het gebied van het huidige Zuid-Amerika. De enige benoemde soort is Gasparinisaura cincosaltensis.
  Gasparinisaura 2.jpg
  • Gastonia Gastonia  Gastonia is een uitgestorven geslacht van plantenetende ornithischische dinosauriërs dat tijdens het Vroeg-Krijt leefde in het gebied van het huidige Noord-Amerika.
This drawing shows the possible appearance of Gastonia, a dinosaur from the early Cretaceous Period (around 125 million years ago). Gastonia featured a sacral shield and large spikes on its shoulders. It was named by James Kirkland in 1998 after remains were found in Utah, USA.
A few skulls and skeletons from nearly complete to partial.
ANATOMICAL CHARACTERISTICS Head very small, heavily armored, no teeth on front of upper jaw. Arm and leg very short. Belly extremely broad. Large sidewaysprojecting shoulder spines, no lateral spines at hip, modest spines on side of tail.
AGE Early Cretaceous, Barremian.
HABITAT Short wet season, otherwise semiarid with floodplain prairies, open woodlands, and riverine forests




  • Gigantosaurus carolinii, bigger than the Mapusaurus , it was even larger than the Tyranosaurus Rex, with a skull 1.8m long.
  • Gigantoraptor

Gigantoraptor Erlianensis

Gigantoraptor Erlianensis

Journalists examine the replica of a fossilized skull, a small scale model and actual fossilized leg bones from the Gigantoraptor erlianensis, whose fossilized bones were uncovered recently in northern China at an unveiling held in Beijing, China, Wednesday, June 13, 2007. The remains of a giant, birdlike dinosaur at least 35 times the weight of similar species have been found in China, a surprising discovery that indicates a more complicated evolutionary process for birds than originally thought, scientists said Wednesday.(AP Photo/Ng Han Guan)
  • Gigantspinosaurus  Gigantspinosaurus is een geslacht van plantenetende ornithischische dinosauriërs, behorend tot de groep van de Stegosauria, dat tijdens het Opper-Jura leefde in het gebied van het huidige China




the Tendaguru giant.
Berlin: MFN Dinosaur Hall,
Giraffatitan brancai was a sauropod, one of a group of four-legged, plant-eating dinosaurs with long necks and tails, and tiny brains.Originally considered to be a species of Brachiosaurus, Giraffatitan appears to deserve its own genus, as no derived characters have been found to link it to Brachiosaurus proper. The skull has an unusually tall rounded crest containing the nostrils, which is why it was selected for this poster. This species is unusual in possessing “withers” over the shoulders.
It and the other Brachiosaurids are members of the Brachiosauridae family of dinosaurs.They differ from other sauropods, as all had a long giraffe-like build, with long forelimbs and a raised neck, which it probably used to graze in the tops of trees. It has been suggested that all were basal titanosauriforms thrown together without respect for true characteristics, such as long necks and long arms.
For many decades, Brachiosaurus was the largest known dinosaur. It has since been exceeded in sheer mass by a number of giant titanosaurids like the Argentinosaurus and it was finally surpassed in height by another brachiosaurid, the Sauroposeidon. It was, however, still the largest dinosaur known from a relatively complete skeleton and the largest on display anywhere in the world.
The first Brachiosaurus was discovered in 1900 by Elmer S. Riggs, in the Grand River Canyon of western Colorado, in the United States. He named the new species and genera in 1903 after its long front limbs. Brachiosaurus means “arm lizard”, from the Greek brachion (“arm”) and sauros (“lizard”). This first discovered species has named Brachiosaurus altithorax and it was made famous by the movie “Jurassic Park”. It is very tall (40 feet!) and very heavy – more than 12 elephants! Unlike most of the other long-necked dinosaurs,
Starting in 1909, German paleontologist Werner Janensch found many new specimens in Tanzania, Africa, including some nearly complete skeletons. These were the Brachiosaurus brancai, which is shown on the poster. Its fossilized remains are on display at the Humboldt Museum in Berlin, Germany. The remains are primarily from one gigantic animal, except for a few tail bones (caudal vertebrae) which belong to another animal of the same size and species While the Diplodocus carnegiei mounted at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, United States actually exceeds it in length, the Berlin animal is taller, and far more massive. Almost a century after its discovery, it still remains the largest mounted dinosaur in the world. It has also been one of the luckiest, because it escape destruction when most of Berlin was reduced to rubble by allied bombardment during World War II.There are three known species of Brachiosaurus;
B. alataiensis (de Lapparent & Zbyszewski, 1957): Is known from back bones (vertebrae), and parts of the hip and limbs, which were recovered in Estremadura, Portugal. It lived about 150 million years ago, during the Kimmeridgian age of the late Jurassic period.
B. altithorax (Riggs, 1903). The type species is known from two partial skeletons recovered in Colorado and Utah in the United States. It lived from 145 to 150 million years ago, during the Kimmeridgian to Tithonian ages.
?B. nougaredi (de Lapparent, 1960): While it may not be a distinct species (nomen dubium?) it is known from set of fused bones over the hip (sacrum), and parts of a forelimb, which were recovered in Wargla, Algeria in Africa. It lived 100 to 110 million years ago, during the Albian to Cenomanian ages of the middle Cretaceous period.There at least two other valid members of the family. :
Giraffatitan brancai (Janensch, 1914 (formerly B. brancai): The new type species, it is known from five partial skeletons, including at least three skulls, and some limb bones, which were recovered in Mtwara, Tanzania, in Africa. It lived from 145 to 150 million years ago, during the Kimmeridgian to Tithonian ages of the late Jurassic period.
Cedarosaurus weiskopfae (Tidwell, Carpenter, and Brooks, 1999). A new brachiosaurid from the Yellow Cat member of the Cedar Mountain Formation in Utah. This sauropod is known from a partial skeleton including vertebrae, partial girdles, and most of the limbs. Remains referred to Pleurocoelus may belong here. It was a smallish sauropod.http://www.dinosaur-world.com/weird_dinosaurs/giraffatitan%20_brancai.htm
Members of an antarctic 1990–91 expedition collected partial remains of a Jurassic creature called Glacialisaurus, meaning “frozen lizard.”The entire dinosaur must have been 20–25 feet (6–8 m) long and weighed an estimated 4–6 tons.
This is (tentatively) identified as a plant-eating, longnecked dinosaur, or sauropodomorph.
Again, this was a big eater.
Illustration by Mike Belknap

Skeleton of Giraffatitan.


Gondwanatitan is a Primitive Titanosaur from late Cretaceous Brazil.  It was similar to Aeolosaurus.

esqueleto de gondwanatitan



  • Gongbusaurus Gongbusaurus is een geslacht van plantenetende ornithischische dinosauriërs dat tijdens het late Jura leefde in het gebied van het huidige China


“Gongbusaurus” wucaiwanensis

Gongbusaurus (meaning “Yu Gong’s (of the Zigong Dinosaur Museum) lizard”) is a genus of ornithischian (an ornithopod?) dinosaur that lived between about 160 and 155 million years ago, in the Late Jurassic period. A small herbivore, it is very poorly known. Two species have been assigned to it, but as the original name is based on teeth, there is no concrete evidence to connect the two species. Its fossils have been found in China.

 Afbeeldingen van Gongxianosaurus

Skeletal reconstruction of Gongxianosaurus shibeiensis. From He et al., 1998.


Gorgosaurus libratus
Gorgosaurus, meaning “fierce lizard” (from the Greek: gorgos/ meaning ‘terrible’ or ‘fierce’ and saurus/ meaning ‘lizard’) is a genus of carnivorous dinosaur that reached 7 to 8 metres (27 to 30 feet) in length, with an estimated weight of 2.5 tonnes (2.75 short tons). It was first described by paleontologist Lawrence Morris Lambe, in 1914 and has been found in western Canada and the United States. It lived about 70 million years ago in the late Cretaceous Period.
Over 20 Gorgosaurus skeletons have been recovered, making it the most well-represented tyrannosaurid in the fossil record. Generally similar to Tyrannosaurus and most other large tyrannosaurids (such as Daspletosaurus and Albertosaurus), Gorgosaurus can be described as having a massive head, large curved teeth, tiny two-fingered front limbs, and powerful legs. Compared to the other tyrannosaurids, Gorgosaurus is most similar to its very close relative Albertosaurus. Although it has been suggested that Gorgosaurus was a scavenger, its co-existence with the similarly sized but more robust tyrannosaurid, Daspletosaurus, casts doubt on this theory. Another hypothesis proposes that Gorgosaurus, which was rather lean for a tyrannosaurid, actively hunted fleet-footed animals such as duckbills and ornithomimids (‘ostrich-mimic’ dinosaurs). According to this proposition, the more troublesome ceratopsians and ankylosaurians (horned and heavily armoured dinosaurs) would have been left to Daspletosaurus.For years, the species Gorgosaurus libratus (the only species of Gorgosaurus currently recognized) was assigned to the Albertosaurus genus. However, recent work done by paleontologists suggest that enough differences exist between G. libratus and the other Albertosaurus species, to justify the original genus name of Gorgosaurus.Order: Saurischia
Suborder: Theropoda
Family: Tyrannosauridae
Subfamily: Albertosaurinae
Genus: Gorgosaurus
Species: G. libratus

Image © The Natural History Museum, London 2007

Goyocephale was a genus of dinosaur which lived during the Late Cretaceous period. It lived in what is now Mongolia. Goyocephale was a pachycephalosaur, which were ornithischians with thick, bony skulls.Goyocephale probably weighed 10-40 kg. The type species, Goyocephale lattimorei, was formally described by Perle, Maryanska, and Osmolska in 1982. It is based on a fairly complete skeleton.

Order: Ornithischia
Suborder: Marginocephalia
Infraorder: Pachycephalosauria
Family: Pachycephalosauridae
Genus: Goyocephale
Perle, Maryanska, and Osmolska (1982)
Goyocephale lattimorei


Gryponyx africanus

Gryponyx taylori

Gryponyx transvaalensis

A new species of the hadrosaurine hadrosaurid Gryposaurus was discovered in the late Campanian Kaiparowits Formation of southern Utah.

Gryposaurus monumentensis

Lees meer … Palaeoblog
Lees het oorspronkelijke wetenschappelijke artikel


Gryposaurus monumentensis

Gryposaurus notabilis
Gryposaurus was a common duck-billed dinosaur known from a over 10 skulls, some bones, and one of the very few skin casts ever found. The skin cast reveals the skin on its neck, sides and belly were covered with smooth scales less than a quarter of an inch in size. It had a long, narrow skull, highly-arched nostrils, and a big bump on its snout. It was a large plant-eater that would have traveled in herds while trying to avoid being eaten by some of the earliest tyrannosaur family members. Discovered in Alberta, Canada by L. Lambe in 1914, the type species is G. notabilis.
Gryposaurus is much better known under the name Kritosaurus notabilis. For a long time Kritosaurus and Gryposaurus were considered to be the same genus, but in the last twenty years it has become clear that the type material of Kritosaurus is not particularly diagnostic, based on a fragmentary skull.

Gryposaurus, meanwhile, is based on much better remains. Interestingly, it now appears that Kritosaurus may actually be a “saurolophinid”, instead of a “gryposaurinid”, illustrating the problems of establishing hadrosaurid taxa on material that is either missing or has an inadequately preserved skull.

hadrosaurid, hadrosaur, duck-billed dinosaur=  was a plant-eater that was about 30 feet (9 m) long.

  • Guaibasaurus    Guaibasaurus is een geslacht van saurischische dinosauriërs dat tijdens het late Trias leefde in het gebied van het huidige Brazilië. De typesoort is Guaibasaurus candelariensis.


Skeleton of Guaibasaurus candalariensis

Meer afbeeldingen <—

Guaibasaurus (“Rio Guaiba lizard”) was an  early dinosaur from the Late Triassic, about 220 million years ago. It was found in 1998 by José Bonaparte and Jorge Ferigolo near Candalaria, Río Grande do Sul Province, Brazil. The remains consist of two incomplete skeletons. Guaibasaurus is an even more primitive saurischian than either the Argentinean Herrerasaurus or the Brazilian Staurikosaurus, and may belong to the group that was ancestral to both sauropods and theropods.






Support Wikipedia


Paleontologists from the Utah Geological Survey and the Utah Museum of Natural History announced the discovery of a bizarre new species, Falcarius utahensis, in the May 5, 2005,. issue of Nature Magazine. James Kirkland, Utah state paleontologist at the Utah Geological Survey and principal scientist for the new study. He said, “This little beast is a missing link between small-bodied predatory dinosaurs and the highly specialized and bizarre plant-eating therizinosaurs.” The new species was excavated from ancient gravely mudstones at the base of the Cedar Mountain rock formation, at a site named the Crystal Geyser Quarry after a nearby manmade geyser that spews cold water and carbon dioxide gas. It was discovered in a mass graveyard containing hundreds, if not thousands, of individuals, including everything from hatchlings to adults. It was discovered by a commercial fossil collector who later was convicted of fossil theft. “We never would have found it, at least for 100 years or so, if he hadn’t taken us to the site,” Kirkland says. “Once he figured out he had a new dinosaur, he realized scientists should be working the site.

, November 18, 2011

Falcarius: bizarre sickle-cutter

by Scott Hartman
(enlarge : click on drawings and photo’s )

The truly strange looking animal above is Falcarius utahensis.

It’s an early, omnivorous member of the theropod clade known as therizinosaurs.
Not only does it look weird, it’s also a bit different from other skeletals you may have seen on the web.There are still several points worthy of discussion.First off, the animal was discovered in a bone bed of disarticulated individuals.
The good news is that most of the individual elements are known, but the down side is the bones aren’t all from the same sized animals.
That means that cross-scaling is needed to restore the skeleton, but even that presents a challenge; the usual method of cross-scaling involves double-checking the results against the proportions of close relatives.
Alas, in this case the fossil record for the base of the therizinosaur family tree isn’t well known, and what is known makes it clear that Falcarius has very different proportions than it’s closest known relative: Beipiaosaurus.
Copyright Greg Paul
When the original description of Falcarius was published in 2005, it came with the skeletal drawing above
Obviously I don’t agree with those proportions now, but at the time it had been done when fewer bones had been excavated, prepared, and described in detail, so Greg Paul had to try and scale them based on a smaller amount of material to compare with.In fact, given the difficulty of restoring the proportions I intentionally avoided doing a Falcarius skeletal reconstruction for several years
I might have avoided it all together, but towards the end of my tenure at the WDC we mounted a cast of Falcarius that Gaston Design produced.
Working on that skeleton I was able to not only measure and photograph all of the elements, but spend time looking at how the individual elements were matched up.
Some parts of the cast’s vertebral column are from different sized individuals(an unavoidable consequence of trying to piece together a skeleton from several different individuals). In other cases, vertebrae I had assumed to be from different sized animals were in fact crushed.

In addition to the hands-on data, Lindsay Zanno had been hard at work publishing more detailed information on Falcarius (this is actually notable, as not all researchers are as timely with getting more detailed descriptions of a new animal into print). As the information piled up I felt that a skeletal was possible to be done. I ended up being asked to produce a skeletal of Falcarius for a display in the new Utah Museum of Natural History building (side note: the new UMNH building just opened, and houses one of the most impressive natural history displays in North America, ). Since I was working with the UMNH, I got valuable input from several of the researchers who worked on the specimens. They were able to provide additional information – I won’t go into the nitty-gritty of it (although you may if you would like), but I wanted to point out that the end result was quite a surprise to me.

And little is more satisfying than when you are really surprised at the end of a skeletal reconstruction.

Resulting skeletal in hand, you can compare it to the most recent studies of the therizinosaur family tree, as well as the excellent research being done by Lindsay Zanno and Peter Makovicky on the origin of plant-eating in theropod dinosaurs, and Falcarius starts to tell an interesting tail about the order in which therizinosaur traits appeared. Falcarius appears to already be specialized for browsing for high forage. Given the lack of an enlarged gut for fermentation it probably preferred to seek out higher-quality plant matter, like fruiting bodies or seeds. The partially upright stance appears concurrently with a widening of the passage through the pelvis (not visible in side view) allowing move guts into that area, causing the center of gravity to sit further back despite the elongation of the neck. The large hand claws (from which the authors derived the name “sickle-cutter”) may have allowed Falcarius to pick up small prey, but they also may have served as defense for a fairly slow animal with small teeth. The first toe is low and long enough to start interacting with the ground, perhaps to provide balance and stability when browsing high. All of these features would be carried to extremes in advanced therizinosaurs, but they seem to already be playing the same (albeit incipient) functional roles in Falcarius. So with Falcariuswe have an animal that at first glance appears inexplicably strange, but when viewed through the lens of where it was coming from (long-bodied small-headed meat eaters) and where it ends up (the upright, pot-bellied therizinosaurs) the combination of traits start to make a lot of sense.

Isn’t science grand?

References:Kirkland, J. I., Zanno, L. E., Sampson, S. D., Clark, J. M. & DeBlieux, D. D., 2005. A primitive therizinosauroid dinosaur from the Early Cretaceous of Utah. Nature, v435, pp 84-87.

Zanno, L. E. 2006. The pectoral girdle and forelimb of the primitive therizinosauroid Falcarius utahensis(Theropoda, Maniraptora): Analyzing evolutionary trends withing Therizinosauroidea. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, v26 n3, pp 636-650.Zanno, L. E. 2010. Osteology of Falcarius utahensis (Dinosauria: Theropoda): characterizing the anatomy of basal therizinosaurs. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. v158, pp 196-230.Zanno, L. E. & Makovicky, P. J., 2011. Herbivorous ecomorphology and specialization patterns in theropod dinosaur evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. v108 m1, pp 232-237.

Scientists have suggested a number of possible explanations for such mass deaths. Scott Sampson, chief curator at the Utah Museum of Natural History and an associate professor of geology and geophysics at the University of Utah. Sampson says that they include drought, volcanism, fire and botulism poisoning from water tainted by carcasses. Kirkland leans toward a theory developed by Celina and Marina Suarez, twins who are geology graduate students at Temple University in Philadelphia. Their research on carbonate-rich sediments in which the dinosaurs were buried suggests the area was near or in a spring, and that there were at least two mass die-offs . That raises the possibility the dinosaurs were drawn repeatedly to the site by water or an attractive food source – perhaps plants growing around the spring – and then the spring occasionally would poison the animals with toxic gas or water, Kirkland says.With almost 1,700 bones excavated during the past three years, scientists have about 90 percent of Falcarius’ bones, making it the most complete therizinosaurus specimen found to date. Falcarius “is the most primitive known therizinosaur, demonstrating unequivocally that this large-bodied group of bizarre herbivorous group of dinosaurs came from Velociraptor-like ancestors,” says study co-author Lindsay Zanno, a graduate student in geology and geophysics at the University of Utah and the Utah Museum of Natural History. Sampson maintains that Falcarius did not descend directly from Velociraptor, but both had a common, yet-undiscovered ancestor, says study co-author and paleontologist Kirkland says Falcarius likely was covered with shaggy, hair-like “proto-feathers,” which may or may not have had a shaft like those found in bird feathers. No feathers were found with the Falcarius fossils. Feathers rarely are preserved, but “a number of its close relatives found in China had feathers [preserved by unusual lake sediments], so the presumption is this animal too was feathered,” Sampson says. The previously unknown species provides clues about how vicious meat-eaters related to Velociraptor ultimately evolved into plant-munching vegetarians. The adult dinosaur walked on two legs and was about 13 feet long (4 meters) and stood 4.5 feet tall (1.4 meters). It had sharp, curved, 4-inch-long (10 centimeter) claws. Scientists do not yet know if the creature ate meat, plants or both. Kirkland said, “Falcarius shows the beginning of features we associate with plant-eating dinosaurs, including a reduction in size of meat-cutting teeth to leaf-shredding teeth, the expansion of the gut to a size needed to ferment plants, and the early stages of changing the legs so they could carry a bulky body instead of running fast after prey.” Falcarius, which dates to the Early Cretaceous Period about 125 million years ago, belongs to a group of dinosaurs known as therizinosaurs. Falcarius and Beipiaosaurus are about the same age and appear to represent an intermediate stage between deadly carnivores and later, plant-eating therizinosaurs. Falcarius is anatomically more primitive than the Chinese therizinosaurs.Falcarius had leaf-shaped teeth designed for shredding plants rather than the triangular, blade-like serrated teeth of its meat-eating relatives.Its pelvis was broader, indicating a larger gut to digest plant material, which is more difficult to process than meat. Its lower legs were stubby, presumably because it no longer needed to run after prey. Compared with carnivorous relatives, Falcarius’ neck was more elongated and its forelimbs were more flexible, perhaps for reaching plants to eat. Sampson says: “Falcarius represents evolution caught in the act, a primitive form that shares much in common with its carnivorous kin, while processing a variety of features demonstrating that it had embarked on the path toward more advanced plant-eating forms.” Falcarius means sickle-maker, so named because later plant-eating therizinosaurs had 3-foot-long, sickle-like claws. The species name, utahensis, comes from the fact the new species was discovered in east-central Utah, south of the town of Green River. Falcarius is the fourth new dinosaur species Kirkland has discovered in the Cedar Mountain Formation’s Yellow Cat member (a unit of the formation) in 11 years. Others are meat-eaters Utahraptor and Nedcolbertia, and an armored dinosaur named Gastonia. “Therizinosaurs have been found for 50 years in China and Mongolia, but were not recognized as a distinct group until about 25 years ago,” Sampson says. The only therizinosaur known previously from North America was Nothronychus, which Kirkland discovered in the late 1990s in New Mexico. It was 90 million years old, so scientists initially believed the older therizinosaurs in China had migrated over a land bridge from Asia through Alaska to the American Southwest. But due to the constantly shifting plates of Earth’s surface, Alaska didn’t exist 125 million years ago – the age of both Falcarius and the oldest known Chinese therizinosaur, Beipiaosaurus. So scientists now wonder if therizinosaurs originated in Asia and migrated through Europe to North America before the Atlantic Ocean basin opened up, or if they originated in North America and migrated through Europe to Asia. “Falcarius may have been home-grown,” Kirkland says.” This discovery puts the most primitive therizinosaurs in North America,” Zanno says. “This tells us that North America potentially could be the place of origin for this group of dinosaurs.” http://www.dinosaur-world.com/feathered_dinosaurs/falcarius_utahensis.htm http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/osteology-of-falcarius-utahensis.html http://skeletaldrawing.blogspot.com/2011/11/falcarius-bizarre-sickle-cutter.html http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050502/full/news050502-3.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7038/full/nature03468.html

Vicious vegetarian.
Felcarius utahensis provides clues to how some dinosaurs gave up meat.






. .





fruitadens haagorum.jpg

Fruitadens haagarorum, distal hindlimb. LACM 120478, articulated left tibia, fibula and astragalocalcaneum in anterior (A), medial (B), posterior (C), lateral (D), proximal (E) and distal (F) views. LACM 115747 (holotype), proximal left tibia in lateral (G) and medial (H) views. LACM 115727, distal left tibia with attached astragalocalcaneum in anterior (I), medial (J), posterior (K), lateral (L) and distal (M) views. LACM 115747 (holotype), distal right tibia in distal (N) and anterior (O) views. LACM 120602, left astragalocalcaneum in anterior (P) and proximal (Q) views. Abbreviations: amsh, anteromedial sheet of tibia; asp, ascending process; cal, calcaneum; cnc, cnemial crest; fibc, fibular condyle; for, foramen; innc, inner condyle; int, notch between inner condyle and fibular condyle.


Life restoration of Fukuiraptor.


Futalognkosaurus dukei (Calvo et. al. 2007) Taxonomy: Saurischia; Sauropodomorpha; Sauropoda; Macronaria; Titanosauria; Lognkosauria “Great Chief Lizard of Duke Energy Company” Time: Late Cretaceous (Turonian-Coniacian epochs, ~ 90-87 million years ago) Length: ~30m Probable Mass: ~ 65-70 tons Hailing from Late Cretaceous Argentina, Futalognkosaurus dukei was one of the most massive dinosaurs ever known, with the deepest neck on record and a colossal pelvis exceeding 2m at its widest point. It’s also the most complete giant titanosaur known, though due to the current lack of reliable measurements it’s hard to tell just how “giant” the entire animal was. My skeletal reconstruction is done based on extensive cross-scaling using the best known unpublished photos and verifying the most reliable of the published measurements with the sizes of the people said photos. Futalognkosaurus was a member of the family Lognkosauria, a transitional group of titanosaurs with a plethora of strange and extreme skeletal features, including extremely wide dorsal vertebrae and rib cages. They ranged from the small (Malawisaurus) to the colossal (Puertasaurus). Futalognkosaurus, a Late Cretaceous lognkosaur, was one of the larger members of the family, and so far the one with the tallest neck bones – indeed it may have proportionally the deepest neck of any sauropod with the exception of Isisaurus. Currently this recon shows Futalognkosaurus at (30m), rivaling Argentinosaurus in length, and likely exceeding both Paralititan and Argyrosaurus. Nevertheless the width of the vertebrae, though impressive, indicates it is still significantly smaller than both Puertasaurusand the new adult Alamosaurus remains, and it may also be outclassed by Ruyangosaurus giganteus and Huanghetitan ruyangensis. http://svpow.com/2009/10/20/futalognkosaurus-was-one-big-ass-sauropod/ The remains of the Futalognkosaurus Dukei 





Families & Species
















































Mei long 130




Patagonykus 95
Shuvuuia 80
Alvarezsaurus 80
Parvicursor 80
Mononykus 70
Aves (birds)




Recent discoveries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dinosaurs Support Wikipedia



  • Echinodon Echinodon was een geslacht van plantenetende dinosauriërs behorend tot de Ornithischia, die tijdens het Late Jura leefde in het gebied van het huidige Engeland. De typesoort is Echinodon becklesii.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              syn : Saurechinodon Herbivore, Quadrupedal Ornithischia  Suborder: Thyreophora? Family: Scelidosauridae?                       H 0.3 meters    L 0.6 meters    Late Jurassic                                                                                                                               Discovered in England and described by Sir Richard Owen in 1861, Echinodon was once considered to be a fabrosaurid, a family name that has now been abandoned. It may have been related to Scutellosaurus, a plant-eater with small bony armor plates on its back. Evidence suggests that armor found in England in 1879 and thought to belong to a lizard, may belong to Echinodon, thus moving it into the mostly quadrupedal Thyreophora suborder of ornithischians.

http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2007/05/24/galve-european-spinosaurines-c/               http://qilong.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/pegomastax-and-the-echinodonts/

i-5590c96777032c9c6d3f98b3979a3202-Yinlong.jpg  Echinodon becklesii mandible

NHMUK 48215b, a paralectotype dentary referred to Echinodon becklesii (Owen, 1861). AfterSereno, 2012.

It was a theropod closely related to Torvosaurus, and may, in fact, be a junior synonym of that genus. Its fossils, including a partial skeleton, were found at Como Bluff, Wyoming.


edmarka rex

http://tolweb.org/NodosauridaeEdmontonia (meaning “From the Edmonton Formation”) was an armoured dinosaur, a part of the nodosaur family from the Late Cretaceous Period. It is named after the Edmonton Formation (now the Horseshoe Canyon Formation), the unit of rock it was found in. was bulky and tank-like at roughly 6.6 m (22 ft) long and 2m (6 ft) high.[citation needed] It had small, ridged bony plates on its back and head and many sharp spikes along its back and tail. The four largest spikes jutted out from the shoulders on each side, two of which were split into subspines in some specimens. Its skull had a pear-like shape when viewed from above.(information from Wikipedia.org

De lange schedels van een Edmontosaurus en een paard; beide hebben een lange schedel en grote maalkiezen

Late Cretaceous, Ornithischia : Ornithopoda : Hadrosauridae : Hadrosaurinae : Edmontosaurus: Edmontosaurus regalis

Hanenkam ontdekt

 13 december 2013  1
edmondosaurus regalis

Wetenschappers hebben in Canada een bijzondere ontdekking gedaan. Ze troffen er de gemummificeerde resten van een eendensnaveldinosaurus met een hanenkam aan. Het bewijst voor het eerst dat deze dino’s een kleurige kam op de kop hadden die in veel opzichten overeenkomsten vertoont met de moderne hanenkam.

Het is niet ongewoon dat dinosaurussen worden teruggevonden met een bijzondere structuur op de kop. Denk maar eens aan de Triceratops met hoorns op de kop en dat enorme schild dat zijn kwetsbare nek beschermde. Maar dat zijn stuk voor stuk botstructuren. Een dinosaurus met een vlezige structuur op de kop is nog nooit ontdekt.

Tot nu dan. In Canada troffen de onderzoekers de resten van een gemummificeerde eendensnaveldinosaurus aan. Het gaat om een Edmontosaurus regalis: een soort waar al diverse fossiele resten van zijn teruggevonden.                                                    En toch is deze vondst bijzonder. “We hebben reeds heel veel schedels van de Edmontosaurus gevonden, maar geen enkele vertoont aanwijzingen dat ze een grote, vlezige kam op de kop hadden,” vertelt onderzoeker Phil Bell. En dat is ook goed te verklaren. Omdat er geen bot in de kam zit, fossiliseert deze niet. Dat onderzoekers de hanenkam nu gedetecteerd hebben, is dan ook puur te danken aan het feit dat de Edmontosaurus die de onderzoekers ontdekten, gemummificeerd was.

De vondst trekt het uiterlijk van diverse dino’s waarmee we juist zo vertrouwd zijn geraakt, in twijfel en is   volgens Bell,  erg belangrijk. Normaal gesproken fossiliseert een vleesachtige structuur zoals een hanenkam namelijk niet.

“Het is alsof we voor het eerst hebben ontdekt dat olifanten slurven hebben. We hebben veel schedels van Edmontosaurussen gevonden, maar nooit eerder waren er aanwijzingen dat ze een vlezige kam op hun hoofd hadden.”

Bell vermoedt dat ook andere dinosauriërs hanenkammen hadden. “Er is geen reden om aan te nemen dat andere vreemde vlezige structuren niet aanwezig waren op heel veel andere dinosaurussen, waaronder(bijvoorbeld )  de T. rex of de Triceratops,” stelt Bell.

Het is nog onduidelijk waar de hanenkam van de dinosaurussen voor diende. Vergelijkbare structuren komen ook voor bij moderne dieren zoals kameleons en hanen en hagedissen en dienen meestal om indruk te maken op mogelijke seksuele partners en ze zodoende te versieren  . Mogelijk gold dat ook voor de dinosaurus. 

Tijdschrift Current Biology.
Nieuwssite Phys.org.
Surprise: Duck-Billed Dinosaurs Had Fleshy ‘Cocks Comb’” – Cell Press (via Sciencedaily.com).
De afbeelding bovenaan dit artikel is gemaakt door Julius Csotonyi © Bell, Fanti, Currie, Arbour, Current Biology.
Edmontosaurus is a genus of crestless (?)  duck-billed dinosaur.
The fossils of this animal have been found in rocks of western North America that date from the late Campanian stage to the end of the Maastrichtian stage of the Cretaceous Period, between 73 and 65.5 million years ago. It was one of the last non-avian dinosaurs, and live alongsideTriceratops and Tyrannosaurusshortly before the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event.Edmontosaurus was one of the largest hadrosaurids, measuring up to 13 meters (43 ft) long and weighing around 4.0 metric tons (4.4 short tons). It is known from several well-preserved specimens that include not only bones, but in some cases extensive skin impressions and possible gut contents. It is classified as a hadrosaurine hadrosaurid (those hadrosaurids which lacked a fossilised  hollow crest), and was closely related to Anatotitan,(if not a synonym.)
Edmontosaurus has a lengthy and complicated taxonomic history dating to the late 19th century. Various species classified with genera such as Claosaurus, Thespesius, Trachodon, and the well-known but now defunct genus Anatosaurus are now regarded as belonging to Edmontosaurus. The first fossils named Edmontosaurus were discovered in southern Alberta, Canada, in what used to be called the lower Edmonton Formation. The type species, E. regalis, was named by Lawrence Lambe in 1917, although several other species that are now classified in Edmontosaurus were named earlier. The best known of these is E. annectens, originally named by Othniel Charles Marsh in 1892 as Claosaurus annectens and known for many years as Anatosaurus annectens. A third smaller species, E. saskatchewanensis, is also known. The name Edmontosaurus means “Edmonton lizard”; the genus was named after the Edmonton Formation, now known as the Horseshoe Canyon Formation.Edmontosaurus was widely distributed across western North America. The distribution of Edmontosaurus fossils suggests that it preferred coasts and coastal plains. It was a herbivore that could move on both two legs and four. Because it is known from several bone beds, Edmontosaurus is thought to have lived in groups, and may have been migratory as well. The wealth of fossils has allowed researchers to study its paleobiology in detail, including its brain, how it may have fed, and its injuries and pathologies, such as evidence for a tyrannosaur attack on one edmontosaur specimen.Posted Image
with or without crest ? 
Edmontosaurus has been described in detail from several specimens. Like other hadrosaurids, it was a bulky animal with a long, laterally flattened tail and a head with an expanded, duck-like beak. The skull had no hollow or solid crest, unlike many other hadrosaurids. The fore legs were not as heavily built as the hind legs, but were long enough to be used in standing or movement. Edmontosaurus was among the largest hadrosaurids: depending on the species, a fully grown adult could have been 9 meters (30 ft) long, and some of the larger specimens reached the range of 12 meters (39 ft) to 13 meters (43 ft) long. Its weight was on the order of 4.0 metric tons (4.4 short tons). At the present, E. regalis is the largest species, although its status may be challenged if the large hadrosaurid Anatotitan copei is shown to be the same as Edmontosaurus annectens, as put forward by Jack Horner and colleagues in 2004 (this remains to be tested by other authors). The type specimen of E. regalis, NMC 2288, is estimated as 9 to 12 meters (30 to 39 ft) long. E. annectens was somewhat shorter. Two well-known mounted skeletons, USNM 2414 and YPM 2182, measure 8.00 meters (26.25 ft) long and 8.92 meters (29.3 ft) long, respectively. However, there is at least one report of a much larger potential E. annectens specimen, almost 12 meters (39 ft) long. E. saskatchewanensis was smaller yet, with its full length estimated as 7 to 7.3 meters (23 to 24.0 ft).
The skull of a fully grown Edmontosaurus was around a meter (or yard) long, with E. regalis falling on the longer end of the spectrum and E. annectens falling on the shorter end. The skull was roughly triangular in profile, with no bony cranial crest. Viewed from above, the front and rear of the skull were expanded, with the broad front forming a duck-bill or spoon-bill shape. The beak was toothless, and both the upper and lower beaks were extended by keratinous material. Substantial remains of the keratinous upper beak are known from the “mummy” kept at the Senckenberg Museum. In this specimen, the preserved nonbony part of the beak extended for at least 8 centimeters (3.1 in) beyond the bone, projecting down vertically. The nasal openings of Edmontosaurus were elongate and housed in deep depressions surrounded by distinct bony rims above, behind, and below. In at least one case (the Senckenberg specimen), rarely preserved sclerotic rings were preserved in the eye sockets. Another rarely seen bone, the stapes (the reptilian ear bone), has also been seen in a specimen of Edmontosaurus.
The Senckenberg mummy
Skull of the Senckenberg Edmontosaurus mummyin left lateral view.
Teeth were present only in the maxillae (upper cheeks) and dentaries (main bone of the lower jaw). The teeth were continually replaced, taking about half a year to form. They grew in columns, with an observed maximum of six in each, and the number of columns varied based on the animal’s size. Known column counts for the various species are: 51 to 53 columns per maxilla and 48 to 49 per dentary (teeth of the upper jaw being slightly narrower than those in the lower jaw) for E. regalis; 43 columns per maxilla and 36 per dentary for E. annectens; and 52 and 44 for E. saskatchewanensis.
Postcranial skeleton
The number of vertebrae differs between specimens. E. regalis had thirteen neck vertebrae, eighteen back vertebrae, nine hip vertebrae, and an unknown number of tail vertebrae. A specimen once identified as belonging to Anatosaurus edmontoni (now considered to be the same as E. annectens) is reported as having an additional back vertebra and 85 tail vertebrae, with an undisclosed amount of restoration. Other hadrosaurids are only reported as having 50 to 70 tail vertebrae, so this appears to have been an overestimate. The anterior back was curved toward the ground, with the neck flexed upward and the rest of the back and tail held horizontally. Most of the back and tail were lined by ossified tendons arranged in a latticework along the neural spines of the vertebrae. This condition has been described as making the back and at least part of the tail “ramrod” straight.
The ossified tendons are interpreted as having strengthened the vertebral column against gravitational stress, incurred through being a large animal with a horizontal vertebral column otherwise supported mostly by the hind legs and hips.The shoulder blades were long flat blade-like bones, held roughly parallel to the vertebral column. The hips were composed of three elements each: an elongate ilium above the articulation with the leg, an ischium below and behind with a long thin rod, and a pubis in front that flared into a plate-like structure.
The structure of the hip hindered the animal from standing with its back erect, because in such a position the thigh bone would have pushed against the joint of the ilium and pubis, instead of pushing only against the solid ilium. The nine fused hip vertebrae provided support for the hip.
The fore legs were shorter and less heavily built than the hind legs. The upper arm had a large deltopectoral crest for muscle attachment, while the ulna and radius were slim. The upper arm and forearm were similar in length. The wrist was simple, with only two small bones. Each hand had four fingers, with no thumb (first finger). The index second, third, and fourth fingers were approximately the same length and were united in life within a fleshy covering. Although the second and third finger had hoof-like unguals, these bones were also within the skin and not apparent from the outside. The little finger diverged from the other three and was much shorter. The thigh bone was robust and straight, with a prominent flange about halfway down the posterior side. This ridge was for the attachment of powerful muscles attached to the hips and tail that pulled the thighs (and thus the hind legs) backward and helped maintain the use of the tail as a balancing organ. Each foot had three toes, with no big toe or little toe. The toes had hoof-like tips.
AMNH 5060: a well preserved specimen of Edmontosaurus annectens
Multiple specimens of Edmontosaurus have been found with preserved skin impressions. Several have been well-publicized, such as the “Trachodon mummy” of the early 20th century, and the specimen nicknamed “Dakota”, the latter apparently including remnant organic compounds from the skin. Because of these finds, the scalation of Edmontosaurus is known for most areas of the body.
File:Edmontosaurusskin.jpgSkin impression from the abdomen of Edmontosaurus annectens
Skin impression of the specimen nicknamed “Dakota”, which was found in 1999
A large patch of fossilized dinosaur skin. The stripe of larger scales probably ran along the back of the embryo.
Luis Chiappe | Lorraine Meeker   AMNH 
“Trachodon” : the other mummy
AMNH 5060 Edmontosaurus annectens.

AMNH 5060, the “Trachodon mummy” (so-called because it appears to be a fossil of a natural mummy), is now recognized as a specimen of E. annectens.
It was found to have skin impressions over the snout, much of the neck and torso, and parts of the arms and legs. The tail and part of the legs eroded before collection, so these areas are unknown for the specimen.
Additionally, some areas with skin impressions, such as sections associated with the neck ridge (see below) and hands, were accidentally removed during preparation of the specimen.
The specimen is thought to have desiccated in a dry stream bed, probably on or near a point bar. The circumstances of the location and preservation of the body suggest that the animal died during a prolonged drought, perhaps from starvation. The desiccated carcass was eventually buried in a sudden flood, surrounded by sediment that had enough fine particles to make a cast of the epidermal structures.The epidermis was thin, and the scalation composed of small nonoverlapping scales, as seen in the Gila monster.
Two general types of scales were present over most of the body: small pointed or convex tubercles, 1 to 3 millimeters (0.039 to 0.12 in) in diameter with no definite arrangement (ground tubercles); and larger, flat polygonal tubercles (pavement tubercles) typically less than 5 millimeters (0.20 in) in diameter, but up to 10 millimeters (0.39 in) over the forearm. The pavement tubercles were grouped into clusters separated by ground tubercles, with transitional scales between the two types. Over most of the body, the pavement tubercles were arranged in circular or oval clusters, while near the shoulder on the upper arm, they formed strips roughly parallel to each other and the shoulder blade. Generally, clusters were larger on the upper surfaces of the body and smaller on the underside. Clusters up to 50 centimeters (20 in) in length were present above the hips.The only impressions from the head came from the large opening for the nostrils. Instead of tubercle impressions, there were impressions of folded soft tissue, with a deeper area at the anterior end of the opening that may have been the approximate location of the nostril itself. The neck and back had a soft ridge or frill running down the midline, with a row of oval tubercle clusters arranged above the spines of the vertebrae. The total height of the ridge on AMNH 5060 is not known, nor the disposition of its upper border, as the upper extremity was prepared away. The ridge was at least 8 centimeters (3.1 in) tall, and was folded and creased to permit movement. Osborn proposed that it was tall enough for another row of clusters.The forearms had the largest tubercles, arranged in single large clusters that covered the leading surfaces. The hands were covered in small pavement tubercles in a soft-tissue structure than enclosed the three central fingers; not even the tips were exposed. Osborn interpreted this as a paddle for swimming. Robert T. Bakker later reinterpreted it as a soft-tissue pad for walking, analogous to that of a camel. Like the forearm, the shin had large tubercles. The scalation of the rest of the leg is not presently known, although impressions on a specimen of the crested hadrosaurid Lambeosaurus suggest that the thighs were under the skin of the body, like modern birds.The tail of AMNH 5060 was not present, but other specimens have filled in some details for that area.
Skin impressions from a partial tail belonging to either Edmontosaurus or its close relative Anatotitan, recovered from the Hell Creek Formation of Montana, show a segmented ridge above the vertebrae.
The ridge was about 8.0 centimeters (3.1 in) tall, with the segments being about 5.0 centimeters (2.0 in) long and 4.5 centimeters (1.8 in) high, spaced 1.0 centimeter (0.39 in) apart, with one segment to a vertebra. Another tail, this time pertaining to a juvenile E. annectens, had fossilized impressions including tubercles as well as previously unseen skin textures.
These impressions included elliptical overlapping scales, grooved scales, and a “9 cm by 10 cm trapezoidal horn-like structure”.
Failed attack 
edmondosaurus  (healed) skin
Edmontosaurus was a hadrosaurid (a duck-billed dinosaur), a member of a family of dinosaurs which to date are known only from the Late Cretaceous. It is classified within the Hadrosaurinae, a clade of hadrosaurids which lacked hollow crests. Other members of the group include Brachylophosaurus, Gryposaurus, Lophorhothon, Maiasaura, Naashoibitosaurus, Prosaurolophus, and Saurolophus. It was either closely related to or the same as Anatotitan, another large hadrosaurid from various latest Cretaceous formations of western North America. The giant Chinese hadrosaurine Shantungosaurus is also anatomically similar to Edmontosaurus; M. K. Brett-Surman found the two to differ only in details related to the greater size of Shantungosaurus, based on what had been described of the latter genus.While the status of Edmontosaurus as a hadrosaurine has not been challenged, its exact placement within the clade is uncertain. Early phylogenies, such as that presented in R. S. Lull and Nelda Wright’s influential 1942 monograph, had Edmontosaurus and various species of Anatosaurus (most of which would be later reevaluated as additional species or specimens of Edmontosaurus) as one lineage among several lineages of “flat-headed” hadrosaurs. One of the first analyses using cladistic methods found it to be linked with Anatotitan and Shantungosaurus in an informal “edmontosaur” clade, which was paired with the spike-crested “saurolophs” and more distantly related to the “brachylophosaurs” and arch-snouted “gryposaurs”. A 2007 study by Terry Gates and Scott Sampson found broadly similar results, in that Edmontosaurus remained close to Saurolophus and Prosaurolophus and distant from Gryposaurus, Brachylophosaurus, and Maiasaura.
However, the most recent review of Hadrosauridae, by Jack Horner and colleagues (2004), came to a noticeably different result: Edmontosaurus was nested between Gryposaurus and the “brachylophosaurs”, and distant from Saurolophus. The discrepancies are complicated by the relative lack of work on hadrosaurine evolutionary relationships.
Discovery and history
Edmontosaurus has had a long and complicated history in paleontology, having spent decades with various species classified in other genera. Its taxonomic history intertwines at various points with the genera Agathaumas, Anatosaurus, Anatotitan, Claosaurus, Hadrosaurus, Thespesius, and Trachodon, and references predating the 1980s typically use Anatosaurus, Claosaurus, Thespesius, or Trachodon for edmontosaur fossils (excluding those assigned to E. regalis), depending on author and date. Although Edmontosaurus was only named in 1917, its oldest well-supported species (E. annectens) was named in 1892 as a species of Claosaurus, and scrappier fossils that may belong to it were described as long ago as 1871.The first described remains that may belong to Edmontosaurus were named Trachodon atavus in 1871 by Edward Drinker Cope. This species was assessed without comment as a synonym of Edmontosaurus regalis in two reviews, although atavus predates regalis by several decades. In 1874 Cope named but did not describe Agathaumas milo for a sacral vertebra and shin fragments from the late Maastrichtian-age Upper Cretaceous Laramie Formation of Colorado. Later that same year, he described these bones under the name Hadrosaurus occidentalis. The bones are now lost. As with Trachodon atavus, Agathaumas milo has been assigned without comment to Edmontosaurus regalis in two reviews, although predating regalis by several decades. Neither species has attracted much attention; both are absent from Lull and Wright’s 1942 monograph, for example. A third obscure early species, Trachodon selwyni, described by Lawrence Lambe in 1902 for a lower jaw from what is now known as the Dinosaur Park Formation of Alberta, was erroneously described by Glut (1997) as having been assigned to Edmontosaurus regalis by Lull and Wright. It was not, instead being designated “of very doubtful validity.”
More recent reviews of hadrosaurids have concurred.The first well-supported species of Edmontosaurus was named in 1892 as Claosaurus annectens by Othniel Charles Marsh. This species is based on USNM 2414, a skull and skeleton, with a second skull and skeleton, YPM 2182, designated the paratype. Both were collected in 1891 by John Bell Hatcher from the late Maastrichtian-age Upper Cretaceous Lance Formation of Niobrara County (then part of Converse County), Wyoming. This species has some historical footnotes attached: it is among the first dinosaurs to receive a skeletal restoration, and is the first hadrosaurid so restored; and YPM 2182 and UNSM 2414 are, respectively, the first and second essentially complete mounted dinosaur skeletons in the United States. YPM 2182 was put on display in 1901, and USNM 2414 in 1904.Because of the incomplete understanding of hadrosaurids at the time, following Marsh’s death in 1897 Claosaurus annectens was variously classified as a species of  Claosaurus, Thespesius o r Trachodon. Opinions varied greatly; textbooks and encyclopedias drew a distinction between the “Iguanodon-like” Claosaurus annectens and the “duck-billed” Hadrosaurus (based on remains now known under Anatotitan copei), while Hatcher explicitly identified C. annectens as synonymous with the hadrosaurid represented by those same duck-billed skulls.
Hatcher’s revision, published in 1902, was sweeping: he considered almost all hadrosaurid genera then known as synonyms of Trachodon. This included Cionodon, Diclonius, Hadrosaurus, Ornithotarsus, Pteropelyx, and Thespesius, as well as Claorhynchus and Polyonax, fragmentary genera now thought to be horned dinosaurs. Hatcher’s work led to a brief consensus, until after 1910 new material from Canada and Montana showed a greater diversity of hadrosaurids than previously suspected.
Charles W. Gilmore in 1915 reassessed hadrosaurids and recommended that Thespesius be reintroduced for hadrosaurids from the Lance Formation and rock units of equivalent age, and that Trachodon, based on inadequate material, should be restricted to a hadrosaurid from the older Judith River Formation and its equivalents. In regards to Claosaurus annectens, he recommended that it be considered the same as Thespesius occidentalis. His reinstatement of Thespesius for Lance-age hadrosaurids would have other consequences for the taxonomy of Edmontosaurus in the following decades.
During this time frame (1902–1915), two additional important specimens of C. annectens were recovered. The first, the “Trachodon mummy” (AMNH 5060), was discovered in 1908 by Charles Hazelius Sternberg and his sons in Lance Formation rocks near Lusk, Wyoming. Sternberg was working for the British Museum of Natural History, but Henry Fairfield Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History was able to purchase the specimen for $2,000. The Sternbergs recovered a second similar specimen from the same area in 1910, not as well preserved but also found with skin impressions. They sold this specimen (SM 4036) to the Senckenberg Museum in Germany.
Posted Image
Canadian discoveries
Edmontosaurus itself was coined in 1917 by Lawrence Lambe for two partial skeletons found in the Edmonton Formation along the Red Deer River of southern Alberta, Canada. The Edmonton Formation lends the genus its name. These specimens came from the lower Edmonton Formation, now known as the Horseshoe Canyon Formation, which is slightly older than the rocks in which Claosaurus annectens was found. The type species, E. regalis (“regal,” or, more loosely, “king-sized”), is based on NMC 2288, consisting of a skull, articulated vertebrae up to the sixth tail vertebra, ribs, partial hips, an upper arm bone, and most of a hind limb. It was discovered in 1912 by Levi Sternberg.
The second specimen, paratype NMC 2289, consists of a skull and skeleton lacking the beak, most of the tail, and part of the feet. It was discovered in 1916 by George F. Sternberg. Lambe found that his new dinosaur compared best to Diclonius mirabilis (specimens now assigned to Anatotitan copei), and drew attention to the size and robustness of Edmontosaurus.
Initially, Lambe only described the skulls of the two skeletons, but returned to the genus in 1920 to describe the skeleton of NMC 2289. The postcrania of the type specimen remains undescribed, still in its plaster jackets.Two more species that would come to be included with Edmontosaurus were named from Canadian remains in the 1920s, but both would initially be assigned to Thespesius. Gilmore named the first, Thespesius edmontoni, in 1924.
T. edmontoni also came from the Edmonton Formation. It was based on NMC 8399, another nearly complete skeleton lacking most of the tail. NMC 8399 was discovered on the Red Deer River in 1912 by a Sternberg party. Its forelimbs, ossified tendons, and skin impressions were briefly described in 1913 and 1914 by Lambe, who at first thought it was an example of a species he’d named Trachodon marginatus, but then changed his mind. The specimen became the first dinosaur skeleton to be mounted for exhibition in a Canadian museum. Gilmore found that his new species compared closely to what he called Thespesius annectens, but left the two apart because of details of the arms and hands.
He also noted that his species had more vertebrae than Marsh’s in the back and neck, but proposed that Marsh was mistaken in assuming that the annectens specimens were complete in those regions.
In 1926, Charles Mortram Sternberg named Thespesius saskatchewanensis for NMC 8509, a skull and partial skeleton from the Wood Mountain plateau of southern Saskatchewan. He had collected this specimen in 1921, from rocks that were assigned to the Lance Formation, now the Frenchman Formation. NMC 8509 included an almost complete skull, numerous vertebrae, partial shoulder and hip girdles, and partial hind limbs, representing the first substantial dinosaur specimen recovered from Saskatchewan. Sternberg opted to assign it to Thespesius because that was the only hadrosaurid genus known from the Lance Formation at the time.
At the time, T. saskatchewanensis was unusual because of its small size, estimated at 7 to 7.3 meters (23 to 24.0 ft) in length.Anatosaurus to the presentIn 1942, Lull and Wright attempted to resolve the complicated taxonomy of crestless hadrosaurids by naming a new genus, Anatosaurus, to take in several species that did not fit well under their previous genera. Anatosaurus, meaning “duck lizard”, because of its wide, duck-like beak (Latin anas = duck + Greek sauros = lizard), had as its type species Marsh’s old Claosaurus annectens. Also assigned to this genus were Thespesius edmontoni, T. saskatchewanensis, a large lower jaw that Marsh had named Trachodon longiceps in 1890, and a new species, Anatosaurus copei, for two skeletons on display at the American Museum of Natural History that had long been known as Diclonius mirabilis (or variations thereof). Thus, the various species became Anatosaurus annectens, A. copei, A. edmontoni, A. longiceps, and A. saskatchewanensis. Anatosaurus would come to be called the “classic duck-billed dinosaur.”This state of affairs persisted for several decades, until Michael K. Brett-Surman reexamined the pertinent material for his graduate studies in the 1970s and 1980s. He concluded that the type species of Anatosaurus, A. annectens, was actually a species of Edmontosaurus and that A. copei was different enough to warrant its own genus. Although theses and dissertations are not regarded as official publications by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, which regulates the naming of organisms, his conclusions were known to other paleontologists, and were adopted by several popular works of the time. Brett-Surman and Ralph Chapman designated a new genus for A. copei (Anatotitan) in 1990. Of the remaining species, A. saskatchewanensis and A. edmontoni were assigned to Edmontosaurus as well, and A. longiceps went to Anatotitan, as either a second species or as a synonym of A. copei. Because the type species of Anatosaurus (A. annectens) was sunk into Edmontosaurus, the name Anatosaurus is abandoned as a junior synonym of Edmontosaurus.
The conception of Edmontosaurus that emerged included three valid species: the type E. regalis, E. annectens (including Anatosaurus edmontoni, emended to edmontonensis), and E. saskatchewanensis.
The debate about the proper taxonomy of the A. copei specimens continues to the present: returning to Hatcher’s argument of 1902, Jack Horner, David B. Weishampel, and Catherine Forster regarded Anatotitan copei as representing specimens of Edmontosaurus annectens with crushed skulls.
In 2007 another “mummy” was announced; nicknamed “Dakota”, it was discovered in 1999 by Tyler Lyson, and came from the Hell Creek Formation of North Dakota.
Species and distribution
Edmontosaurus is currently regarded as having three valid species: type species E. regalis, E. annectens, and E. saskatchewanensis.
UPDATE (211 )  Two valid species  ( in North America )  
articulated Edmontosaurus skulls.
Nearly all known   complete  Articulated Edmontosaurus skulls of North Amerika . E. regalis, E. annectens,//
Type skulls and current biostratigraphic distributions of North American edmontosaurs
Edmontosaurus phylogeny
E. regalis is known from the Horseshoe Canyon Foron, St. Mary River Formation, and Scollard Formation of Alberta, the Hell Creek Formation of Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, the Lance Formation of South Dakota and Wyoming, and the Laramie Formation of Colorado, dating from the Maastrichtian Stage of the Late Cretaceous. At least a dozen individuals are known, including seven skulls with associated postcrania, and five to seven other skulls. Trachodon atavus and Agathaumas milo are potential synonyms.
E. annectens was listed in the latest review as being present in the Scollard Formation of Alberta, the Hell Creek Formation of Montana and South Dakota, the Lance Formation of South Dakota and Wyoming, and the Laramie Formation of Colorado. It is limited to late Maastrichtian rocks, and is known from at least five skulls with postcrania. One author, Kraig Derstler, has described E. annectens as “perhaps the most perfectly-known dinosaur to date [1994].” Thespesius edmontoni or edmontonensis, Anatosaurus copei, and Trachodon longiceps were all regarded as synonyms of E. annectens in a 2004 review. T. edmontoni has usually been assigned to E. annectens since 1990, although the A. copei and T. longiceps synonymizations have not yet been tested by other authors. If they prove to belong to E. annectens, its total would increase by the five individuals assigned to A. copei and the lower jaw that is the holotype of T. longiceps (the number given for E. annectens in Horner et al. [2004] is incorrect, as it is unchanged from an earlier publication that did not consider A. copei and T. longiceps synonyms of E. annectens). The list of formations may be in error, depending on the formation that T. edmontoni comes from (it is not stated which part of the old Edmonton Formation it came from). T. edmontoni may be misassigned; James Hopson in 1975 proposed that it was a young E. regalis, and Nicolas Campione also found that its skull was indistinguishable from the contemporary E. regalis in a preliminary 2009 study. E. annectens differed from E. regalis by having a longer, lower, less robust skull. Although Brett-Surman regarded E. regalis and E. annectens as potentially representing males and females of the same species, all E. regalis specimens come from older formations than E. annectens specimens
.E. saskatchewanensis is known from four or five individuals, mostly represented by skulls. It has only been found in the late Maastrichtian-age Frenchman Formation of Saskatchewan. It differs from the other two species in its smaller size. There has been little published on this species since its description, in comparison to the other two species. Preliminary work by Nicolas Campione have shown that it is probably a synonym of E. annectens, though more study is required.Additionally, there are many Edmontosaurus fossils that have not been identified to species. Remains that have not been assigned to a particular species (identified as E. sp.) may extend the range of the genus as far as the Prince Creek Formation of Alaska and the Javelina Formation of Texas.PaleoecologyEdmontosaurus was a wide-ranging genus in both time and space. The rock units from which it is known can be divided into two groups by age: the older Horseshoe Canyon and St. Mary River formations, and the younger Frenchman, Hell Creek, Lance, Laramie, and Scollard formations. The time span covered by the Horseshoe Canyon Formation and equivalents is also known as Edmontonian, and the time span covered by the younger units is also known as Lancian.
The Edmontonian and Lancian time intervals had distinct dinosaur faunas.
Edmontonian paleoecology
The Edmontonian land vertebrate age is defined by the first appearance of Edmontosaurus regalis in the fossil record. Although sometimes reported as of exclusively early Maastrichtian age, the Horseshoe Canyon Formation was of somewhat longer duration. Deposition began approximately 73 million years ago, in the late Campanian, and ended between 68.0 and 67.6 million years ago. Edmontosaurus regalis is known from the lowest of five units within the Horseshoe Canyon Formation, but is absent from at least the second to the top. As many as three quarters of the dinosaur specimens from badlands near Drumheller, Alberta may pertain to Edmontosaurus. The Horseshoe Canyon Formation is interpreted as having a significant marine influence, due to an encroaching Western Interior Seaway, the shallow sea that covered the midsection of North America through much of the Cretaceous. E. regalis shared the setting with fellow hadrosaurids Hypacrosaurus and Saurolophus, hypsilophodont Parksosaurus, horned dinosaurs Montanoceratops, Anchiceratops, Arrhinoceratops, and Pachyrhinosaurus, pachycephalosaurid Stegoceras, ankylosaurid Euoplocephalus, nodosaurid Edmontonia, ostrich-mimics Ornithomimus and Struthiomimus, a variety of poorly known small theropods including troodontids and dromaeosaurids, and the tyrannosaurids Albertosaurus and Daspletosaurus. Edmontosaurus is found in coastal, near-marine settings, while Hypacrosaurus and Saurolophus are found in more continental lowlands. Edmontosaurus and Saurolophus are not usually found together. The typical edmontosaur habitat of this formation has been described as the back regions of bald cypress swamps and peat bogs on delta coasts. Pachyrhinosaurus also preferred this habitat to the floodplains dominated by Hypacrosaurus, Saurolophus, Anchiceratops and Arrhinoceratops. The Edmontonian-age coastal Pachyrhinosaurus-Edmontosaurus association is recognized as far north as Alaska.Lancian paleoecologyThe Lancian time interval was the last interval before the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event that eliminated non-avian dinosaurs. Edmontosaurus was one of the more common dinosaurs of the interval. Robert Bakker reports that it made up one-seventh of the large dinosaur sample, with most of the rest (five-sixths) made up of the horned dinosaur Triceratops. The coastal plain Triceratops–Edmontosaurus association, dominated by Triceratops, extended from Colorado to Saskatchewan. Typical dinosaur faunas of the Lancian formations where Edmontosaurus has been found also included the hypsilophodont Thescelosaurus, the rare hadrosaurid Anatotitan, the rare ceratopsids Nedoceratops (=”Diceratops”) and Torosaurus, pachycephalosaurids Pachycephalosaurus and Stygimoloch, the ankylosaurid Ankylosaurus, and the theropods Ornithomimus, Troodon, and Tyrannosaurus.The Hell Creek Formation, as typified by exposures in the Fort Peck area of Montana, has been interpreted as a flat forested floodplain, with a relatively dry subtropical climate that supported a variety of plants ranging from angiosperm trees, to conifers such as bald cypress, to ferns and ginkgos. The coastline was hundreds of kilometers or miles to the east. Stream-dwelling turtles and tree-dwelling multituberculate mammals were diverse, and monitor lizards as large as the modern Komodo dragon hunted on the ground. Triceratops was the most abundant large dinosaur, and Thescelosaurus the most abundant small herbivorous dinosaur. Edmontosaur remains have been collected here from stream channel sands, and include fossils from individuals as young as a meter- or yard-long infant. The edmontosaur fossils probably represent accumulations from groups on the move.The Lance Formation, as typified by exposures approximately 100 kilometers (62 mi) north of Fort Laramie in eastern Wyoming, has been interpreted as a bayou setting similar to the Louisiana coastal plain. It was closer to a large delta than the Hell Creek Formation depositional setting to the north and received much more sediment. Tropical araucarian conifers and palm trees dotted the hardwood forests, differentiating the flora from the northern coastal plain. The climate was humid and subtropical, with conifers, palmettos, and ferns in the swamps, and conifers, ash, live oak, and shrubs in the forests. Freshwater fish, salamanders, turtles, diverse lizards, snakes, shorebirds, and small mammals lived alongside the dinosaurs. Small dinosaurs are not known in as great of abundance here as in the Hell Creek rocks, but Thescelosaurus once again seems to have been relatively common. Triceratops is known from many skulls, which tend to be somewhat smaller than those of more northern individuals. The Lance Formation is the setting of two edmontosaur “mummies”.Brain and nervous system
A 1905 chart showing the relatively small brains of a Triceratops (top) and EdmontosaurusThe brain of Edmontosaurus has been described in several papers and abstracts through the use of endocasts of the cavity where the brain had been. E. annectens and E. regalis, as well as specimens not identified to species, have been studied in this way. The brain was not particularly large for an animal the size of Edmontosaurus. The space holding it was only about a quarter of the length of the skull, and various endocasts have been measured as displacing 374 milliliters (13 US fl oz)[76] to 450 milliliters (15 US fl oz), which does not take into account that the brain may have occupied as little as 50% of the space of the endocast, the rest of the space being taken up by the dura mater surrounding the brain. For example, the brain of the specimen with the 374 millilitre endocast is estimated to have had a volume of 268 milliliters (9 US fl oz). The brain was an elongate structure, and as with other non-mammals, there would have been no neocortex. Like Stegosaurus, the neural canal was expanded in the hips, but not to the same degree: the endosacral space of Stegosaurus had 20 times the volume of its endocranial cast, whereas the endosacral space of Edmontosaurus was only 2.59 times larger in volume.
Feeding adaptations
As a hadrosaurid, Edmontosaurus was a large terrestrial herbivore. Its teeth were continually replaced and packed into dental batteries that contained hundreds of teeth, only a relative handful of which were in use at any time. It used its broad beak to cut loose food, perhaps by cropping, or by closing the jaws in a clamshell-like manner over twigs and branches and then stripping off the more nutritious leaves and shoots. Because the tooth rows are deeply indented from the outside of the jaws, and because of other anatomical details, it is inferred that Edmontosaurus and most other ornithischians had cheek-like structures, muscular or non-muscular. The function of the cheeks was to retain food in the mouth. The animal’s feeding range would have been from ground level to around 4 meters (13 ft) above.Before the 1960s and 1970s, the prevailing interpretation of hadrosaurids like Edmontosaurus was that they were aquatic and fed on aquatic plants. An example of this is William Morris’s 1970 interpretation of an edmontosaur skull with nonbony beak remnants. He proposed that the animal had a diet much like that of some modern ducks, filtering plants and aquatic invertebrates like mollusks and crustaceans from the water and discharging water via V-shaped furrows along the inner face of the upper beak. This interpretation of the beak has been rejected, as the furrows and ridges are more like those of herbivorous turtle beaks than the flexible structures seen in filter-feeding birds.The prevailing model of how hadrosaurids fed was put forward in 1984 by David B. Weishampel. He proposed that the structure of the skull permitted motion between bones that led to backward and forward motion of the lower jaw, and outward bowing of the tooth-bearing bones of the upper jaw when the mouth was closed. The teeth of the upper jaw would grind against the teeth of the lower jaw like rasps, processing plant material trapped between them. Such a motion would parallel the effects of mastication in mammals, although accomplishing the effects in a completely different way. An important piece of evidence for Weishampel’s model is the orientation of scratches on the teeth, showing the direction of jaw action. Other movements could produce similar scratches, though, such as movement of the bones of the two halves of the lower jaw. Not all models have been scrutinized under present techniques.Weishampel developed his model with the aid of a computer simulation. Natalia Rybczynski and colleagues have updated this work with a much more sophisticated three-dimensional animation model, scanning a skull of E. regalis with lasers. They were able to replicate the proposed motion with their model, although they found that additional secondary movements between other bones were required, with maximum separations of 1.3 to 1.4 centimeters (0.51 to 0.55 in) between some bones during the chewing cycle. Rybczynski and colleagues were not convinced that the Weishampel model is viable, but noted that they have several improvements to implement to their animation. Planned improvements include incorporating soft tissue and tooth wear marks and scratches, which should better constrain movements. They note that there are several other hypotheses to test as well. Further work by Casey Holliday and Lawrence Witmer found that ornithopods like Edmontosaurus lacked the types of skull joints seen in those modern animals that are known to have kinetic skulls (skulls that permit motion between their constituent bones), such as squamates and birds. They proposed that joints that had been interpreted as permitting movement in dinosaur skulls were actually cartilaginous growth zones
.The immobile skull model was challenged in 2009 by Vincent Williams and colleagues. Returning to tooth microwear, they found four classes of scratches on Edmontosaurus teeth. The most common class was interpreted as resulting from an oblique motion, not a simple up-down or front-back motion, which is more consistent with the Weishampel model. This motion is thought to have been the primary motion for grinding food. Two scratch classes were interpreted as resulting from forward or backward movement of the jaws. The other class was variable and probably resulted from opening the jaws. The combination of movements is more complex than had been previously predicted. Because scratches dominate the microwear texture, Williams et al. suggested Edmontosaurus was a grazer instead of a browser, which would be predicted to have fewer scratches due to eating less abrasive materials.
Candidates for ingested abrasives include silica-rich plants like horsetails and soil that was accidentally ingested due to feeding at ground level.Reports of gastroliths, or stomach stones, in the hadrosaurid Claosaurus are actually based on a probable double misidentification. First, the specimen is actually of Edmontosaurus annectens. Barnum Brown, who discovered the specimen in 1900, referred to it as Claosaurus because E. annectens was thought to be a species of Claosaurus at the time. Additionally, it is more likely that the supposed gastroliths represent gravel washed in during burial.
Gut contents
Both of the “mummy” specimens collected by the Sternbergs were reported to have had possible gut contents. Charles H. Sternberg reported the presence of carbonized gut contents in the American Museum of Natural History specimen, but this material has not been described. The plant remains in the Senckenberg Museum specimen have been described, but have proven difficult to interpret. The plants found in the carcass included needles of the conifer Cunninghamites elegans, twigs from conifer and broadleaf trees, and numerous small seeds or fruits. Upon their description in 1922, they were the subject of a debate in the German-language journal Paläontologische Zeitschrift. Kräusel, who described the material, interpreted it as the gut contents of the animal, while Abel could not rule out that the plants had been washed into the carcass after death.At the time, hadrosaurids were thought to have been aquatic animals, and Kräusel made a point of stating that the specimen did not rule out hadrosaurids eating water plants. The discovery of possible gut contents made little impact in English-speaking circles, except for another brief mention of the aquatic-terrestrial dichotomy, until it was brought up by John Ostrom in the course of an article reassessing the old interpretation of hadrosaurids as water-bound. Instead of trying to adapt the discovery to the aquatic model, he used it as a line of evidence that hadrosaurids were terrestrial herbivores. While his interpretation of hadrosaurids as terrestrial animals has been generally accepted, the Senckenberg plant fossils remain equivocal. Kenneth Carpenter has suggested that they may actually represent the gut contents of a starving animal, instead of a typical diet. Other authors have noted that because the plant fossils were removed from their original context in the specimen and were heavily prepared, it is no longer possible to follow up on the original work, leaving open the possibility that the plants were washed-in debris.
Posted ImageInteractions with theropods
Edmondosaurus predator T rex attack on EDMONTOSAURUS dino2 °
The time span and geographic range of Edmontosaurus overlapped with Tyrannosaurus, and an adult specimen of E. annectens on display in the Denver Museum of Nature and Science shows evidence of a theropod bite in the tail. Counting back from the hip, the thirteenth to seventeenth vertebrae have damaged spines consistent with an attack from the right rear of the animal. One spine has a portion sheared away, and the others are kinked; three have apparent tooth puncture marks. The top of the tail was at least 2.9 meters (9.5 ft) high, and the only theropod species known from the same rock formation that was tall enough to make such an attack is T. rex. The bones are partially healed, but the edmontosaur died before the traces of damage were completely obliterated. The damage also shows signs of bone infection. Kenneth Carpenter, who studied the specimen, noted that there also seems to be a healed fracture in the left hip which predated the attack because it was more fully healed. He suggested that the edmontosaur was a target because it may have been limping from this earlier injury. Because it survived the attack, Carpenter suggested that it may have outmaneuvered or outran its attacker, or that the damage to its tail was incurred by the hadrosaurid using it as a weapon against the tyrannosaur.
Posted Image


C) 1997 M.ShiraishiEdmontosaurus ) meaning ‘Edmonton lizard’ (after where it was found, in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and Greek sauros meaning lizard) was a hadrosaurid dinosaur genus from the Maastrichtian, the last stage of the Cretaceous Period, 71-65 million years ago. A fully-grown adult could have been up to 9 metres (30 feet) long and some of the larger species reached 13 metres (43 feet). Its weight was in the region of 3.5 tonnes, making it one of the largest hadrosaurids.Edmontosaurus was erected by Lawrence Morris Lambe in 1917 from a find in the Edmonton Rock Formation, Alberta, using E. regalis as type species. Marsh named Claosaurus annectens in 1892, but this has now been reclassified as E. annectens. Likewise, Charles Mortram Sternberg named Thespesius in 1926, but this is also a species of Edmontosaurus, namely E. saskatchewanensis.The well-known hadrosaurid genus Anatosaurus has been synonymized with Edmontosaurus. Anatosaurus, meaning “duck lizard”, because of its wide, duck-like bill (Latin anato = duck + Greek sauros = lizard). The type species of Anatosaurus, A. annectens, was re-named Edmontosaurus annectens, forcing the name Anatosaurus to be abandoned as a junior synonym. Similarly, Anatosaurus saskatchewanensis was sunk into Edmontosaurus as E. saskatchewanensis. Two other species of Anatosaurus, A. longiceps (originally Trachodon) and A. copei (the famous mount at the American Museum of Natural History), were found to differ from Edmontosaurus were placed in a separate genus, Anatotitan.Edmontosaurus could pass the toughest food back and forth across the teeth with its muscular cheek pouches. To fit so many teeth into its mouth, they were packed into tight “banks” of up to sixty rows, and new teeth constantly grew to replace lost teeth — analogous to a modern shark. The bones of the upper jaw would flex outwards as lower jaw came up, so the mandible could grind against it. Typical food would have included conifer needles, seeds and twigs, and these have been found in the body cavities of fossilized edmontosaurs. It was evidently a tree-browser.The 1908 discovery in Wyoming was especially remarkable in that paleontologists actually recovered fossilized imprints of Edmontosaurus’ skin. The impression must have been left by the skin drying very quickly and fixing its shape into the mud. It is from these impressions that we know the skin was scaly and leathery, and the thigh muscle was under the skin of the body. This would have given the impression that the leg left its body at the knee, and the whole thigh was under the skin. This only contributes to its resemblance to a duck. It also had a number of tubercles (bumps) along its neck and down its back and tail.Edmontosaurus was bipedal but could certainly have walked on four legs. The forelimbs are shorter than the hinds but not sufficiently that four-legged motivation was unfeasible. The front feet also had hooves on two fingers, and weight-bearing pads like those of Camarasaurus. The rear feet had three funtional toes and all were hoofed. The bone structure in the lower limbs suggests that both the legs and feet were attached to very powerful muscles. The spine curved downwards at the shoulders, so Edmontosaurus would have had a low posture and would have browsed close to the ground. Despite the power of the limbs, Edmontosaurus would only have been slow-moving and had few defensive features. To survive, it must have had keen eyesight, hearing and smell to get early warning of predators. © 2007 Answers Corporation


Edmontosaurus was a Herbivore from the Late Cretaceous Period.



Edmontosaurus meaning ‘Edmonton lizard’ (after where it was found, in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and Greek sauros meaning lizard) was a hadrosaurid dinosaur genus from the Maastrichtian, the last stage of the Cretaceous Period, 71-65 million years ago. A fully-grown adult could have been up to 9 metres (30 feet) long and some of the larger species reached 13 metres (43 feet). Its weight was in the region of 3.5 tonnes, making it one of the largest hadrosaurids.

Edmontosaurus was een hadrosauriër of eendesnaveldinosauriër behorend tot de groep van de Edmontosaurini. Het was een herbivoor zonder klauwen. Wel kon hij wellicht door een op te zwellen neuszak zijn soortgenoten waarschuwen voor gevaar. Hij was familie vanAnatotitan en leefde tijdens het late Krijt in het huidige Noord-Amerika.

De eerste soort, E. regalis werd in 1917 beschreven door Lawrence Morris Lambe. De geslachtsnaam verwijst naar de stad Edmonton in Canada; de soortaanduiding betekent: “koninklijk” en verwijst naar de enorme omvang van het dier dat een lengte kon bereiken van zo’n dertien meter. Er wordt een tweede soort onderscheiden: E. annectens, in 1892 door Othniel Charles Marsh beschreven als Claosaurus annectus. De derde soort is E. saskatchewanensis. Beide laatste zijn een tijdje ondergebracht bij Anatosaurus.

Een skelet van Edmontosaurus is te zien in Naturalis

Sommige dinosaurussen zijn zo groot dat ze niet op één verdieping van een gebouw zouden passen, zoals deze Camarasaurus in het museum Naturalis in Leiden

Rechts staat het skelet van edmontosaurus opgesteld


  • Efraasia                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Efraasia is een uitgestorven monotypisch geslacht van plantenetende basale sauropodomorfe dinosauriërs. De enige soort, Efraasia minor, leefde ongeveer 210 miljoen jaar geleden, tijdens het Opper-Trias, in het gebied van het huidige Duitsland.




Skull reconstruction of Efraasia minor (based on SMNS 12216, 12684, 12667). From Yates, 2003. Scale bar is 5 cm.



  • Einiosaurus—> Einiosaurus is een uitgestorven geslacht van plantenetende ornithischische dinosauriërs, behorend tot de groep van de Ceratopia, dat tijdens het Laat-Krijt leefde in het gebied van het huidige Noord-Amerika

 Einiosaurus had a large downward-curving nasal horn.



MfN Berlin Elaphrosaurus mount








theropods <—documentatiemap & beeldmateriaal  


E.Tyrannus   lengi   Eotyrannus (“dawn tyrant”) was a tyrannosauroid theropod dinosaur hailing from the Early Cretaceous Wessex Formation beds, included in Wealden Group, located in the southwest coast of the Isle of Wight, United Kingdom. The remains, consisting of assorted skull, axial skeleton and apendicular skeleton elements, from a juvenile or subadult, found in a plant debris clay bed, was described by Hutt et al. in early 2001. The etymology of the generic name refers to the animal’s character as an “early tyrant”, while the specific epithet is a mention to the discoverer of the fossil. Eotyrannus is a 6 meter-long theropod whose tyrannosauroid character is given by serrated premaxillary teeth with a D cross section, proportionally elongate tibiae and metatarsals. Primitive characters for Tyrannosauroidea are the elongate neck vertebrae and the long well developed arms forelimbs along with the undecorated dorsal surface of the skull, unlike the more advanced tyrannosaurids. However this animal, proportionally, has one of the longest hands in Theropoda known to date.This theropod would be a probable predator of such herbivorous dinosaur species as Hypsilophodon and Iguanodon. E. lengi’s find corroborates the notion that early tyrannosaurs were gracile with long forelimbs and three-fingered grasping hands though the big size of the animal either means that early evolution for this clade was carried out at a big size or Eotyrannus developed big size independently. The find of this animal in Europe puts interesting questions to the purported Asian origin for these animals along with North American Stokesosaurus and European Aviatyrannis arguing for a more complex biogeography for tyrannosaurs.Order: Saurischia
Suborder: Theropoda
Superfamily: Tyrannosauroidea
Genus: Eotyrannus

(Greek for “lizard in the tree”); Woodlands of Asia
Late Jurassic (150 million years ago)
About 6 inches long and one pound Probably omnivorous
Tiny size; long arms with clawed handsArchaeopteryx gets all the press, but there’s a convincing case to be made that Epidendrosaurus was the first reptile to be closer to a bird than to a dinosaur. This pint-sized theropod was less than half the size of its more famous cousin, and it’s a sure bet that it was covered with feathers. Most notably, Epidendrosaurus appears to have been adapted to an arboreal (tree-dwelling) lifestyle–its small size would have made it a simple matter to hop from branch to branch, and its long, curved claws were likely used to pry insects from tree bark.
So was Epidendrosaurus really a bird rather than a dinosaur?
As with all of the feathered “dino-birds,” as these reptiles are called, it’s impossible to say.
It’s better to think of the categories of “bird” and “dinosaur” as lying along a continuum, with some genera closer to either extreme and some smack in the middle.
  • Erectopus      —>Erectopus is een geslacht van vleesetende theropode dinosauriërs, behorend tot de Tetanurae, dat tijdens het vroege Krijt leefde in het gebied van het huidige Frankrijk. De enige benoemde soort is Erectopus superbus.

erectopus superbus

Fossil skull of the Cretaceous therizinosaur Erlikosaurus andrewsi (Credit: Image by Emily Rayfield, University of Bristol)
  • (Ichnofossil )Eubrontes (?) Glenrosensies ,

track with partly mud-collapsed digits
Track name: Eubrontes glenrosensis sp. 
Somervell County, Texas
Glen Rose Limestone
Lower Cretaceous (110 million years)


Eubrontes (?) glenrosensis SHULER, published by Adams et al. in Palaeontologia Electronica in 2010.

(The “toes” in the figure above)  =

_The figure above is both an indirect vindication of Weems’ work, and a warning: many dinosauriformian and dinosaurian lineages are so convergent that they make highly similar tracks across vast distances in space and time!


Weems in 2003, in a very detailed study of the pedal morphology and posture of Plateosaurus, noted the excellent correlation between Plateosaurus and the Connecticut Eubrontes tracks

  1.   March 6, 2009

    ” a trackmaker assignment is a hypothesis.

    Eubrontes isn’t a dinosaur body-fossil genus. It’s an ichnotaxon–in this case a footprint genus. There are no Eubrontes skeletons out there. The name is restricted to the footprint morphotype alone. Ignoring the issues with slapping Latin bionomials on sedimentary structures, this is a common practice and Eubrontes fossils represent a fairly characteristic type of footprint shape found across North America in Lower Jurassic rocks.

    The question of what animal made Eubrontes is a different issue, but identifying a footprint as a Eubrontes track is a matter of studying the footprint itself and comparing it to other footprints. There need not be dinosaur skeletal feet preserved nearby that fit the tracks. Again, the issue of who made the fooprint is a different issue from figuring out whether or not the track morphology is consistent with the morphotype that is known as Eubrontes. ”


Weems, R.E. 2003. Plateosaurus foot structure suggests a single trackmaker for Eubrontes and Gigandipus footprints, p. 293–313.


E. Hitchcock 1845, p. 23.

Type species: Eubrontes giganteus E. Hitchcock 1845, p. 23.

Lithographs and photographs of Eubrontes giganteus and referred specimens (from Olsen et al., 1998):(Scale, 5 cm, in the lithographs added by authors)

A, lithograph of AC 15/3, Hitchcock (1836, Fig. 21)B, lithograph of AC 15/3, Buckland (1836, Pl. 26b, Fig. 1)

C, lithograph of AC 15/3, Hitchcock (1848, Pl. 1, Fig. 1)

D, lithograph of AC 15/3, Hitchcock (1858, Pl. 57, fig 1)

E, type of Eubrontes giganteus AC 15/3

F, specimen referable to Eubrontes giganteus, in situ, at the locality for AC 15/3, the Dinosaur Footprint Reservation, Holyoke, Massachusetts

G, AC 45/8, the specimen substituted for the type of Eubrontes giganteus by Hitchcock (1865) and followed by most later workers.

H, AC 45/1, specimen figured by Lull (1904, 1915, 1953) as a referred specimen of Eubrontes giganteus. Scale is 5 cm.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Euoplocephalus-tutus-1.jpg      //Euoplocephalus-Skeleton in im Senckenberg Museum, Frankfurt//

Life restoration of Euoplocephalus.

  • Euoplocephalus       Euoplocephalus  Thyreophora/Ankylosauridae

Built like an armored tank, Euoplocephalus ambled through the late Cretaceous landscape, well equipped to withstand attack from any other dinosaur. Low slung and broad, the back of Euoplocephalus bore rows of bony shields with some taller spikes over the shoulders and at the base of the tail. There were also spikes on the dinosaur’s cheeks and behind each eye, protecting the head.

The most lethal weapon in Euoplocephalus’s armory was the double-headed club at the end of the long, stiffened tail. The base of the tail was quite flexible, but the last third was welded into a stiff rod by long struts growing out of each vertebra. The tail club could be swung most effectively from side to side, swiping at the feet of an attacking predator. If it connected with full force, it could shatter the ankle bones of the attacker, a wound that could later prove fatal.

Euoplocephalus had a compact, rounded head. Like other ankylosaurids, but unlike nodosaurids, it had a complex and convoluted nasal passage in the skull, but the function that this served is not clear. Perhaps the extra length given by the twists and loops allowed air to be warmed while the animal was breathing in, or perhaps this passage collected moisture from air being exhaled. The passage may also have been lined with sensors that gave Euoplocephalus an enhanced sense of smell for detecting food, predators, or potential mates.

The mouth had a broad beak at the front and a wide palate lined with small teeth. This arrangement suggests that Euoplocephalus was not particularly selective about what it ate and would consume almost any plant material that it could reach.

Around 40 specimens of Euoplocephalus have been found. All were isolated finds, which suggests thst these animals were loners rather than pack or herd animals. Packs and herds provided plant-eaters with a defense against predators but, perhaps because it was so heavily armored, Euoplocephalus had no need to rely on group behavior for protection.

Skeleton of Euoplocephalus
Euoplocephalus is medium- to large-sized ankylosaurid dinosar and is common from the Upper Cretaceous sediments of North America. It has slit-like nostrils, divided by a vertical septum. As in other ankylosaurids, this dinosaur has small teeth, and tooth shape indicates a herbivorous diet.
Euoplocephalus  stratigraphy     Jan 30, ’13  by Tim    /Consulting THE DINOSAURIA, I note that   Euoplocephalus  is known from the Upper Two Medicine formation as well as the Dinosaur Park. No doubt, that is why Euoplocephalus is thought to have outlasted Scolosaurus and Dyoplosaurus. The three genera may seem coeval in Dinosaur Park strata, but the Upper Two Medicine is younger than the Dinosaur Park. Available stratigraphic data suggests Scolosaurus and Dyoplosaurus disappeared about 75 MYA, but Euoplocephalus lasted until 72-71 MYA, or roughly the end of the Campanian. Euoplocephalus may have been eliminated by the Bearpaw transgression, inasmuch as ankylosaurids preferred interior as opposed to near-marine habitat. Of course, North American ankylosaurids weren’t eliminated entirely c 71 MYA, since the early Maastrichtian taxon and Ankylosaurus lived in the same region later. They or their ancestors may have inhabited areas less affected by the transgression.


Support Wikipedia



Camarasaurus skull.


Camarasaurus Camarasaurus

paper Dinosaur / Lindahall

40. The Carnegie Juvenile Camarasaurus, 1925


The reason the Osborn/Mook memoir on Camarasaurus was described as “almost definitive” (see item 39) is that one year after its publication, a fully articulated and nearly complete skeleton of a juvenile Camarasaurus was recovered from the Carnegie quarry, which shortly after this find became the Dinosaur National Monument. This massive slab (actually four slabs, joined together after shipment from the quarry) was and is the most perfect sauropod skeleton ever discovered. In 1925 Gilmore described the specimen in this fully illustrated memoir. The photograph reproduced at upper left shows the specimen as it was when found.

The Museum decided to display the skeleton as a panel mount, and another photograph shows the fossil as displayed (see illustration at lower right). Comparing the two reveals that the skeleton was allowed to retain its original position, except that the tail was straightened out, a few displaced bones were re-articulated, and the missing left ilium was provided from another specimen. The flat bone found next to the tail is a sternal plate, which was placed beneath the neck in the final display.


The articulation of the bones allowed Gilmore to conclude that Camarasaurus did not have its highest elevation at the shoulders, as Osborn, Mook, and Christman had reconstructed it, but rather stood highest at the hips, like Apatosaurus and Diplodocus.

The monograph contains a large folding plate with a corrected restoration of the skeleton. The photographs were taken by Arthur S. Coggeshall, and the line drawings and the full skeletal restoration were the work of Sydney Prentice.

Source Gilmore, Charles W.      “A nearly complete articulated skeleton of Camarasaurus, a saurischian dinosaur from the Dinosaur National Monument, Utah,” in: Memoirs of the Carnegie Museum, vol. 10 (1925), pp. 347-384. This work was on display in the original exhibition as item 40.

Camarasaurus is een sauropode dinosauriër behorend tot de groep van de Camarasauromorpha. Dit dier werd 18 tot 20 meter lang. Hij leefde in het Late Jura net als vele andere sauropoden.

Bij het geslacht werden door Edward Drinker Cope en Othniel Charles Marsh verschillende soorten onderscheiden waarvan tegenwoordig in ieder geval nog de oorspronkelijke twee erkend worden: respectievelijk C.supremus en C.grandis, beiden uit 1877.

Het dier had geen kiezen om planten of vlees mee te vermalen. Hij leefde voornamelijk van planten en heel misschien af en toe een insect. Zijn nek stond redelijk rechtop. Zo kon hij bij blaadjes die hoger groeiden

De tanden van sauropoden waren aangepast om plantendelen van de takken te trekken en niet om mee te kauwen. Dit was ook zo bij Camarasaurus.

 May 13, 2011  Filed under: Ornithopoda —   The original species of Camptosaurus is based on ten partial skeletons, ranging from juveniles to adults. The species is well-known from the mounted skeletons of a juvenile and an adult collected by Fred Brown and William H. Reed in the 1880s in Wyoming, USA, and put on display in the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC. The English species is a nomen dubium and may not even be an ornithopod.

ROM camptosaurus
//some people think they were obligate bipeds, thus the warning label on the photo  page on wikimedia . And as mentioned: more research needed.
WARNING   ;   the bipedal gait of the animal is  almost certainly  wrong  
Factbox °
//NameCamptosaurus, meaning ‘flexible lizard’  Size: 7m long and up to 6m tall  Food: plants Lived: 155-140 million years ago, in the Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous Periods in western Europe and North America
Camptosaurus is very similar to its cousin Iguanodon, a genus which was a characteristic feature of the landscape of the later early Cretaceous period in Europe. However, its head is longer and lower, and it has four toes on the back foot rather than three. Its heavy body can be carried on four legs (or on two, ? )  both its front five-fingered feet and its hind feet carrying weight-bearing hooves. Its long mouth contains hundreds of grinding teeth and it has a beak at the front. Its food would be kept in cheek pouches while chewed.
The curved thigh bone of this dinosaur enabled it to run quite fast on its powerful hind legs. As it ran, Camptosaurus balanced its bulky body with its heavy tail. This peaceful dinosaur had no weapons, such as horns or sharp claws, and the only way it could escape larger carnivorous dinosaurs was to run away. The strong, agile rear legs were made for running. It needed to be able to escape from an Allosaurus that could easily overpower even the largest Camptosaurus. Its front legs were small but strong and were used for slow movement during feeding and grubbing around in the brush. It fed with its short front legs on the ground, and the tall hips and rounded curve of the tail gave Camptosaurus a curved or bent profile. This is how it got its name.
It is possible that the original species of Camptosaurus is the only true one. The others may be species of Iguanodon.
camptosaurus NHM
camptosaurus 001
  • camptosaurus elbow and hands hands and elbow   MHN


Photo Album carcharodontosauridae

Carnotaurus sastrei , is one of the strangest dinosaurs to have come from South America. It was discovered in Patagonia, the southern tip of Argentina.
The most unusual feature of this meat-eating dinosaur was that it had two short, knobby eyebrow-horns and a small, deep shaped skull, making it look somewhat like a bull. These characteristics are reflected in its name. The horns were probably used more to impress females than for fighting.
Carnotaurus was fierce looking fellow. Its eyes faced forward, which is unusual in a dinosaur, and may indicate binocular vision and depth perception. It could look you in the eye, then flash a mouthful of flesh-tearing teeth, which enough to scare the pajamas off anything.
. Although the upper part of the skull seems powerful, the lower part appears slender and weak. The snout is incredibly blunt and deep, giving Carnotaurus the appearance of a dinosaur bulldog. Perhaps the strangest feature of this theropod is its tiny, underdeveloped arms, probably the tiniest of any of the larger meat-eaters. Its arms were so short that the hands appeared to sprout almost directly from the elbows. The forearms were not much longer than the fingers and they did not bend. It had primitive four-fingered hands and one of the fingers was a backward-facing spike. The palms faced outwards.
Carnotaurus sastrei was discovered in province of the Chubut by doctor A’ngel Tailor, who noticed a concretion of bone fragments. It was excavated in 1984 by José F. Bonaparte, who led a paleontological expedition of the Argentine Museum of Natural Sciences. it seemed that it was impossible to extract that material because it was on a tremendously hard rock, but eventually a single nearly complete skeleton has been described including impressions of skin along almost the entire right side.
Carnotaurus provided the best theropod skin impressions ever found. The skin was leather-like and lined with rows of bumps, that become larger toward the spine. These small cone-shaped nodules, each about two inches (5 cm) across, were regularly spaced over its body. Bonaparte says that when dying, this animal had been thrown on the mud, that when becoming hardened perfectly copied the texture of the leather. Although closely related to the feathered dinosaurs, the highly-detailed skin impressions showed no sign of feathers.

by Scot Hartman


(click on the  drawing   )
This is Carnotaurus sastrei, a theropod that seems to be little more than a mouth with a set of legs to carry it around. Carnotaurus belongs to an aberrant group of theropods called abelisaurs, which dominated much of the southern hemisphere during the Cretaceous. While all abelisaurs appear odd to our tetanuran-biased eyes, it seems like Carnotaurus is striving for weirdness as a means to its own end; as if it were making some sort of meta-commentary on abelisaur diversity.
The hyoid bones –
 the bones that support several muscles, including in dinosaurs the tongue musculature. Being long, slender bones that don’t directly articulate to other bones, hyoids are often not found (and other times are probably not collected or m-identified). Even when they are found, their lack of a direct connection to other bones makes restoring them problematic. In Carnotaurus this wasn’t a problem, as they were found in direct association with the underside of the mandible, apparently in their life position. The fact that extensive skin impressions were found with Carnotaurus reinforces the likelihood that the soft tissue holding the hyoid in place had not been disturbed.
In the skeletal above you can see part of the hyoid sticking out from under the bottom-rear part of the jaw. Part of the hyoid is obscured, but there’s not much I can do about that. Having the hyoid is actually pretty useful – the trachea and esophagus have to pass through it (or above it), so having a properly positioned hyoid constrains the throat tissue.
Carnotaurus is also striking due to its advanced arm reduction – in side view the arms almost disappear, as they don’t even extend past the stomach. What on Earth could such arms be used for? Hold on to that thought, as I’m not ready to go public with my thoughts on that just yet. But it sure reinforces the “legs carrying a head” image.
The back and neck also have osteological structures that raise up to, or above the level of the neural spine. So most of the animal should be restored as having a remarkably flat top. Given how narrow the head is, this must have produced a really strange life appearance.
A final note on the skeletal itself: while Carnotaurus is a wonderfully complete specimen, the lower legs and much of the tail is missing, so those elements were restored after its close cousinAucasaurus.
Carnotaurus January 25, 2012  Filed under: Theropoda —

This large predatory dinosaur had a thick, powerful neck, a bull-shaped head and very short forearms for its size.

Carnotaurus was previously considered to be a member of the group of dinosaurs known as the carnosaurs. However, the group has since been defined to encompass only the allosaurs and their closest kin. It is now classified as an abelisaurid. Carnotaurus had a shorter and deeper skull than Tyrannosaurus and had hornlets over its eyes.

An almost complete skeleton of Carnotaurus was extracted with difficulty from the hard mineral nodule in which it was preserved in Argentina. The deep skull suggests that it may have had an acute sense of smell, but the strength of the jaws and neck implied by the muscle attachments seem at odds with the weakness of the lower jaw and teeth.

Factbox  //Name: Carnotaurus, meaning ‘meat-eating bull’  Size: 7.5m long and 3.5m high Food: meat, mainly other dinosaurs Lived: 100-90 million years ago in the Middle to Late Cretaceous in South America

The head is very short and squashed-looking, with a shallow, hooked lower jaw. Two horns stick out sideways from above the eyes, probably being used for sparring with rivals. The arms are extremely short with no apparent forearms, even shorter than the tiny arms ofTyrannosaurus. They form mere stumps with four miniscule fingers. The skin texture, the best-known of any theropod, has a groundmass of small, pebbly scales but with large, conical scutes forming rows along the sides.

The skull of Carnotaurus has an enormous hole in front of the eye sockets – this is known as the antorbital fossa. All theropods possess this, but only in the abelisaurids is it so large

Its long, muscular hind legs may have made Carnotaurus much more agile than some other theropods. It would have been able to rush up on its prey and take it by surprise, probably using its sharp claws to slash and grip, while its powerful jaws took out chunks of flesh.

Although Carnotaurus had a very strong skull, it also needed to be light enough to move easily. There were spaces in the sides of the skull to help make it lighter. By jerking its head back, Carnotaurus could tear its prey apart. The teeth in the upper jaw could slice through the flesh, which was held by the lower jaw. Carnotaurus had teeth about 4cm long which curved backwards to help it keep hold of its victim.

Carnotaurus was found in a vast area of grassland and semi-desert called Patagonia in Argentina in 1985. It was an exciting find because the remains gave scientists a very good idea of what this dinosaur’s skin looked like. Along the surface of the body, from head to tail, there were rows of cone-shaped bumps. Rows of big, raised sclaes stood out from the smaller bumps on Carnotaurus’ head, making a pattern around the eyes and on the upper part of its snout.

Carnotaurus was as heavy as a car, almost as tall as an elephant and ran on two legs. Its long backbone was like a big girder supporting the weight beneath. Long rib bones from shoulder to hip gave Carnotaurus extra protection and support.

When Carnotaurus was moving at top speed it would have been unstable without its tail. Carnotaurus used its long, muscular tail to help it keep its balance. This enabled it to push its head forward to seize hold of its struggling prey.

At the top of its short deep head, Carnotaurus had a pair of small, flat horns. These jutted forward over its eyes rather like little wings. Unlike the ceratopsians, such as TriceratopsCarnotaurus’ horns were too small to have been used for defence. Experts think that they may have been coated in extra layers of horn, which would have made them longer. Like stag deer, it is also possible that the male Carnotaurus had larger horns than the females.

Centrosaurus nasicornis

Gehoornde hagedis
Afbeelding Centrosaurus nasicornis

: Krijt: Ornitischia: Herbivoor: 6m

Deze planteneter hoort bij de Ceratopsia (‘gehoornde dinosauriërs’), net als zijn verwanten Chasmosaurus en Triceratops. En dat kan je goed zien: deze dino heeft een kort nekschild, twee kleine hoorns boven de ogen en één grote hoorn op de snuit. Hij heeft ook een scherpe papegaaienbek, waarmee hij planten kon afknippen. Hij liep dus rond met een schaar op zijn snoet.

Deze dino leefde 75 miljoen jaar geleden. Paleontologen vonden hem in Noord-Amerika.



this rather lovely centrosaurus skeleton. nearly complete from head to toe…  it had toe bones. this skeleton apart from some vertebrae was complete

Another lovely centrosaurus… (or if you’re into brown’s interpretation =  the type specimen of monoclonius nasicornis.).. skeleton. Again nearly complete head to tail.



  Figure 10.Ceratopsia.
(a) Skulls of Psittacosaurus and (bProtoceratops.

A protoceratops flock.

Protoceratops skull growth series.
From left: Small Juvenile, Large Juvenile, Small Adult, Large Adult.

A Psittacosaurus flock

List of ceratopsian genera by classification and location follows a review by Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. in 2010.


Ceratosaurus     Ceratosaurus         


Plusieurs squelettes de Ceratosaurus adultes ont été retrouvés à ce jour. C’est le plus grand et d’une certaine manière le plus primitif des cératosaures. Il a de nombreux points communs avec Allosaurus. Cependant, il montre plusieurs différences subtiles. En particulier, sa main possède quatre doigts développés, à la différence d’Allosaurus qui n’en a que trois. En comparaison, Cératosaurus semble avoir été plus agile.

Ceratosaurus “Lézard cornu ” possédait trois orteils munis de griffes.

Selon les espèces, la taille est estimée entre 5,7 et 6 m.

Ceratosaurus vivait en Amérique du Nord, en Europe et en Afrique. Les fossiles ont été retrouvés dans le Colorado et le Wyoming. D’autres fossiles ont été découverts au Portugal et en Tanzanie.

Les fossiles sont tous datés du Jurassique supérieur.

Il portait une petite corne sur le museau, juste derrière les narines. Cette corne était trop fine pour servir d’arme. On ne connaît pas exactement la fonction de cette corne. Peut-être servait-elle à la parade amoureuse ?

Ses mâchoires imposantes avaient des dents incurvées et acérées

La rangée de plaques osseuses, qui forme une crête dentelée le long de son dos, aurait pu servir à réguler sa température.

Il portait également une petite crête devant chaque oeil.

Les empreintes, trouvées dans les roches de la Formation Morrison, dans l’ouest des Etats-Unis, montrent que ces dinosaures se déplaçaient en groupe. Ils pouvaient peut-être s’associer pour chasser ou pourquoi pas avoir une organisation “sociale”.

Classification: Saurischia Theropoda Ceratosauria        Plusieurs espèces ont été décrites:

Ceratosaurus nasicornis
Ceratosaurus ingens
Ceratosaurus magnicornis
Ceratosaurus roechlingi
Ceratosaurus willisobrienorum

The Largest Ceratosaurus

Eastern Utah’s Cleveland-Lloyd dinosaur quarry is a treasure trove of predatory dinosaurs. In addition to elements from more than 46 individual Allosaurus, this fossil-rich pocket has yielded remains of rarer predators that lived in the region 150 million years ago, including the little-known Marshosaurus and the tyrannosaur Stokesosaurus.
The charismatic, well-ornamented predator Ceratosaurus has been uncovered from these deposits, too, but the particular individual found in the Jurassic quarry might belong to a species that was only recently recognized.
Since the late 19th century, the Ceratosaurus genus has been best represented by one species: Ceratosaurus nasicornis.
Paleontologist O.C. Marsh included a beautiful reconstruction of this dinosaur in a kangaroo-like pose in his essential 1896 tome The Dinosaurs of North America. In 2000, however, paleontologists James Madsen and Samuel Welles named two additional species in their detailed monograph on the osteology of Ceratosaurus.
One, represented by an articulated skeleton found in Colorado’s Fruita Paleontological Area, was named Ceratosaurus magnicornis,
and the unusual Cleveland-Lloyd specimen was dubbed Ceratosaurus dentisulcatus.

The Cleveland-Lloyd species was not found all together in a single, articulated skeleton. Work over many years turned up the scattered remains of what Madsen and Welles considered to be a singleCeratosaurus individual.
When the isolated parts were viewed together, the paleontologists were struck by the size of the dinosaur. This Ceratosaurus was significantly larger than any found before. (I have seen these fossils myself in the Natural History Museum of Utah collections, and compared to the skeleton on display at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, the Cleveland-Lloyd Ceratosaurus is huge.) What Masen and Welles called Ceratosaurus dentisulcatus also differed in various anatomical aspects such as larger, more recurved teeth and a nasal opening set lower down at the front of the skull. Sadly, the portions of the skull which preserved the dinosaur’s ornaments were not found, so we don’t know how this species might have differed from others in this respect.
It’s difficult to say how large this individual actually was. The Cleveland-Lloyd Ceratosaurus was much larger than the roughly 17.5-foot specimen that formed the basis of previous anatomical descriptions, and informal estimates have placed the larger species at about 28 feet. Yet, given the new interest in dinosaur growth, I have to wonder if Ceratosaurus dentisulcatus really represents a bigger, badder species than Ceratosaurus nasicornisCeratosaurus is a relatively rare dinosaur, so much so that we still don’t have a good idea of how individuals varied from one to another, nor do we have a solid understanding of Ceratosaurus growth. Maybe the Cleveland-Lloyd Ceratosaurus is just an older, and therefore larger, individual of Ceratosaurus nasicornis in the same way that the dinosaur often called Saurophaganax might be an older or particularly large variant of Allosaurus. Even though the dinosaurs of the Morrison Formation have been known for a long time and seem familiar, there is much we still don’t know about their biology.
References:   Madsen JH, Welles SP. Ceratosaurus (Dinosauria, Therapoda), a Revised Osteology. Miscellaneous Publication. Utah Geological Survey.                                                          Brian Switek

Especes dinosaures

V.B (05.2003) M.à.J 30.01.2006

Picc © Joe Tucciarone and Jeff Poling

Ceratosaurus / meaning ‘horned lizard’, in reference to the horn on its nose (Greek keras/keratos meaning ‘horn’ and sauros meaning ‘lizard’), was a large predatory dinosaur from the Late Jurassic Period, found in the Morrison Formation of North America, in Tanzania and possibly in Portugal. It was characterized by large jaws with enormous, bladelike teeth, a large, blade-like horn on the snout and a pair hornlets over the eyes. The forelimbs were powerfully built but very short. The bones of the sacrum were fused (synsacrum) and the pelvic bones were fused together and to this structure (Sereno 1997) (i.e. similar to modern birds). Evidence suggests that there may also have been a row of small spurs or even a low sail, along the spine.

Discovery and species

Ceratosaurus is known from the Cleveland Lloyd Dinosaur Quarry in central Utah and the Dry Mesa Quarry in Colorado. The type species, described by O. C. Marsh in 1884 and redescribed by Gilmore in 1920, is Ceratosaurus nasicornis. Two further species have recently been described in 2000, C. magnicornis, and dentisulcatus. However, additional species, including C. ingens, C. stechowi and a species that has been referred to as C. meriani, from Portugal, have been described from less complete material. While C. nasicornis remains the type species and is cited at around 6 meters (20 feet) in length, additional finds indicate that this species may be misleadingly small, and that Ceratosaurus was likely larger. Very scant remains of a Ceratosaurus-like theropod have been found in Tanzania and would have belonged to an animal at least 15 meters (50 feet) in length, much larger than Allosaurus.


Ceratosaurus lived alongside dinosaurs such as Allosaurus, Torvosaurus, Apatosaurus, Diplodocus, and Stegosaurus. It may have competed with Allosaurus for prey, though it was smaller at around 6 to 8 meters (20-27 feet) in length, weighing 500 kg up to 1 tonne. Ceratosaurus had a longer, more flexible body, with a tail shaped like a crocodilian. This suggests that it was a better swimmer than the stiffer Allosaurus. A recent study by Bakker confirmed that Ceratosaurs generally hunted aquatic prey, such as fish and crocodiles, although it had potential for feeding on large dinosaurs. The study also suggests that sometimes adults and juveniles ate together. This evidence is, of course, very debatable and Ceratosaurus tooth marks are very common on large, terrestrial dinosaur prey fossils.


Relatives of Ceratosaurus include Elaphrosaurus and the abelisaur Carnotaurus. The classification of Ceratosaurus and its immediate relatives has been under intense debate recently. In the past, Ceratosaurus, the Cretaceous Albelisaurs and the primitive Coelophysoidae were all grouped together and called Ceratosauria, defined as theropods closer to Ceratosaurus than to the lineage of aves. Recent evidence, however, has shown large distinctions between the later, larger and more advanced Ceratosaurs and earlier forms like Coelophysis, leading to the naming of the later theropods as Neoceratosauria and closer to, or perhaps even ancesteral to, Tetanuran carnosaurus like Allosaurus. Many Theropods no longer considered close to Ceratosaurus were once classified as relatives, including Eustreptospondylus and Yangchuanosaurus. While it is likely that they are not Neoceratosaurs these ‘more advanced’ theropods do display a sort of middle ground of primitive characteristics compared to Allosaurs (Eustreptospondylus lacks the Allosaur expanded boot-shaped pubic bone, instead having a rod shaped pubis like Ceratosaurus. Many Sinraptors and Allosaurs have a tendency to grow elaborate and multiple horn rows, very visible in Yangchuanosaurus and prominent in Ceratosaurus). Some of the most modern publishings have even begun listing Ceratosaurus as a basal Tetanurae and closer to Allosaurus than Coelophysis. While considered distant from the lineage of aves among the theropods, Ceratosaurus and its kin were still very bird-like and even had a more ‘advanced-looking tarsus than Allosaurus. As with all dinosaurs, the more fossils found of these animals, the better their evolution and relationships can be understood.

Info Copyright © 2006 Answers Corporation

Ceratosaurus nasicornis was een een theropode dinosauriër uit het Jura.

Ceratosaurus werd in 1884 beschreven door Othniel Charles Marsh. Hij is gevonden in lagen van zo’n 150 miljoen jaar geleden in de Verenigde Staten en Afrika, gebieden die zich toen nog op één continent bevonden.

Ceratosaurus was ongeveer zes m lang en 2.50 m hoog, en had enkele kenmerkende eigenschappen. De meeste theropoden zoals Allosaurus hebben hoorns. De twee boven de ogen waren klein en leken meer op kammetjes, zo ook bij Ceratosaurus: bij hem echter was de hoorn op de neus (althans de middenlijn van de schedel, achter de neusgaten) sterk vergroot, en kon, hoewel vrij plat, met recht een ‘hoorn’ genoemd worden. Er was ook een kleiner hoorntje meer achter op de schedel. Sommige schedels hebben grotere hoorns dan andere. Dit kan twee dingen betekenen: er waren verschillende soorten, of er waren verschillen tussen de seksen. De functie van de hoorns is onduidelijk, misschien werden ze door de mannetjes gebruikt bij gevechten. De hoorn op de neus zou ook een geducht wapen kunnen vormen, waarmee het dier prooien aanviel en zich verdedigde tegen de grotere roofdieren, zoals Allosaurus – maar dat kan alleen maar zo geweest zijn als het onbekende hoornweefsel een scherpe kartelrand vormde, want de bewaard gebleven botkern is vrij stomp.

Op de rug van Ceratosaurus liepen de erg lange doornuitsteeksels als een kam over de ruggengraat. Deze kam, en de hoorn(s), gaven het dier een draakachtig uiterlijk.

Ceratosaurus had vier vingers, terwijl de meeste andere theropoden uit de late Jura er drie hadden. In het vroege Jura en het late Trias kwamen wel meer viervingerige theropoden voor (ook vijfvingerige). Deze primitieve eigenschap toont in samenhang met vele andere kenmerken aan dat Ceratosaurus een theropode was uit één van de twee hoofdvertakkingen van de Theropoda, die zelfs naar deze soort genoemd is: de Ceratosauria; de andere vertakking heet de Tetanurae. De vierde vinger was wel kleiner, en had geen klauw.

In 2000 zijn twee andere soorten beschreven: C. magnicornis en C. dentisulcatus. Het is nog zeer omstreden of het hier inderdaad om aparte soorten gaat. De laatste vorm is ongeveer 60% langer. Daar dinosauriërs typisch nooit ophielden met groeien kan het ook om een groot individu van C. nasicornis gaan. De andere vorm had, zoals de naam reeds aangeeft, een grotere hoorn – maar dat is vermoedelijk een zeer variabel kenmerk. Voor een komische noot zorgde in 1995 Pickering door niet-diagnostische resten C. willisobrienorum te noemen, enkel om een tekenstudio te eren. Volgens de regels staat het een ieder vrij om via een publicatie nieuwe soorten te benoemen. De heer Pickering misbruikt deze vrijheid regelmatig.

Een ander vreemd kenmerk van Ceratosaurus , dat hij met vele theropoden deelde, was dat de onvergroeide onderkaken (iedere gewervelde heeft er twee) van de toch al relatief grote (1 m) schedel in het midden (dus aan beide zijkanten van de schedel) gewrichten hadden en ook ten opzichte van elkaar vrij mobiel waren. Dit kan op verschillende manieren geïnterpreteerd worden: allereerst als een vermogen om, net als veel slangen, zijn bek aan de voorkant ‘uit te rekken’. Zo kon het dier vrij grote prooien (bijvoorbeeld de snelle Dryosaurus) in hun geheel doorslikken, als de beide onderkaken van voren uit elkaar klapten. Misschien was dit vanwege de concurrentie van andere roofdieren. Als Ceratosaurus net zoals veel andere dieren gewoon happen uit zijn prooi zou nemen, zou hij niet de tijd hebben om zijn prooi op te eten voordat er aaseters kwamen. Als hij de prooi in zijn geheel kon doorslikken, had hij het volledige maal al op voordat de aaseters de geur konden ruiken. De meer traditionele interpretatie is dat de onderkaaksmiddengewrichten niet naar binnen klapten zodat de punten van voren uit elkaar gingen, maar naar buiten zodat de hele bek korter en breder werd. Dit verhoogt de zaagwerking van de tanden. Voor deze gebruikelijke opvatting pleit het feit dat bij fossielen de onderkaken toch vaak als één geheel bewaard zijn gebleven – wat duidt op vrij strakke kapselverbindingen – en het simpele gegeven dat de normale kaakgewrichten al toestonden de bek enorm open te sperren, terwijl de ingang door de verbreding ook vergroot werd. Ertegen pleit dat mogelijkheid tot de noodzakelijke horizontale beweging van de normale kaakgewrichten nooit aangetoond is.

1. Chilantaisaurus? sibiricus
There are a lot of fragmentary taxa known from a tooth or a vertebra that are poorly described (usually in a useless archaic way) and illustrated in a photo from a single view. What makes sibiricus stand out is that Riabinin (1914) didn’t even identify which element the holotype was, let alone try to describe its features. He just said it was hollow and belonged to the limb of a fairly large theropod, probably a megalosaurid (named as Allosaurus? sibiricus). Even worse, he didn’t illustrate it, only providing six measurements (proximal width 48 mm, proximal depth 39 mm, distal width 68 mm, distal depth 62 mm, cavity width 22 mm, cavity depth 17 mm). Huene (1932) identified it as a distal metatarsal IV without rationale, but said only that it did not permit exact characterization and probably belonged to an allosaurid (renamed Antrodemus? sibiricus). Molnar et al. (1990) then said it was “almost identical with that of C. tashuikouensis in form and proportions of the distal condyle”, so questionably referred it to that genus. You now possess the entirity of published information on sibiricus.

Artist’s restoration of Ceratosaurus.


 June 19, 2011

Filed under: Theropoda —
Coelurus would eat anything it came across – even the rotting carcasses of animals killed by other dinosaurs.
It was a nippy little dinosaur, with a small head about the same size as a man’s hand. Its teeth were razor-sharp and curved. Once they had sunk into another animal, it was almost impossible for the prey to wrench itself free. Coelurus also used its powerful teeth and jaws to rip flesh from the rotting carcasses of prey killed by other carnivores.
For a long time Coelurus was thought to have been another specimen of Ornitholestes. However, studies by John Ostrom in 1976 and Jacques Gauthier in 1986 show that the hands are like those of the maniraptorans. In contrast, the neck is nothing like that of a maniraptoran and it is unclear whether this animal fits into the dinosaur family tree.

Name: Coelurus, meaning ‘hollow tail’
Size: 2m long
Food: meat, usually dead dinosaurs it found
Lived: about 140 million years ago during the Late Jurassic Period in North America
This animal is another of the small, hunting dinosaurs. It has a strangely down-curved jaw with sharp, curved teeth. The hands are long but not particularly strong, with a wrist joint similar to that of a bird, and very flexible fingers. The ‘hollow tail’ part of the name refers to the deep excavations in the vertebrae of the back and tail, something like those found as a weight-saving measure in sauropods.
Coelurus had very light bones and a stiff tail with hollow bones in it. Its front limbs were short and slim. Its hands were small and weak, with three curved claws. Coelurus had similar, slightly blunter claws on the toes of both back limbs. It used its hands to snatch at its prey and to keep it in its grasp, while ripping it to death with the claws on its feet.
Specimens of Coelurus found in four locations in the same quarry may have come from the one individual. That individual may not even have been fully grown, and so the size estimate here may be on the small side.


Signification : A queue creuse

Taille : 2 mètres de long

Poids : 15 à 30 kilogrammes

Groupe : Théropodes

Famille : Coeluridés

Epoque : Jurassique supérieur (156-137 ma)

Régime alimentaire : Carnivore

Répartition : Etats-Unis (Wyoming)

Coelurus possédait une petite tête (20 cm). Ses os creux rappellent ceux des oiseaux. Il devait sûrement se nourrir de petits lézards et de petits mammifères ou encore d’insectes. Ses proies étaient limitées, étant donné sa petite taille, même si les insectes et les petits lézards proliféraient avec le climat radieux des forêts et des marécages de l’Amérique du Nord du Jurassique supérieur. Même si tenté par les charognes de dinosaures comme Camptosaurus qui gisaient près des rivièresfaute d’eau; ils ne pouvaient que rester regarder. Car leurs dents étaient trop petites pour transpercer la peau des gros dinosaures. Ainsi, Coelurus était un petit prédateur insectivore et qui se nourrissait aussi de petits mammifères et de petits lézards. Ses mains, pourvues de trois doigts griffus, étaient longues et puissantes, permettant d’arracher la chair de ses petites proies. 

Klik hier om een link te hebben waarmee u dit artikel later terug kunt lezen.<– De Bultenaar uit spanje

De Concavenator corcovatus.( “gebochelde vleeseter van Cuenca”)… Het vier meter lange   roofdiier  leefde -132 MY geleden

Francisco Ortega  van de universiteit van  Madrid      http://dfmf.uned.es/biologia/personal/fortega/
, vond   de dino-beenderen in de Los Hoyas vlaktes van centraal Spanje.
Destijds was dat een moerasgebied dat nu vergelijkbaar is met de Everglades.  De  koosnaam van het  fossiel werd  “Quasimodo  van  Las Hoyas ”

De vondst is het  tot nu toe meest volledige fossiel  van  met    haaientanden   uitgeruste drietenige theropoden, genoemd : de  carcharodontosauria theropoden,…..” waren een erg bijzondere groep dinosauriërs, omdat vogels tot dezelfde groep behoren”,
verklaart onderzoeker Jose Franz op BBC News.

“De wereld zou niet hetzelfde zijn zonder vogels. Vogels zijn eigenlijk een soort gevleugelde theropoden.”

Het opgegraven dier heeft twee verlengde ruggenwervels, waardoor een soort bochel is ontstaan.
De onderzoekers denken dat  deze theropode  een bescheiden driehoekige kam op zijn rug had, , maar zo’n kam is bij verwante dinosaurussen nooit gevonden. Spinosaurus gebruikten rugkammen misschien om te pronken of om af te koelen, maar hun kammen bedekten een veel groter deel van de ruggegraat.

“Eén van de meest in het oog springende karakteristieken van de Concavenator is de bijzondere verlenging van de laatste twee ruggenwervels”,
verklaart hoofdonderzoeker Ortega.
“Dit is nog niet eerder vertoond bij dinosauriës die tot nu toe zijn opgegraven. De functie van de bochel is onbekend.”

Opvallend aan het beest is niet alleen de merkwaardige bultkam op zijn rug, maar ook het feit dat hij aan zijn voorpoten aanhangsels moet hebben gehad diemogelijk voorlopers waren van veren te vergelijken  met die waarmee kan worden gevlogen.
Maar , hoe ze er precies uitzagen en wat hun functie was, is eveneens ( nog )    onbekend.

Op de reconstructie     (fig2)  heeft de theropode  aan de voorpoten een minimale franje gekregen, maar het zouden ook vertakte veerachtige structuren geweest kunnen zijn, aldus de onderzoekers.

De  bulten /littekens  op de voorarmen van de dino zouden  wel  eens  een aanwijzing kunn en zijn  dat het landdier mogelijk  gevederd    was ..al willen/kunnen  de onderzoekers daar nog geen  verdere speculaties  aan verbinden .

De bobbels zijn mogelijk het oudste bewijs voor de groei van primitieve veren bij dieren, zo melden de onderzoekers in het wetenschappelijk tijdschrift Nature.

“Deze eigenschap is eerder waargenomen bij kleine dinosauriërs die nauwer verwant zijn aan vogels, zoals de Velociraptor”, verklaart hoofdonderzoeker Francesco Ortega op Discovery News.
“Deze dinosaurus is vier keer groter dan de Velociraptor en( =de haaientanden /carcharodontosauria)
werden  tot nu toe beschouwd als te primitief ( in dit opzicht )om veren te hebben.”

“Toch beschikt dit dier ook over deze kleine bobbels waaruit waarschijnlijk primitieve veren groeiden”, aldus Ortega.

.The dinosaur’s unusual skeleton included a hump over the ilium – where the hind legs join the spine – and around five bumps on the forearm…..these bumps( knobs )  have been seen in dinosaurs before – including Velociraptor, it is interesting and new to find this characteristic in a dinosaur that is so far removed from either birds or previous known feathered dinosaurs.The bumps are very similar to those in present-day birds,(= quill knobs ) with just two differences.
There are fewer bumps in the Concavenator and they are not in such a regular arrangement. 
The team interpret these differences in evolutionary terms.
They suggest that over evolutionary time the bumps could have evolved into the feather attachments that are found in modern birds

*The hump found on the dinosaur’s spine is more of a mystery, however. Humps are common in dinosaurs, and can be used for heat regulation – when they might look like a kind of sail – for display, or for food storage.

Scientists and fossil (Ortega/Sanz) The scientists from Madrid uncovered the bones in Cuenca, central Spain

The team cannot work out what this hump might be for, though.

It is probably not for heat regulation, since normally a hump of this type would need an extensive blood supply, and there would be evidence within the surrounding bone – the team did not find this.

Also, most previous dinosaur humps have been found around the shoulders or the centre of the back – this hump is further towards the tail…

The hump
 could  also represent  another
“…..anchors to the ligaments that hold the flight feathers.
Maybe Concavenator wasn’t  ( flight- )feathered,  but its hump could represent an evolutionary step in that direction….”

Concavenator corcovatus : 
A bizarre, humped Carcharodontosauria (Theropoda) from the Lower Cretaceous of Spain

Fernando Escaso  & José L. Sanz    Nature Volume: 467 ,Pages:203–206   Date published:(09 September 2010)

Francisco Ortega,fortega@ccia.uned.es

Figure 1: Holotype of Concavenatorcorcovatus.

Holotype of Concavenator corcovatus.

Specimen MCCM-LH 6666 from the Lower Cretaceous series (Barremian stage) of Las Hoyas (Cuenca, Spain). a, Photograph under visible light. b, Schematic interpretation of the exposed right side of the skeleton. a, astragalus; aofe, antorbital fenestra; co, coracoid; d11–12sp, neural spines of the eleventh and twelfth dorsal vertebrae; fe, femur; fi, fibula; hu, humerus; il, ilium; is, ischium; j, jugal; l, lacrimal; mt III, third metatarsal; mx, maxilla; na, nasal; po, postorbital; pu, pubis; ra, radius; sc, scapula; ti, tibia; u, ungual phalanx; ul, ulna.

Figure 2: Time-calibrated reduced consensus of the phylogeny of Neotetanurae theropods.

Time-calibrated reduced consensus of the phylogeny of Neotetanurae theropods.

a, Hypothetical flesh reconstruction of Concavenator corcovatusb, The phylogeny resulting from a parsimony analysis of the data matrix6 in which Concavenator is incorporated (seeSupplementary Information). If poorly represented carcharodontosaurian taxa are considered, Concavenator is located either as the sister group to the remaining Carcharodontosauria or as a basal carcharodontosaurian, but on removing the less informative taxa, Concavenator stands unequivocally as the most basal Carcharodontosauridae. Concavenator possesses two unambiguous synapomorphies of Carcharodontosauria: a deeply concave iliac articular surface on the ischia and a proximomedially inclined femoral head. Our analysis agrees with recent hypotheses6 in considering that Carcharodontosauria is basally split into Carcharodontosauridae and Neovenatoridae6. Two cranial synapomorphies would place Concavenator within Carcharodontosauridae: the lacrimal-postorbital contact and a large curving flange in the jugal process on the postorbital. Maa, Maastrichtian; Cam, Campanian; San, Santonian; Con, Coniacian; Tur, Turonian; Cen, Cenomanian; Alb, Albian; Apt, Aptian; Bar, Barremian; Hau, Hauterivian; Val, Valanginian; Ber, Berriasian; Tit, Tithonian; Kim, Kimmeridgian; Oxf, Oxfordian; Cal, Callovian; Bat, Bathonian; Baj, Bajocian; Aal, Aalenian

Figure 3: Details of the holotype of Concavenatorcorcovatus.

Details of the holotype of Concavenator corcovatus.

Specimen MCCM-LH 6666 from the Lower Cretaceous series (Barremian stage) of Las Hoyas (Cuenca, Spain). a, Lateral view of the skull. b, Middle part of the axial skeleton showing the distribution of the height of the neural spines of vertebrae around the pelvic region. c, Detail of distal phalanx of the right foot showing impressions of plantar pads and corneous sheaths of the ungual bones. d, Impressions of hexagonal scales associated with the fifth metatarsal. e, Distal portion of the tail vertebrae showing a body outline. f, Distal portion of the tail vertebrae showing a body outline and the disposition of some rectangular scales. il, ilium; ip, intraorbital process; ob, orbital brow; mt V, fifth metatarsal; sp10–12, neural spines of the tenth–twelfth dorsal vertebrae.

Figure 4: Forearm of Concavenatorcorcovatus.

Forearm of Concavenator corcovatus.

Specimen MCCM-LH 6666 from the Lower Cretaceous series (Barremian stage) of Las Hoyas in Cuenca, Spain. a, Forearm (radius and ulna) of Concavenator corcovatusb, Detail of the posterolateral crest showing a series of feather quill knobs (arrows mark the available five elements of the series). c, Dorsal view of the ulna of an extant turkey vulture (Cathartes sp.). Scale bars, 1cm.

Five bumps were found on the fossil arm bones (top) whereas modern birds such as the turkey vulture (bottom) have eight to 10.



 New dinosaur extinction theory, a new dinosaur and more

(10 m)
3.5 tons (3,200 kilos)
Late Cretaceous – 75 MYA
Alberta, Canada; Montana, USA

Corythosaurus is a member of the planting-eating, duck-billed dinosaur family that is sometimes referred to as hadrosaurs. It had a toothless, wide beak and hundreds of teeth in the back part of its mouth that it used for grinding tough plants to mush. Like other duckbills, it was a herd animal that traveled in large groups. Fossils of this dinosaur are sometimes found together with other plant-eating dinosaurs, which leads scientists to believe that different types of plant-eaters grouped together to feed, drink and maybe even migrate (moving from one area to another).
Corythosaurus is most famous for its helmet or half dinner plate-like crest. It is known from remains belonging to at least twenty individuals. The crest is similar to the helmets worn by ancient Corinthian warriors; this resulted in its name. The crest grew until adulthood and was likely used as a mating ritual ornament. There appears to be gender differentiation regarding the size of the crest, with males having a larger crest. At least 10 skulls have been identified from this species, giving scientists a good look at individual and gender differentiation. Fossilized skin remains have also been found, further contributing to the knowledge of Corythosaurus.

Groepen :

Ceratopsidae Ceratopsians

Support Wikipedia


INHOUD —-> https://tsjok45.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/evodisku/

Bacillus thuringiensis(Bt)        deze bacterie komt voor in de natuur en scheidt eiwitkristallen uit die toxisch zijn voor een aantal insecten (vooral rupsen). Bt wordt gebruikt als biologisch pesticide. De genetische eigenschap om het toxine te maken, werd via genetische modificatie ook ingebracht in planten.

Bacillus thuringiensis with the parasporal body next to the forming endospore.
The parasporal body (or parasporal crystal) acts as a biopesticide against the caterpillar stage of over 100 species of moths.

BACTERIEËN   proto-cellige micro-organismen; slechts een erg  klein deel van deze organismen is ziekteverwekkend.
Diagram van een model-bacterie cel


Basic Concepts in Science: A list

July 14, 2007 John S. Wilkins

This is a list of the Basic Concepts posts being put up by Science Bloggers and others. It will be updated and put to the top when new entries are published. If you are not a Scienceblogger, email me (see below) and let me know of your post, or someone else’s. If you want suggestions for a topic to write on, just ask.


Recent additions:

Anyone can add to this series, even if you don’t blog on Science Blogs. Email me!


Physics and Astronomy

Energy by Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles
Fields by Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles
Force by Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles
Measurement by Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles
Entropy by Rob Knop at Galactic Interactions
Redshift by Rob Knop at Galactic Interactions
Understanding Electricity by Scott Aaronson at Shtetl-Optimized
Ohm’s Law by Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles
Estimation and DImensions by Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles
De Broglie Equation (quantum physics) by Wandering Primate
Phase changes, by Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Science and Ethics

A shopping list of sought Basics for physics is given here by physics is fundamental at Cocktail Party Physics.


The Composition of the Earth by Chris Rowan at Highly Allochthonous
Chronology and Stratigraphy by Chris Rowan at Highly Allochthonous
Paleomagnetism by Chris Rowan at Highly Allochthonous

Skepchick has a series of articles on the origins of the earth:


pH by Cat at Lab Cat
Strong and Weak Acids by Cat at Lab Cat
Acids and Bases by Cat at Lab Cat
What is Food Science? by Cat at Lab Cat
Food Chemistry by Cat at Lab Cat
Elements by Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science
Polar and Non-polar Molecules by Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science
Intermolecular Forces by Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science


Genes and Genomes
Gene by PZ Myers at Pharyngula
What is a Gene? by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
Gene by Greg Laden
New definitions of a Gene by Allen McNeill at The Evolution List
The Richard Dawkins Definition of a Gene Is Seriously Flawed by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
The Central Dogma of Molecular Biology by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
How Proteins Fold by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
Heat Shock and Molecular Chaperones by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
The Genetic Code by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
ABO Blood types by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
Genetics of ABO Blood types by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
Genetics of Eye Color by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
Collagen by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
How do you sequence a Genome? Parts I, II, III, IV, V, and VI by Ask Dr Science at Discovering Biology in a Digital World
What are Hypothetical and Putative Proteins? by Ask Dr Science at Discovering Biology in a Digital World
Linkage Disequilibrium by Razib at Gene Expression
Mutations by evolgen at Coalescence
Allele by Mike Dunford at The Questionable Authority

Evolution and Phylogenetics
Evolution by Larry Moran at Sandwalk
The Many Faces of ‘Evolution’ by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts

Understanding Natural Selection: Essential Concepts
and Common Misconceptions/T. Ryan Gregory

The Three Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Natural Selection by Greg Laden
Modes of Natural Selection by Greg Laden
What makes Natural Selection an adaptive process? by Carl Bajema at Evolving Thoughts
Artificial and Natural Selection by Mike the Mad Biologist
Sexual Selection by Razib at Gene Expression
Human Evolution 1001 by Greg Laden
Fitness by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Measuring Fitness by Mike Dunford at The Questionable Authority
Clade by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Species by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Primitive by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Macroevolution by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Ancestors by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Why Spiders aren’t Insects, parts I, II, III, IV, and V by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Allopatry and sympatry by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts

Ecology and Environment
What is Ecology? by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes I by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes: Tropical Rain Forest by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes III: Tropical Dry Forest by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes IV: Tropical Savannah by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes V: Deserts by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes VI: Temperate Grassland by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Biomes VII: Temperate Forest by Jeremy Bruno at The Voltage Gate
Conservation versus Preservation by Joshua Rosenau at Thoughts from Kansas

Developmental biology

The Pharyngula Stage by PZ Myers at Pharyngula
Gastrulation in Vertebrates by PZ Myers at Pharyngula
Gastrulation in Invertebrates by PZ Myers at Pharyngula
Neurulation by PZ Myers at Pharyngula
Allometry by PZ Myers at Pharyngula

Other or multiple topics
Artifacts and Vectors by Ask Dr Science at Discovering Biology in a Digital World
8th Grade Math (Hardy Weinberg, Genetic Variance, Molecules and Phylogenies, Kin) by Razib at Gene Expression
Biological Clock by Bora Zivkovic at A Blog Around the Clock
Anisogamy by Matt, at Behavioral Ecology Blog
Cell migration by Dan, at Migrations
Hearing by Shelley at Retrospectacle
How do we smell? by Sunil at balancing life.
Prions by Shelley at Retrospectacle
Cell Theory by Dan at Migrations
Blood Clotting by Larry Moran at Sandwalk

Teaching resources for biology
Bora Zivkovic at A Blog Around the Clock has a series of lectures as posts that teachers may find useful, his BIO101 speed-course lecture (and lab) notes. Almost none of them cover a very narrow term or concept (some come close):

Historical and social sciences

Pottery in Archeology by CFeagans at Hot Cup of Joe
Cause, Manner and Mechanism of Death [Forensic science] by William the Coroner at Dr Zeus’s Forensic Files


Mathematics, Philosophy, Logic and Computer Science

Normal Distribution by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Mean, Median and Mode by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Standard Deviation by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Margin of Error by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Correlation (and Causation, and Random Variables) by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Binary Search by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Innumeracy by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Percentage and percentage points by Kristjan Wager at Pro-Science

Statistics Primer, Part 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 by Echidne of the Snakes
[Unfortunately, each post does not open in a separate window, but the whole thing is accessible from here]

General Mathematics

Multidimensional Numbers by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Vectors by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Algebra, by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Calculus by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Limits by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Recursion by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Turing Machine by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
The Halting Problem by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Real Numbers by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Algorithm by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Discrete versus Continuous [Mathematics] by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Infinity and Infinite Sums by Jason Rosenhouse at EvolutionBlog
Numbers by Jason Rosenhouse at EvolutionBlog
Metric System by Jim at Chimpanzee Refuge
Modular Arithmetic by Alon Levy at Abstract Nonsense
Theories, Theorems, Lemmas and Corollaries by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Fractals by Karmen at Chaotic Utopia

Logic and Computability
Logic by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Modal Logic by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Syntax and Semantics by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Sets by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Arguments by Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science
Optimization by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Axioms by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Going Meta by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math
Parallel, Distributed, and Concurrent by Mark Chu-Carroll at Good Math, Bad Math

Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
The Feminist Theory of Science by Zuska, at Thus Spake Zuska
Falsifiable Claims by Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science
Epistemology by Benjamin Cohen at The Worlds Fair
Theory by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Introductory texts for philosophy of biology by John Wilkins at Evolving Thoughts
Scientific Method by Rob Knop at Galactic Interactions
Laws and theories by Rob Knop at Galactic Interactions
Likelihood Theory by Mike the Mad Biologist

Medicine and Psychiatry

Introduction to Microbiology and Infectious Disease by Tara C. Smith at Aetiology
Normal flora, Normal Flora 2 by Tara C. Smith at Aetiology
Determining the Cause of Disease (Koch’s Postulates) by Sandra Porter at Discovering Biology in a Digital World
Seasonal Affective Disorder by Bora Zivkovic at A Blog Around the Clock
Selection of Antidepressants, Part I, Part 2 Part 3 by Corpus Callosum
Balloons, Stents and Arteries by Burt Humburg at The Panda’s Thumb
The history of hormone therapy and menopause, parts 1, 2 and 3 by Evil Monkey at Neurotopia

Learning Science

Learning Styles and Science Labs by Sandra Porter at Discovering Biology in a Digital World

In each case, read the comments too.

I’ve decided to list these by field and topic and author, respectively (this allows multiple authors to cover one topic, as in Gene).




De Normale verdeling

Wie nu in de caravan zit, omdat het buiten regent, en bovendien kinderen in de mens-erger-je-niet-leeftijd heeft, weet het: met een dobbelsteen …

BIODIVERSITEIT          verscheidenheid aan organismen, die voorkomen in de natuur. Biodiversiteit in de context van biotechnologie betekent ook de aanwezigheid van een grote variatie aan genetische kenmerken (bv. variëteiten) van een soort.

BIOTECHNOLOGIE     de toepassing van biologische mechanismen in productieprocessen. Meer specifiek is de biotechnologie een multidisciplinaire wetenschap en technologie, die vooral steunt op de in-vitrocultuur en op gerichte genetische modificatie van microbiële plantaardige of dierlijke systemen, met het oog op het verkrijgen van nuttige producten of effecten. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotechnologie


CollegaVanEric (CVE)Biostratigrafie : is de wetenschap die aan de hand van microfosielen probeert een eenduidige wereldwijde tijdtabel te maken.Het probleem voor creationisten die geloven in een wereldwijde vloed is dat microfossielen zeediertjes zijn met dezelfde natuurkundige eigenschappen (zoals drijfvermogen) en dat je dus niet op basis van gewicht, intelligentie of zwemkracht een sortering kunt maken. De enige verklaring die rest is dat de soorten na elkaar geleefd hebben en niet gelijktijdig.

Voorbeeld: pleistocene schelpen in boring diemerbrug

Vergroting –>http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:25G132_Diemerbrug_Range_Chart.jpg

BLOTS (BLOTTING )       letterlijk: vlekken.

Dit is een techniek die gebruikt wordt om bepaalde fragmenten terug te vinden na gel-elektroforese van DNA (Southern blot)-, RNA (Northern blot)- of eiwit (Western blot)-fragmenten.
DNA, RNA of eiwit wordt getransfereerd naar een membraan; waar vervolgens via DNA-hybridisatie (probes) of antilichamen (bij eiwitten) de fragmenten worden opgespoord


INHOUD —-> https://tsjok45.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/evodisku/


Wie meent dat inmiddels het creationisme definitief het pleit heeft verloren en dat de discussie gesloten kan worden , ziet over het hoofd dat het “creationisme” is geevolueerd ( en zal evolueren ) in nieuwere mimicretische vormen( memecomplexen ) zoals bijvoorbeeld het ID(C) en het accomodationisme 

Daarom …… ANTI-CREATO :
een weerleggingen – verzameling
gericht tegen diverse verzamelingen creationistische beweringen en claims ..
anti-creato is een onderdeel van EVODISKU
zie voor opzet en regelingen  –> 

“…Creationisme komt overal vandaan ,daar is geen opleiding niveau op van toepassing….” ( antoon , morosoof )




abiogenesis slechts een evolutie-geloof


misvattingen over abiogenesis.docx (152.6 KB

Teach the controversy <–doc archief 



De oorsprong van de menselijke beschaving.docx (20.8 KB)   


Nep cosmology uit de weet.docx (1021.7 KB)   



cambrium volgens creato’s

Datering en ouderdom aarde

( en creationisme )

anti creato plaattektoniek   (Doc) ARCHIEF 



WP FILE  //  

°dino’s & mensen.docx (1.5 MB)    ° kachina bridge dinos.pdf (1.8 MB)   °misvattingen over dino’s.docx (257.8 KB) 

er zijn weinig dino’s <–

dinosauriërsoorten blijken één soort’  <–

PALUXY RIVER   <–Document 






accomodationisme.docx (99.3 KB)
antiwetenschap.docx (75.2 KB) 

Godsdienst Wetenschap en Cultuur.docx (70.9 KB)

oorlog met de religie.docx (779.2 KB)

95 stellingen.docx (450.7 KB)   

scepticisme en kritiek.docx (66.3 KB)  




vatikaan en pauselijke evolutietheorie  <–doc

links :







waarom bijbelvaste christenen niet in evolutie geloven.docx (162.5 KB)

wetenschapsleer.docx (205.2 KB)   





slecht en half oog <—

Teologie argument en causaal verband


design.docx (22.2 KB)



  het bestaan  van  sexuele voortplanting is  onverklaarbaar door  NS  en daarom een  falsificatie van evolutie ?  




        Knock out  <—doc  WP



 <—doc archief

journalisten en wetenschap  –> doc arhief

tree of life <— doc


Klik hier om een link te hebben waarmee u dit artikel later terug kunt lezen.<archeologie antropologie evodisku

INHOUD —-> https://tsjok45.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/evodisku/



archeologie en de bijbel.docx (117.3 KB)

australie.docx (126 KB)

Cultures prehistorique.docx (2.6 MB)     

HOMO SAPIENS.docx (4.4 MB)



afrika -10.000 tot nu.docx (186.1 KB)


ancient egyptian mummies.docx (1.7 MB) 
egypt.docx (3 MB)

Out of Africa theorie.docx (1 MB)


°australie.docx (126 KB)  zie ook   “update”    —>  australie en stille zuidzee  

°Verre oosten.docx (159.8 KB)


°foto’s midden amerika.docx (7.3 MB) 
°midden amerika teksten.docx (4.2 MB)

°Precolombiaanse offerpraktijken.docx (801.9 KB)

°INCA.docx (3.4 MB)

°Cultures prehistorique.docx (2.6 MB) 



Macedonische periode  //


°Homo Sapiens in Europa.docx (1.9 MB)

°ÖTZI.docx (854.1 KB)


STONEHENGE.docx (1.4 MB) Britse megalithische cultuur  —>STONEHENGE WP doc

Women of Brassempouy Final red.pdf (1.5 MB)



°HOMO SAPIENS.docx (4.4 MB)