Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Fisher King revisited by ScottHartman Fisher King revisited by ScottHartman
I got access to better scaling and photographiv documentation of the Spinosaurus type specimen, so along with Jaimie Headden's observation [link] that one of the presumed sacrals was actually an anterior caudal, I set out to revisit Spinosaurus.

Of course much is still unknown, but with the help of Irritator (including Angaturama) and related animals like Baryonyx and Suchomimus I feel like the general proportions are probably about correct, although there is room for uncertainty in the pectoral girdle, forelimbs, and (to a lesser extent) hindlimbs.

Edit: Tweaked the scaling on the head, as well as the rate of drop-off in the distal caudals. Ironically the animal stays about the same length, but the slightly smaller head will have consequences for people trying to estimate the length of the longest specimens.

Edit 2: Now with actual update.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconlordofstamps:
LordOfstamps Featured By Owner Edited Dec 5, 2014
I honestly don't care that the limb proportions are probably wrong. I still find it more likely that the tall spine in the sail was a caudal, not a sacral. I hope they at least try to justify the double-humped sail in the monograph.
Reply
:iconblazze92:
bLAZZE92 Featured By Owner Edited Sep 11, 2014
New paper out, I've read it, this thing is a weirdo, a true semiaquatic weirdo, kinda like a dinosaurian early whale. I'm loving it!
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
I read it and the supplemental data...I have some concerns, but I want to spend some time playing with the scaling before forming a strong opinion either way.
Reply
:iconblazze92:
bLAZZE92 Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2014
I suppose among those concerns are the sail and the relative size of the neck and forelimbs? I was very hyped when I left that comment haha

It's a shame that they made digital models of all the bones and didn't bother to publish them at all :sadface:
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
That is very sad, I agree.
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2014
After the little Pic of the new Spinosaurus Mount (the Sereno s one), lot of people focus the attention on that (short?) legs, similar to Majungasaurus proportions, but for me is more interesting the neural spine anatomy in fact if that Mount is correct we should reinterpretate the holotype material with the taller vert as presacral....
what do you think?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
I'm reserving judgement until I see the paper.
Reply
:iconpedrosalas:
PedroSalas Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2014
After the recent post on "the bite stuff" (the good the bad and the Spinosaurus) I just re-study the Spinosaurus head. 
using Yours updated one from your blog as base and putting on the fossil of rostrum and partially dentary I had to admit Olotype and Dal Sasso's specimen appear to be as near as the same size!


Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
Yup.
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2014
:)
If you want I can send to you my little diagram, or IF for you it is ok I can post here on DA...
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
Send it along and I'll take a look.
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2014
All right... What s your Email ?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 7, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
You can find it on my website (also a contact form) at www.skeletaldrawing.com. Either that or PM me (I don't want to post it for spam scraping).
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2014
Done, you have it :)
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
It's fantastic. See additional thoughts in the email :)
Reply
:icongiga-fan123:
Giga-fan123 Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2014
how long is the specimen shown here?
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
14 meters long.
Reply
:icongiga-fan123:
Giga-fan123 Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014
Oh, thanks :)
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2013
Hi mr Scott!
I don't know if you are still working on Spinosaurus mass... Anyway I found an interesting post about this topic on "Theropoda blogspot".

Read it if you have time :)
Reply
:iconhellharlequin:
hellharlequin Featured By Owner Oct 4, 2013
small question:
do you think Spinosaurids had webbed feet like a duck?
Reply
:iconeusou123:
Eusou123 Featured By Owner Sep 22, 2013
For me the mass of a 16 meters spinosaurus is 9 to 10 tons.
Reply
:iconbrolyeuphyfusion9500:
That's a bit too low. Spinosaurus was not some giant slender featherless stork, it was actually quite bulky.

Google search Suchomimus skeletons to see how bulky the body of a spinosaurid is. You'll find that they're more like bears than storks.

A more reasonable mass estimate for a ~16-meter Spinosaurus would be around ~11-13 tonnes give or take.
Reply
:iconeusou123:
Eusou123 Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2013
How heavy you think that a tyrannosaurus was
Reply
:iconbrolyeuphyfusion9500:
The smallest adult Tyrannosaurus like B-rex and Bucky are likely in the ~4-4.5 tonne range, usual average Tyrannosaurus around ~6-7 tonnes, such as the case of CM 9380 and AMNH 5027, and large specimens like Sue and MOR 008 usually around ~7-8 tonnes.

So basically, around ~4-8 tonnes.
Reply
:iconeusou123:
Eusou123 Featured By Owner Oct 20, 2013
Ok.
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2013
Hi mr Scott, do you have news about the mass est. of Spinosaurus ?
Reply
:iconspongebobfossilpants:
Looks like Andrea Cau disagrees with the giant Spinosaurus size estimates: theropoda.blogspot.ca/2013/08/… (you might have to run that link through a translator). What say you?
Reply
:iconblazze92:
bLAZZE92 Featured By Owner Sep 3, 2013
Estimate given to the Spinosaurus holotype by Cau based on Baryonyx centrum length, 12.6m, assuming Baryonyx is 9m. Difference?  40%
Estimate fiven to the Spinosaurus holotype by Hartman, 14m, how long is Hartman's Baryonyx? 10m or so. difference, 40% or less.

They aren't that different actually, the main difference is that Cau is using a Baryonyx restored with a short skull, short torso and short tail.
Reply
:iconjulianraptor:
julianraptor Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2013
is it a sub adult ?!?
Reply
:iconmegalosaurid:
Megalosaurid Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2013
Hi mr. Hartman, I made a body mass estimate for MSMN V4047.
I used the same GDI analysis as you and I got some interesting results to share:
Min: 11,050 kg
Average: 11,550 kg
max: 11,750 kg
This is considering a 15,6 m long specimen.
Reply
:iconmegalosaurid:
Megalosaurid Featured By Owner Jul 19, 2013

Sorry, my estimates were actually for the specimen IPHG 1912, so I decided to scale them up from 14 to 15,6 m.

If IPHG 1912 weighted 11,550 kg then MSNM V4047 should weight from 15,288 to 15,979 kg, depending in the conservative or medium estimates given.

 

 

 

 

Reply
:iconmegalosaurid:
Megalosaurid Featured By Owner Oct 3, 2013

Actually, I thought Spinosaurus had a hump, more like a camel or a bison,but when I realized this was wrong, I re-estimated the weight of the type specimen, and it weighted a full 8.4 tonnes, plus, scaled to the paratype, the full weight was 12.1 tonnes, which matches with the 8-12 tonne range for Spinosaurus.

I doubt that the paratype specimen weighted less than 10 tonnes.  

Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jul 16, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
You can't have used the same GDI as me, as I haven't published my top view silhouette yet. Not that I think your estimates are bad (you'll have to wait a wee bit longer for mine), but I'm curious what you used for the top view?
Reply
:iconmegalosaurid:
Megalosaurid Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2013
Well, I never meant that I used exactly the same GDI, just that I used rather the same method of estimation, I used your actual skeletal of Spinosaurus MSMN V4047, I wanted to see if my estimates matched your future estimates :)
Reply
:iconpaleo-reptiles:
Paleo-reptiles Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2013
Spinosaurus is fragmentally similar to some T.rex....But You rebuild Spinosaurus but you never rebuild them?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
First of all, Spinosaurus is much more complete than some T. rex specimens, like UCMP 118742, which is just a single toe bone. Second, Spinosaurus has been well described - there are lots of photographs and measurements published (going back to 1915), while the supposedly giant T. rex specimens are mostly undescribed, so you have to use quotes of people given to the media, which aren't always reliable (Peck's Rex, for example, was claimed to be larger than Sue when they were digging it up, but after actually prepping the material and taking measurements it turns out that it's not as large as Sue).
Reply
:iconbrolyeuphyfusion9500:
The toe bone is UCMP 137538. UCMP 118742 is the maxilla that is actually ~5 centimeters shorter than that of Sue.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Haha, I just corrected Tracy Ford on that very thing on Facebook earlier. You're correct of course.
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Awesome skeletal, although those legs look a tad small for such a huge animal! :0
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Funny, others complained that they were too big (based on comments about an unpublished specimen). It's worth noting that leg size (and muscle mass) is only partially connected with size - it's also determined by behavioral needs and locomotive style (so elephants have rather weak muscles in a relative sense, despite being the largest living land animals). Regardless, the ones here are just scaled from baryonchines - if and when better data is published I'll update it again.
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Hmm, I'd think anything much shorter would really impede its range of motion. I would think Spinosaurus would tend to have longer legs, akin to many wading/shoreline animals of today. I scaled your Spinosaurus and Baryonyx to the same "body length" (head to hip), and the Spinosaurs's legs were ~20% shorter. I suppose a larger animal would have somewhat shorter legs, but would it really be a full 20%?
Reply
:iconspinodontosaur4:
Spinodontosaur4 Featured By Owner Jun 26, 2013
Keep in mind though that Spinosaurus is a _lot_ larger than Baryonyx (akin to comparing Albertosaurus to Tyrannosaurus) and that the specimen Scott restored is a sub-adult.
Suchomimus would be a better reference point. It is closer temporally, geographically and in terms of size, plus the type specimen isn't a sub-adult (or at least it wasn't described as one, despite popular internet belief) and has proportions closer to non-spinosurid megalosauroids (e.g. Torvosaurus).
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jun 26, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
When using Suchomimus the discrepancy drops to 10%.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
When using some of the unpublished specimens the discrepancy drops even further...
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Haha, so many future papers to wait for! :)
Reply
:iconsomnium-23:
Somnium-23 Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013
I've heard some people say that Spinosaurus was likely quadrapedal because the spines made it too front heavy and unbalanced for a bipedal gate. What's your opinion on that?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Yeah, what the others have said - evidence from relatives show that there's nothing doin' with the quadrupedal stance speculation.
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
A quadrupedal gait was literally impossible, no theropod that ever evolved had hands built to support weight, Spinosaurus could never use it's hands for locomotion. The quad theory was popularized by people that still believe in bunny-hands in theropods! :)
Reply
:iconmalcolmraptor:
Malcolmraptor Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Baby Spino: Mom!
Mommy Spino: What?
Baby Spino: Look! I'm a freaking Ouranosaur- Aaaagh, my back!! Oh shit, my fingers!!! /starts crying
Mommy Spino: These kids...
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
  • Art Print
  • Canvas
  • Photo
280 Purchase Purchased Download Purchase Soon
909 KB ZIP File. Includes JPG
Fisher King revisited.jpg
1.3 MB
Add Your Rating! Thanks for Rating! Change Your Rating




Details

Submitted on
January 9, 2012
Image Size
1.3 MB
Resolution
3021×2250
Submitted with
Sta.sh
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
16,769 (5 today)
Favourites
230 (who?)
Comments
205
×