HOME | DD

#adamantinasuchus #adamantina #armadillosuchus #baurusuchus #sphagesaurus #montealtosuchus
Published: 2018-07-18 21:35:33 +0000 UTC; Views: 5645; Favourites: 76; Downloads: 17
Redirect to original
Description
Second part of the chart, with the crocodilesNotes:
01-There is no GDI for Baurusuchids and Stem-Sphagesaurids, so I left a question mark in that place.
02-My B.salgadosensis was scaled up from a femur and resulted in a 2.32 m animal, Random scaled it from the Skull and obtained a ~3 meter animal. We probably used different individuals for scaling this, so there is potential for larger B.salgadosensis.
03-Tooooo many crocs, toooooomuch work.
Species that were omitted:
01-Caryonosuchus: crappy material, not enough for scaling.
02-Brasileosaurus: lack of information, crappy material and no up to date phylogenetic position.
03-''Goniopholis'' paulistanus: crappy material and definitely not Goniopholis.
04-Mariliasuchus robustus: As far as I'm aware it is only know from skull material, and it has a more boxier (deeper and shorter) skull than M.amarali, so scaling it from M.amarali skull I would find a questionable result since that species is supposed to have a shorter cranium them M.amarali. So I'm not featuring it.
Edit:
30/July/2018: Rescaled Baurusuchids, based on the recent Pepesuchus paper that found Aplestosuchus nested inside Baurusuchus I'm sinking it into Baurusuchus. New silhouette for B.albertoi & B.sordidus
References:
Notosuchus skelleton from Fiorelli & Calvo 2008, adapted with the skull of other stem-sphagesaurids.
Gonipholis, used for the postcrania of Barreirosuchus, the skull is from Paleofile's Trematochampsa www.paleofile.com/Mesosuchia/T…
Baurusuchus albertoi, used for all Baurusuchids and addapted for Armadillosuchus and Montealtosuchus.
as base for scaling the Baurusuchids, and skull used for B.albertoi & B.sordidus.
Related content
Comments: 15
CrownCrocopoda [2020-02-12 08:46:41 +0000 UTC]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AndreOF-Gallery In reply to CrownCrocopoda [2020-02-12 13:06:32 +0000 UTC]
... I'm not sure, quite a long time I did this.
I remember I scaled most taxa based on skull length, so that was probably what I did for B.pachecoi here, for the baurusuchids I also scaled then based on their femora size.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
acepredator [2018-10-18 20:10:08 +0000 UTC]
With Pycnemosaurus being the only major dinosaurian predator here, it looks like Sebecosuchia really went on a field day.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AndreOF-Gallery In reply to acepredator [2018-10-18 23:29:45 +0000 UTC]
Pycno isn't actually from the Bauru group but from another one I forgot the name...; but there were even larger abelisaurids in Adamanitna and medium-large Megaraptorids. Baurusuchids would probably be forced into the mid predator niche.
I explainded stuff in more detail here:
Talking about Adamantina I hinted this at the post about Buriolestes; a lecture I attended a couple weeks ago gave me inspiration to do this and today we’ll talk about the ecology of the Adamantina formation. There is an AMAZING paper about this (https://doi.org/10.1007/s41513-018-0048-4) and is where I got much of the information I used here and you should check it out because I had to resume it in here.
The environment:
Adamantina is located at Southeast-Central Brazil and part of the Bauru basin, once it was suggested that it should be split into 3 different formations: Presidente Prudente, Vale do Rio do Peixe and São José do Rio Preto; I found conflicting information on the subject so I’m going with Adamantina “sensu latus” lumping the 3 other formations inside it. Its age is also contestable, with studies dating it from Turonian-Coniacian till early Maastrichtian. I’m following here the dating on one of SVP
Some things are outdated, like the Adamantina aging now know to be 87.3 million years ago and the fact I considered formations like Preseindete Prudente as part of Adamantina, but the barusuchid vs theropod topic is still accurate and will explain this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
acepredator In reply to AndreOF-Gallery [2018-10-19 01:08:20 +0000 UTC]
The predatory theropods have the Sebecosuchians beat on size, but in terms of diversity the latter are still dominating.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Corallianassa [2018-08-06 18:28:01 +0000 UTC]
Very nice. Notosuchians need more art and this is definitely helpful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AndreOF-Gallery In reply to 105697 [2018-07-31 11:36:41 +0000 UTC]
Quite large, I got 4.66 m if it had the same proportions as other sphagesaurids but since the museum mount show that it is quite different I measured the skeleton based on the skull size.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
narcosaurus In reply to AndreOF-Gallery [2022-08-27 14:50:41 +0000 UTC]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AndreOF-Gallery In reply to narcosaurus [2022-08-27 17:53:51 +0000 UTC]
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
vasix [2018-07-21 02:40:25 +0000 UTC]
Under the feet of unimpressive titanosaurs, there lived...these things...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AndreOF-Gallery In reply to vasix [2018-07-21 03:36:45 +0000 UTC]
Literally under their feet, digging for food
👍: 0 ⏩: 0