HOME | DD
palaeozoologist — Sauroposeidon multiview skeletal
by-nc-nd
#sauroposeidon #proteles #titanosauriformes #paluxysaurus #somphospondyli
Published: 2017-08-27 06:03:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 10379; Favourites: 71; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Well, I finally finished this. I agree with D'Emic et al (2012) that Paluxysaurus is really the same as Sauroposeidon, and so offer a composite restoration here. The Sauroposeidon material from the holotype is only cervicals 5-8. The overlapping cervicals in Paluxysaurus are nearly identical, when accounting for size, ontogeny and individual variation (the Paluxysaurus material is only about 60% the size of Sauroposeidon). Recent phylogenetic work by D'Emic and others consistently show the two as sister taxa, and also consistently as non-brachiosaurid somphospondylan titanosauriformes. The largest individuals are probably about 30% smaller than the largest titanosaurs, so Sauroposeidon is probably no longer in the top ten list of largest sauropod taxa (and maybe not even in the top 20).In the above reconstruction, only the lateral (side-view) is done 'rigorously' (exception: dorsal view of ilia/sacrum is rigorous as well), with non-preserved or undescribed/non-photographed material with grey fill and preserved/photographed material in white. Scale bar is 1 meter.
Edit [updated 8/27/17]: Made some updates to the scaling of the forelimbs, per suggestions by Steveoc and to the soft tissue outline per suggestions by ijreid.
References:
D. A. Winkler, M. J. Polcyn and L. L. Jacobs New sauropod dinosaur material from Jones Ranch: a large Comanchean
nonmammalian tetrapod from Texas. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh,
Available on CJO (2013) doi:10.1017/S1755691013000418
J. O. Farlow1, M. O’Brien2, G. J. Kuban3, B. F. Dattilo1, K. T. Bates4, P. L.
Falkingham5, L. Piñuela6, A. Rose1, A. Freels7, C. Kumagai1, C. Libben1, J. Smith1 and J. Whitcraft1. (2012) Dinosaur Tracksites of the Paluxy River Valley (Glen Rose Formation, Lower Cretaceous), Dinosaur Valley State Park, Somervell County, Texas. Actas de V Jornadas Internacionales sobre Paleontología de Dinosaurios y su Entorno
Michael D. D’Emic & Brady Z. Foreman (2012): The beginning of the sauropod dinosaur hiatus in North
America: insights from the Lower Cretaceous Cloverly Formation of Wyoming, Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 32:4,
883-902
D’Emic, M. D. (2012). Revision of the sauropod dinosaurs of the Early Cretaceous Trinity Group, southern USA, with the description of a new genus. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology.
Wedel, M. J., Cifelli, R. L. & Sanders, R. K. 2000. Sauroposeidon proteles, a new sauropod from the Early Cretaceous of Oklahoma. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 20 (1), 109–14.
Related content
Comments: 38
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
This is probably the single most accurate reconstruction of Sauroposeidon that I’ve ever seen. It clearly shows that it was not really the giant brachiosaurid it once was thought to have been, especially the skull and the build, and I’m hoping to see more reconstructions of this interesting sauropod based on this example of yours in the future.
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Interesting interpretation, how did you decide to scale the limb elements?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I done messed up, after going into my spreadsheet I realized I copied the ratios over wrong from Appendix 1 in the Paluxysaurus description, I agree with your forelimb to hindlimb reconstruction. I can't believe that I missed that, I usually double check everything. Thanks for the catch! Back to the drawing board for me I guess....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No worries, 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Updates made. Yes, I think the proportions were slightly different in the referred material as well, although I don't recall it being a huge difference. There is likely to some regional and normal intraspecific variation, which makes it impossible to create a truly accurate composite restoration - they will always be best (but informed) guesses. It is possible, of course, that they are really different taxa and that further material could be discovered that shows that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
...with not much confidence, that's how haha 
I assume you are talking about the forelimb versus the hindlimbs? I see that you have done a reconstruction as well, with a humerus/femur ratio of about 0.9 whereas my ratio is about 0.67.....yeah, that's a big difference. I probably messed something up. I will have to go check my spreadsheet where I calculated my ratios...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This reconstruction severely lacks the necessary muscle and tissue that an organism would need to survive, especially considering every land animal needs a trachea
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Really? You must be looking at something different than I am, because I have restored a deep tissue outline the lower side of the neck (especially towards the base of the neck and towards the skull), plus the trachea was likely within the cervical ribs which extended well below the centrum. In some birds, the trachea even wraps to the side of the cervicals (such as in ostriches).
There is deep caudo-femoralis tissue shown at the base of the tail. It also has healthily deep tissue in the torso, as can be seen from both the anterior and lateral views. Have you seen skeletal reconstructions of giraffes and other large ungulates (ex: i.pinimg.com/736x/33/2f/fe/332… )? They are not that beefy. Even elephants are relative lean, save for their saggy skin (see: en.upali.ch/wp-content/uploads… and cdn.shutterstock.com/shutterst… )
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Not that beefy" Both of the skeletals you linked show at least twice the thickness of flesh in the neck than your diagram. The trachea wrapping around the neck is a very derived trait present in a very derived bird, it should not be used as a reason to have inaccurate tissue in a sauropod skeletal. Paluxysaurus cervical ribs are not diplodocid, they do not project directly ventral to the centrum. Cervical ribs/parapophyses in non-diplodocids project more laterally than ventrally, so if you have restored your cervicals with ventrally directing ribs that is another inaccuracy. The trachea itself is often similar to the size of the centra, which would mean you need an additional centrum height of tissue below the centra, in addition to the tissue you already have there to account for muscle and tendons and ligaments. Your skeletal simply does not account for these.
The amount of flesh underneath the stomach is fine, although you might want more under the chest where the pectoral muscles would be anchored to the sternum or coracoid. The deltopectorals are extremely lacking, however. The deltopectoral crest of the humerus is meant to anchor muscles from the coracoid and inner elbow, so there should be a relatively straight outline from the inner elbow through to the coracoid. The lower arm musculature is acceptable, hands and forearms aren't normally muscle-bound by much.
The hindlimb and underside of the tail appear to have the right amount of muscles.
Finally, theres the issue of the dorsal region. Neural spines are extreme regions for ligaments and tendons, which stretch across multiple spines to form tightly woven "nets". This would make the dorsal side of the back, neck and tail a smooth curve over all the spines, without much tissue above, but very large amounts of tendons and vertebral muscle beside and between the spines. This would mean smoothing out the 3 "steps" that are visible along the back, behind the shoulder, in front of the pelvis and near the beginning of the tail.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I apologize for being a jerk in my initial response, that was not right of me.
That said, it would come across less antagonistic if you initially provided references and constructive criticism about how my reconstruction was wrong, rather than with the very ambiguous (and unhelpful), "What's with the lack of flesh?" I don't mind criticism if it is based on evidence. Even in your follow-up you fail to provide any links or references to published (or even, unpublished) research.
Now to on to your specific points...
"Both of the skeletals you linked show at least twice the thickness of flesh in the neck than your diagram."
Well, they are both mammals with proportionally gigantic heads. It was not clear in your original comment as to what exactly you were referring to by "lack of flesh". Those skeletals were mainly dealing with the myological reconstruction of the limbs (I've been criticised for that in the past, so I assumed that is to what you were referring).
"The trachea wrapping around the neck is a very derived trait present in a very derived bird, it should not be used as a reason to have inaccurate tissue in a sauropod skeletal."
Well, actually ostriches are one of the least derived extant birds. In fact, there is probably not another extant animal that is closer phylogenetically to sauropods than the living paleognath birds.
"Paluxysaurus cervical ribs are not diplodocid, they do not project directly ventral to the centrum. Cervical ribs/parapophyses in non-diplodocids project more laterally than ventrally, so if you have restored your cervicals with ventrally directing ribs that is another inaccuracy."
Have you seen fig. 10 in the Paluxysaurus description? palaeo-electronica.org/2007_2/… Cervical ribs go way down past the centrum. This is also true for some other basal titanosauriformes, like Euhelopus (ix.cs.uoregon.edu/~kent/paleon… ).
"The trachea itself is often similar to the size of the centra, which would mean you need an additional centrum height of tissue below the centra, in addition to the tissue you already have there to account for muscle and tendons and ligaments."
On that first point (trachea size = centrum size) you will have to provide a reference. All I can say is that I have searched the literature that I have (and also google scholar) and cannot find any support for that claim, at least in reference to sauropods. If instead you are referring to extant birds, that is correct (based on x-ray images I have seen), but earlier you said that extant birds are not good references and now you are (implying) that they are? More importantly, not sure why centrum size and trachea size would be correlated even. Some sauropods with similar overall vertebral dimensions have relatively small or relatively large vertebral centra depending on the taxon (Sauroposeidon centra are for instance less wide and tall than would be expected in a Giraffatitan vertebrae of the same overall dimensions). I would expect trachea size to be correlated with oxygen needs and that this would scale proportionally to some non-linear factor.
"...you might want more under the chest where the pectoral muscles would be anchored to the sternum or coracoid. The deltopectorals are extremely lacking, however. The deltopectoral crest of the humerus is meant to anchor muscles from the coracoid and inner elbow, so there should be a relatively straight outline from the inner elbow through to the coracoid."
I used for reference the myological reconstructions in Ray Wilhite's (2003) unplublished dissertation (www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&… ) and by Daniela Schwarz ( for example, app.pan.pl/acta52/app52−… ). Granted they are diplodocids and a camarasaur, but it's the best references I could find. Both Apatosaurus and Camarasaurus have far more robust humerii than Paluxysaurus, and I reduced the overall musculature accordingly. I also used Magdalena Borsuk-Bialynicka's reconstruction of Opisthoceolicaudia in which she also provides a reconstruction of the forelimb musculature, the humerus of which is also far more robust. Taking that into account, and the fact that much of the applicable soft tissue is obscured by the scapula and rib cage in lateral view, and the outline of the stomach tissue in anterior view, I would say my reconstruction is a reasonable conjecture.
"Finally, theres the issue of the dorsal region. Neural spines are extreme regions for ligaments and tendons, which stretch across multiple spines to form tightly woven "nets". This would make the dorsal side of the back, neck and tail a smooth curve over all the spines, without much tissue above, but very large amounts of tendons and vertebral muscle beside and between the spines. This would mean smoothing out the 3 "steps" that are visible along the back, behind the shoulder, in front of the pelvis and near the beginning of the tail."
Again, references please? I am aware of recently published research that shows tough (in some cases, ossified) tendons on bundles extending at least from the posterior dorsals to the sacrum (for instance: rsos.royalsocietypublishing.or… ). However, I don't see any indication that these tendons wouldn't follow the natural outline of the neural spines.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Also, I have just come across a diagram in Janensch 1929 which shows pretty well that the dorsal neural spines were covered in tendons across the tops of the spines. drive.google.com/drive/folders… page 111
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I probably said the wrong thing initially, although I did think a question would seem less provoking than a statement about the lack of tissue.
Some of these observations are just made from me observing the human body, while also supplemented by data I will do my best to provide.
While not specific to tracheas, there is a useful image here of a crocodile trachea directly comparable to the vertebrae svpow.com/2013/11/08/did-sauro… We have no better comparisons to tracheas than crocodiles and birds, so when we cannot use better we must use them.
Ostriches are as separated from sauropods as Passer, Corvus, Psittacus or Tyrannosaurus. No point can be made that they are a better analogue for sauropods, so please don't try to make them one. (Reference: any study of phylogeny of dinosaurs/birds besides BAND work)
My next two points go hand-in-hand, but these are from personal observations of breathing under different circumstances: trachea size is more likely to have positive allometry throughout neck elongation and size increases, in addition to more musculature of the upper chest region. Breathing through a straw is difficult for humans, we can easily suffocate with sufficient length because of us not being able to repel the air through the straw fast enough to breath fresh air in. Make the straw 10 meters and you die. Make the oxygen required to power all the 20+ tonnes of animal be forced through that straw and it dies. To increase the survival from 0 to possible, you have to enlarge the diameter of the straw by a significant amoung. Then, when breathing in or breathing out, your enlarged chest muscles can force the air all the way in or out enough for new air with oxygen to pass in. I have not taken the time to look at specifically how birds draw air into their lungs, so the chest muscle point might be invalid, but birds do cycle with breaths in and out, so the trachea diameter does make sense.
The deltopectoral points can be observed in the muscle diagrams of GSP of Brachiosaurus, which has much more slender humeri than Paluxysaurus naturalhistory.si.edu/exhibits… but also in the mount/model of a sauropod in the AMNH vertpaleo.org/blog/blog-oldbon…
Because ossified tendons are not preserved in sauropods, or even theropods, I will use comparisons to ornithischians for this if you don't mind. paleobiol.geoscienceworld.org/… Tendons articulate with the neural spines, not always flowing horizontal, but mostly extending across several vertebrae. The gaps in tendons between vertebrae would form a shallow v. Either these v's would be visible in all vertebrae (where the neural spine shapes are visible in life) of they would all be filled with other connective tissue. Sauropod neural spines show rugosities for muscles across all sides, including their dorsal-facing distalmost tip. this would show that there were muscles along the tops of the vertebrae. ix.cs.uoregon.edu/~kent/paleon…
Hopefully these will suffice as references for you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
WOW awesome skeleton and i plan to include Sauroposeidon in my future dinosaur film project called Unknown Island
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sounds cool!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it will be cool
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Depends on what you mean, after all sauropod necks were not penises lol Humor aside, the neck could certainly be retracted into a more elevated position than I show here. That said, swan or goose-like postures with a sharp u-turn right at the base of the neck were probably not possible.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Then why do most major paleontologists show this, and why are the closest relatives (Brachiosaurus and Giraffatitan which I have in my home city) specially adapted for that?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sorry, not exactly sure what you the "this" is you are referring to when you say "why do most major paleontologists shows this". But presuming you mean a very elevated and strongly upturned neck, I am not sure I agree with that. Could you provide some references? Even Greg Paul in his latest reconstructions of brachiosaurs shows less elevated neck posture.
As I said earlier, my reconstruction is not intended to show the max posture attainable (for instance, while feeding) , but rather a walking posture.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
img03.deviantart.net/d8cb/i/20…
pre09.deviantart.net/38b5/th/p…
svpow.files.wordpress.com/2009…
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
A lot of sauropod workers from the SVPOW team, Scott Hartman and Nima-Paleoking-Sassani have an opposite idea about the neck posture...
Not a personal attack, good recostruction
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks for the comment! 
Since I restored it in a walking posture, I lowered it a bit as most animals tend to lower their heads and necks while walking compared to when feeding - assuming a browser, not a grazer - and with intraspecific behaviors (i.e., this: dinascitywildlife.files.wordpr… versus this: thumb1.shutterstock.com/displa… ).
I disagree with Sassani's extreme up-turned u-shaped posture at the base of the neck (in fact his restorations are very disimilar in that aspect when compared to Scott Hartman's and how SV-POW has restored in the past: svpow.files.wordpress.com/2009… ), as I think it violates most interpretations of the anatomy in the published research that I am aware of (even factoring in cartilage and such).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I also agree with you and D'Emic et al.(2012) about Paluxysaurus being the same Taxon sa Sauroposeidon considering the cervical materials, but still considering the grade of fusion in The scapolacoracoid of the Paluxysaurus holotype there is a big dimensional gap
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not all animals mature skeletally at the same rate and in the same regions. I can't find the exact reference now, but I believe there was a study a few years back showing that different parts of the skeleton can mature at different rates in sauropods.
Even in extant taxa some reach maturity at different sizes (i.e., peramorphosis). There can be great variation in "adult size": for instance, in the Canada goose (Branta canadensis), the largest "subspecies" - Common Canada Goose - can weigh up to 4.5 kg as an adult, whereas the smallest subspecies - the Aleutian - only weighs up to 2.3 kg as an adult, which is almost a two-fold difference (Source: Sibley Field Guide to Birds).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0