Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. wrote:
> Will talk some more about spinosaurs later: artists, please note, > though: according to Sereno et al.'s reidentification of skull > material in the _Baryonyx_ holotype, the skull of that animal does > not look like what has been restored before. (One of the footnotes > in the paper details the reidentification of these elements).<
Incidentally, just a few weeks before the new spinosaur was announced on this list, I tried restoring Baryonyx head from the holotype photograph "ab ovo"( having second thoughts, after seeing the type specimen at the BNHM this Spring) . Some natural shape lines on the previous reconstructions, seemed to me forcefully curved in order to make the skull look more like the "common" theropod one - deeper and shorter than it actually, apparently, was. My result was an unusually low and long Baryonyx head restoration, so it looked too peculiar and much too different from the "official" appearance. Therefore, I destroyed it. I may say that it had a lot more common features with the Suchomimus skull, than the old restoration.