[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Amphicoelias fragillimus (gigantic sauropod) size overestimated? (free pdf)



The irony here is too delicious to not comment on.  Woodruff and Foster propose 
Amphicoelias fragillimus wasn't so huge, and that the reported neural arch 
height of 1500 mm in Cope's measurement table was a typo for 1050 mm.  Yet 
their own measurement table comparing proportions using both sizes has a typo 
itself!  "Cop’s arch reconstruction"  Good ol' Edward Drinker Cop.  Hilarious.  
Not a bad theory though.

Mickey Mortimer

----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:03:14 -0800
> From: bcreisler@gmail.com
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Fwd: Amphicoelias fragillimus (gigantic sauropod) size 
> overestimated? (free pdf)
>
> A correction to the citation (wrong page numbers)...
>
>
> D. Cary Woodruff and John R. Foster (2014)
> The fragile legacy of Amphicoelias fragillimus (Dinosauria: Sauropoda;
> Morrison Formation – latest Jurassic).
> Volumina Jurassica 12 (2): 211–220
> DOI: 10.5604/17313708 .1130144
> https://www.voluminajurassica.org/volumina/article/view/173/153
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ben Creisler <bcreisler@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:55 PM
> Subject: Amphicoelias fragillimus (gigantic sauropod) size
> overestimated? (free pdf)
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
>
>
> Ben Creisler
> bcreisler@gmail.com
>
> A new paper in open access:
>
> D. Cary Woodruff and John R. Foster (2014)
> The fragile legacy of Amphicoelias fragillimus (Dinosauria: Sauropoda;
> Morrison Formation – latest Jurassic).
> Volumina Jurassica 12 (2): 211-220
> DOI: 10.5604/17313708 .1130144
> https://www.voluminajurassica.org/volumina/article/view/173/153
>
> In the summer of 1878, American paleontologist Edward Drinker Cope
> published the discovery of a sauropod dinosaur that he named
> Amphicoelias fragillimus. What distinguishes A. fragillimus in the
> annals of paleontology is the immense magnitude of the skeletal
> material. The single incomplete dorsal vertebra as reported by Cope
> was a meter and a half in height, which when fully reconstructed,
> would make A. fra
> initial description Cope never mentioned A. fragillimus in any of his
> scientific works for the remainder of his life. More than four decades
> after its description, a scientific survey at the American Museum of
> Natural History dedicated to the sauropods collected by Cope failed to
> locate the remains or whereabouts of A. fragillimus. For nearly a
> century the remains have yet to resurface. The enormous size of the
> specimen has generally been accepted despite being well beyond the
> size of even the largest sauropods known from verifiable fossil
> material (e.g. Argentinosaurus). By deciphering the ontogenetic change
> of Diplodocoidea vertebrae, the science of gigantism, and Cope’s own
> mannerisms, we conclude that the reported size of A. fragillimus is
> most likely an extreme over-estimation.