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

Re: [dinosaur] Size of australian sauropod trackmaker



Actually the larger tracks have been published on in Salisbury et al. 2017. Of course the paper aims to describe the entire dinosaur ichnofauna and not just the giant sauropods, and there are several smaller sauropods described as well, but they did describe, measure and figure the material in question (e.g. section on sauropod morphotype A, esp. figures 28 and 29 on pages 56-57 and the text on pages 59-62 as well as table)

They actually wrote that they consider the trackmaker comparable in size to Argentinosaurus, among various other giant sauropods. Obviously this statement also reflects a significant amount of uncertainty with the size estimate: taxa like Dreadnoughtus and Futalognkosaurus are also in that rather long list along with other sauropods that were probably something like twice as heavy.

The largest trackmakers (170-175cm pes length and 125-140cm pes width) are estimated at up to 543cm in "hip height", with the scaled-up glenoacetabular distance measurable in newly described Oobardjidama foulkesi’s trackway filling in for the actual hip height (I’d argue that glenoacetabular distance should actually give a better idea of size anyway since it constrains the length of the torso quite well).

However, note that this is actually quite conservative compared to other estimates we would get for footprints this big, either using previously proposed foot-length/hip-height ratios or scaling isometrically from better-represented taxa based on linear foot dimensions. I do wonder why that’s the case (i.e. why does the Oobardjidama have such seemingly much larger feet for its body size than Camarasaurus, Brachiosaurus, Giraffatitan, Diplodocus or the like).

---
Salisbury, S. W., Romilio, A., Herne, M. C., Tucker, R. T. and Nair, J. P. 2016. The Dinosaurian Ichnofauna of the Lower Cretaceous (Valanginian–Barremian) Broome Sandstone of the Walmadany Area (James Price Point), Dampier Peninsula, Western Australia. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 36 (sup1): 1–152.

On 05.04.2017 16:01, Austin Deans wrote:
Hey Tom,

The paper you're referring to is not the same paper as the 1.75 m tracks
found recently. The paper you're talking about (x
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.tandfonline.com_doi_full_10.1080_02724634.2016.1269539&d=DwMFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=SOXFEddBw6I4wr2P0PcAQFvj1zBy9x8_HfvX8IxRY2k&s=vd7bPfvaeEtSChesjmXPFNWGj3jakTKiqK6SKPpEdq8&e=>)
has much smaller tracks for sauropods (< 1 m). The larger tracks haven't
been published on.

Austin Deans

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Poekilopleuron
<dinosaurtom2015@seznam.cz <mailto:dinosaurtom2015@seznam.cz>> wrote:

    Good day,

    I would like to ask if anyone tried to calculate more precisely the
    size and mass of the maker of largest australian sauropod footprints
    from Kimberly region (about 175 cm long)? In the paper the
    silhouette of the dinosaur seems to be too small for such a giant
    footprint. Is it possible that this animal was in the size range of
    Argentinosaurus? Thank you, Tom


Yours sincerely,

Darius Nau
--
dariusnau@gmx.at
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.paleo.keepfree.de&d=DwIDaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=JMxjjbIZXCWilersPs1bzRx-3mUwTiQUzlyzWk7v7k4&m=kGp6bFTU1Jt-3AaASY3l1gVP5RgWk4yokUpRRY47tQg&s=vnHBZw9jEbJNf0oMWDs0ZiX_jQ9nkXJyaTonq4B7VSc&e= Mobile: +4368110280054 or +4915758916009