Search the Community

Hello everyone,I've decided to open a chain of comments focusing on a popular theme: Moroccan spinosaurids. This is the first comment of a small series dedicated to analyse and document the diverse morphology of spinosaurids in the Kem Kem group. As an introduction,I'll be specifying how it will work,the rules and some guidance for those interested. First and foremost,the rules: 1)For correct identifications,I require images in various view(ventral and lateral at least) and with the highest quality possible. 2)Each comment will focuse on a specific morphotype,as such,only post images of specimens matching the description giving at the start. Any specimen from other morphotype won't be identified by me. 3)Other people are encouraged to post their specimens and help with the identification/s. Procedures: 1) A new comment will be posted each week, probably during the weekend,hour from Spain. 2) Around 4 specific comments are planed. 3) Each comment will discuss a specific morphotype (anterior cervicals,mid cervicals, posterior cervicals and cervicodorsal vertebrae). 4)At the start of each comment,I'll write a basic description of the respective morphology. 5) I'll describe in detail each vertebra contained in the four groups previously mentioned. 6) Images will be extracted/modified from the literature and complemented with additional specimens. 7) Concluding remarks: Taxonomic identification and limitations of the analysis. 8) References and acknowledgements will be posted after the main corpus of the comment is finished. For any questions, please comment below. My words might not be entirely clear.I encourage everyone to post their questions.

Hello, I'm new to this forum. In the last months I have been involved in a project regarding North Africa spinosaurids.Because of the reduced data I have, I want to know if anyone could share photos of their specimens.Most of the specimens I need are presacral vertebrae and posterior cranial bones(including,if possible,a braincase). Also, any information in favour of a second morphotype could be really helpful;even though I have already treated this point, I want different opinions on this topic. Thanks a lot in advance to anyone.

So sadly its paywalled as usual I hope to read it soon but the general theme of the abstract seems to suggest various taxonomic of spinosaurus family are no longer valid. Again until I read the paper I wont say anything more than personally I'm highly skeptical. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667120302068

Hello so could someone please explain the situation with sigilmassasaurus and spinosaurus was it the same dinosaur? was sigilmassasaurus bigger? Thanks

I was told by a friend that most spinosaurus teeth are sigilmassasaurus. Is this true? If so, does this make spinosaurus rare and sigilmassasaurus the common one? Sorry about my limited knowledge on these things.

Location: Morocco Kem Kem Beds To often Crocodile jaws are composited with Spinosaurid teeth and sold as Spinosaurus jaws. So the purpose of this topic is to show the diagnostic features of Spinosaurid jaws First its extremely rare that any jaw from this region contains functional teeth. Germ/unerupted teeth are more common but those are typically well into the tooth cavity and not protuding above the jaw line. So its highly probable that those you see sold with teeth are composited. We currently do not know if there is a variation between the jaws of the different Spinosaurids described or yet to be discovered in this region so there could be some difference between them but the general characteristics should be similar. Here is a composite skull in private hands and paleontologist Cristophe Hendrickx drawing of that skull Dentary: This is Stromers original plate. 1) You can see the variation in the lateral (side) view of jaw. A very wide anterior end and more V shaped toward the hinge. So jaw sections that you see sold which are straight across are probably crocodile. 2) The teeth are also not positioned in a straight line, and not always next to one another. 3) The most telling feature is the lip on the labial side. It should be present across the entire length of the jaw 4) Broken dentary jaw sections being sold should wide not narrow like croc's Closeup of Lip Close up of germ/unerupted teeth Premaxillary/Maxillary Much more robust than dentary however the lip feature is still present but on the lingual side. Very wide in lateral view. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0144695 dal Sasso, C.; Maganuco, S.; Buffetaut, E.; Mendez, M.A. (2005). New information on the skull of the enigmatic theropod Spinosaurus with remarks on its sizes and affinities. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 25 (4): 888–896. doi:10.1671/0272-4634(2005)025[0888:NIOTSO]2.0.CO;2 Maxilla for sale with composite teeth

So I was browsing our favourite auction site, and I came across these interesting specimens. The seller claims these all belong to the same individual, while at the same time, strangely, they are selling each bone separately. And while these bones are definitely real Kem Kem bones, I'm posting it in this forum because there is reason to believe the information that these belong to the same animal is suspect. All of these are sold as being from one individual Spinosaurus. This first one is definitely a Spinosaurid cervical vertebra. a fairly nice one. But the rugose triangular area on underside shows that this is in fact from a Sigilmassasaurus, one of the Spinosaurids from Morocco. From the length of the vertebra this can be placed somewhere in the back of the neck of the animal. Next specimen is also a Spinosaurid cervical vertebra. Though due to damage this one is harder to identify as Sigilmassasaurus. Again due to the shortness this seems to be a cervical vertebra from somewhere back in the neck. The dorsal spine though worn, seems to be not that big. So this might point towards it being Sigilmassasaurus as well. So seems fairly plausible if the seller says these belong to the same individual right? Now here comes the problem. This third specimen is listed as belonging to the same individual. But this is clearly a cervical vertebra from a type of crocodile. Since it's nice and complete we can see which way is the front and which is back. The front of the centrum looks to be concave, while the back of the centrum here is convex. This is typical of some crocodiles. But on Spinosaurids it's the other way around, with the front of the centrum being convex and the back is concave. So with that this specimen casts doubt on the whole claim that some of these specimens belong to the same animal. Which is too bad 'cause the fossils seem pretty nice. There were some other specimens as well. But these three were clearly identifiable.

I bought some new cool stuff at a local show. I only bought Moroccan material. A few Mosasaur pieces and stuff from Kem Kem. I've only started cleaning and will research them a bit more later. So I thought I'd share some pics first. I also got some new display items that will be nice to showcase some of my other stuff in. From left to right. Top: First there's a chuck with two roots and one tooth. There's also some bone fragments that look like they could be jaw pieces. Will be a fun prepping project. Then there's a Prognathodon tooth that isn't the prettiest but it's really big and it was cheap so I had to get it. And at the end there's a Plesiosaur vertebra with a partial neural arch that will be fun to clean. Bottom: On the left there's a neural arch from a Spinosaurid. I compared it to the recent reconstruction of Spinosaurus and it looks like it's a pretty close match with some of the first dorsal vertebrae. Middle top there's a small caudal vertebra. Middle bottom there's a fish jaw. And on the right from top to bottom. A possible distal femur. A metacarpal/tarsal? And a possible proximal tibia. All three are hollow and probably Theropod or bird. So I have some research and cleaning to do! Really big ugly Mosasaur tooth. Mosasaur tooth and jaw fragments. Fish jaw. Distal femur. It's very asymmetrical as well. Metacarpal or tarsal. The head is almost symmetrical but the shaft seems to be angled more. Spinosaur neural arch from a different angle. Roughly a dorsoposterior view. Since it's not very complete on one side this will make for a great piece to scan and digitally mirror so that I can recreate a bit of the missing pieces. So I'll be having fun with these pieces for a while.