Sauropod verts

[FF7_Yuffie]

Labelled as sauropod.

 

Photo 1 and 2 is 5 inch by 3.5 inch

 

Photo 3 and 4 is 12 cm by 13.5 cm x 4.9 cm

 

Both are from Oxfordshire. So I'm guessing if they are sauropod, they are probably cetiosaurus.

 

Thanks very much

 

 

 

 

[FF7_Yuffie]

Hello, I have uploaded some photos now--sorry for delay. I had to wait until I got to my computer to properly edit them so it didn't say the sellers name.

If anyone can take a look, that would be great. 

[Troodon]

The first bone is thin to be sauropod looks more marine possibly plesiosaur which is more typical of that locality.   

 

Here are some images posted by other members that I collected of Cetiosaurus you can compare  against on the second vert.  

 

Holotype 

[FF7_Yuffie]

32 minutes ago, Troodon said:

The first bone is thin to be sauropod looks more marine possibly plesiosaur which is more typical of that locality.   

 

Here are some images posted by other members that I collected of Cetiosaurus you can compare  against on the second vert.  

 

Holotype 

 

 

Nice one. Thanks for taking a look.  The seller has quite a few verts, so the thinner ones I will dismiss immediately.

To me, then, looking at the picture, Vert 3/4 seems like it matches picture A/B/C just with the top part missing/worn/damaged?  As do the two that I have also attached (These don't have dimensions listed, they're on a page where you select which one for varying prices). They're from the same seller though and similar priced to the larger version I posted before.

 

Although, the first one doesn't concave on the edge like the ones in the pic you posted do, so maybe not.

 

 

[Troodon]

Identification of centrums can be very problematic since the diagnostic spines are missing.   The overall shape appears to match the illustrations but the lack of concave face does not.   Why this type of material can be very ambiguous to assign.