Jump to content
Haravex

Sigilmassasaurus is Spinosaurus?

Recommended Posts

Troodon

Very cool now I need to get a hold of the paper and see what they have to say.  Ibrahims recent paper also makes comments similar to those in the abstract 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haravex

what are your thoughts Troodon personally I don't see how they can be the same species, nut again dont have the paper to read yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

First need to read the paper, hey they are the experts not us.  Now we need to hear from S. Evers et al if they have a rebuttal since they described Sigilmassasaurus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

This is what you have when there are not a lot of articulated skeletons around.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

BTW we have a similar debate with Carcharodontosaurus and Sauroniops.  Ibrahims et al. 2020 paper clearly argues that the evidence presented to describe Sauroniops is not valid.  Its great that we are seeing these publications may help to bring some clarity to the KK..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

the legenda to plates one & two from Stromer:

styromer1000 (2).jpg

 

(arrow mine)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

Christophe Hendrickx Twitter 

Paper  "No evidence is found to definitively support the presence of any spinosaur in the deposit besides Spinosaurus aegyptiacus. " 

Christophe:

"No evidence is found to definitively support the presence of a single spinosaur, Spinosaurus aegyptiacus, in the deposits"

"Previous confusion over the rejection of Sigilmassasaurus brevicollis has resulted in a system in which any variation between spinosaurid material is automatically assumed to be sexual dimorphism, intraspecific or ontogenetic variations"

 

And then  "A sarcastic remark"

Anyone have the new paper "Baryonyx, Ichthyovenator, Irritator, Suchomimus, and Vallibonavenatrix are Spinosaurus: a reappraisal of spinosaurids worldwide" by Smyth et al. (2025), please?

 

Obviously not very supportive of the reassessment 

 

Henry Sharpe posted

EYtyxN-XgAA1oEK.thumb.jpeg.cf8c4481df98076de432249dbccab9ba.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TyBoy

Ha ha Christophe ontogeny argument sounds a bit like those used against Nano.   Will be interesting to see how the rest of the paleo community reacts to this paper.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×