Jump to content

Question about spinosaurus fossils


PetrosTrilobite

Recommended Posts

PetrosTrilobite

How spinosaurus teeth and bones are so common fossil on the market, the same time that we know very little about this dinosaur? Also, in my favorite fossil website, i have see 6-7 times, "spinosaurus vertebra" with cost from 200 to 500 dollars. They vertebra are really from spinosaurus?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spinosaurus lived in a semi-aquatic environment which enabled the fossilization process of bones and teeth better than a terrestrial environment.  The enamel covering of the Teeth help them preserve better.  Most sellers label all bones and vertebrae as Spinosaurus, encourages sales .  Some are most are not and many that we see here on the Forum are Croc. why you should post your interest here before you buy.

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
LordTrilobite

Fossils are big business in Morocco. They are dug up by the thousands. In the Kem Kem group where spinosaur fossils are found spinosaurids are still rare. But among the more vertebrate finds, such as fish, crocs, pterosaurs and other dinosaurs, spinosaurs make up roughly 60% of the finds. So in that sense they are common among the vertebrate animals there.

 

And note that I say spinosaur and spinosaurid, not Spinosaurus aegyptiacus. So, the family, not the species. While most recent studies find that there is only one spinosaurid present in the Kem Kem group, there is also evidence to suggest there might be more than one species. Such as Sigilmassasaurus. So it's safer to say a bone belongs to a spinosaurid rather than a specific species in that family most of the time.

 

So yeah it should be pretty easy to get rather nice spinosaur bones and teeth from Morocco. But most of the bones that do get found are isolated remains. Articulated remains or even relatively complete skeletons are extremely rare. This is partially why we don't know a whole lot about spinosaurs yet. There's a lot you just cannot learn from just isolated bones. Better more complete finds are needed. Luckily a very complete skeleton was found recently, which is why we now know that Spinosaurus had short legs and a fin on its tail.

 

 

And like Troodon says, many fossils are also misidentified and will often be labeled Spinosaurus when they shouldn't be.

  • I found this Informative 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2020 at 6:27 AM, PetrosTrilobite said:

we know very little about this dinosaur

I think this is a lingering image of Spinosaurus stuck in people's heads that was popularized, but is no longer as accurate as it once was. While there's still unknowns about Spinosaurus, it isn't an enigma of a dinosaur as it once was. It's prevalence, or at least very closely related animal in the Kem Kem Beds certainly helps, it is arguably the most common dinosaur on the market.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

the apparent missing bones of spinosauridae is just an artefact, its because people didnt dig large surfaces, the skeletons are here but the way people dig make only possible lot of bones or teeth , when people dig large surface they find more because the skeletons are on large area like a lot of digging locality in a world. strangly tree american expeditions found partial skeleton of deltadromeus and spinosaur most recently but this idea about the fossils are just parts is still strong in paleontologic world. fossilisation is a rare event ok, but when that happen , lot of specimens are involved true the time.

changing the way of digging will give much more sub complete specimens...

 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...