Small dinosaur ID

[Crazyhen]

Subsequent to my earlier post of a "baby" dinosaur, I have finally obtained more photos of the other dinosaur specimen.  This specimen is more complete and is also collected from the same locality at Ganzhou, Jiangxi of China.  Any idea what species is that?

 

The previous link to "baby dinosaur" is http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/80752-baby-dinosaur/&tab=comments#comment-851276

 

[Max-fossils]

Hmm... Interesting. That is one cool looking fossil!

 

I don't know much about dinosaur fossils (or amphibian/reptile fossils), but the vertebrae in the 4th picture look like they are amphibian or snake vertebrae.

 

Just shape-wise, they are kinda similar to this greater siren (Siren lacertina) (these look similar to snake vertebrae) vertebra. Here is one from my collection:

 

Of course they are not exactly similar. Yours are a lot more stretched out. But I do see some shape similarity, and to me your vertebrae look more amphibian or reptile to me than dinosaur.

 

Also, the skull doesn't look very dinosaurian to me, but also more like an amphibian or reptile skull. So I say that what you have there is more likely an amphibian or reptile fossil than dinosaur. Compare it with this Fedexia striegeli skull I saw online:

 

I will tag @LordTrilobite, @Troodon and @hxmendoza, as they know much more about dinosaur fossils than me and will be able to give a better opinion on your fossil than me.

 

Best regards,

 

Max

[izak_]

Ceratopsian? Looks like it has a frill imo. 

I think the skull bares most resemblance to a Xenomorph though  

[LordTrilobite]

Hm, an interesting critter. It seems it's been a bit butchered in prepping. It does look very complete though. The skull is visible from the dorsal and right lateral side in these photos. The supratemporal fenestra visible on the top back of the skull tell us that this is a diapsid reptile. So not an amphibian. It doesn't look very dinosaurian to me though. The back of the skull is a little smooshed, but the snout still seems to be mostly intact. Though there are exceptions, if it were dinosaurian you'd expect the antorbital fenestra. And this doesn't really look like those dinosaurs that have the antorbital fenestra closed. Which makes me think this is a lizard or a lizard-like animal.

 

But this really needs professional prep to learn more.

[Crazyhen]

38 minutes ago, LordTrilobite said:

Hm, an interesting critter. It seems it's been a bit butchered in prepping. It does look very complete though. The skull is visible from the dorsal and right lateral side in these photos. The supratemporal fenestra visible on the top back of the skull tell us that this is a diapsid reptile. So not an amphibian. It doesn't look very dinosaurian to me though. The back of the skull is a little smooshed, but the snout still seems to be mostly intact. Though there are exceptions, if it were dinosaurian you'd expect the antorbital fenestra. And this doesn't really look like those dinosaurs that have the antorbital fenestra closed. Which makes me think this is a lizard or a lizard-like animal.

 

But this really needs professional prep to learn more.

Does it look like a Captorhinid reptile to you?  I am not certain if Captorhinids have ever been found in China.

[LordTrilobite]

2 minutes ago, Crazyhen said:

Does it look like a Captorhinid reptile to you?  I am not certain if Captorhinids have ever been found in China.

Those don't have open supratemporal fenestra. So no I don't think it looks like those.

[Troodon]

Are these cretaceous deposits?  Can you take a picture looking directly at the skull and like the other a real closeups of the teeth.  What is the size of what we are looking at?

[steelhead9]

Too bad the skull is so ground off. Makes a positive id pretty difficult.

[Crazyhen]

1 hour ago, Troodon said:

Are these cretaceous deposits?  Can you take a picture looking directly at the skull and like the other a real closeups of the teeth.  What is the size of what we are looking at?

30x28cm.  I’m not sure if it’s Cretaceous deposits but it’s from Ganzhou of Jiangxi.  I will ask my friend to take a close up photo.

[Troodon]

If not Cretaceous what are the other possibilities ?

[Crazyhen]

3 minutes ago, Troodon said:

If not Cretaceous what are the other possibilities ?

Ganzhou belongs to Late Cretaceous Nanxiong Formation of Nankang County.

[Troodon]

Lots of chinese books out there on Chinese Paleontology.   May want to see if any have revelance to your interest.

 

http://www.hceis.com/home/book_list.aspx?class_b_id=170

[Crazyhen]

33 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Lots of chinese books out there on Chinese Paleontology.   May want to see if any have revelance to your interest.

 

http://www.hceis.com/home/book_list.aspx?class_b_id=170

Thanks, Troodon.  That’s really useful.

[Haravex]

I don't feel I can comment too much to this post except for one thing whoever is doing the prep work needs to stop they are damaging it beyond repair in my honest opinion.

[jpc]

1 hour ago, Haravex said:

I don't feel I can comment too much to this post except for one thing whoever is doing the prep work needs to stop they are damaging it beyond repair in my honest opinion.

I agree.  This needs professional prep.  

[jpc]

Here is what Haravex is talking about. The skull is no longer a nice skull but it is riddled with tool marks.  It is ruined.  I have circled nice bone texture in green and trashed bone textured in blue.  Who know how much more than the surface has been removed?   And in the second photo I have circled in yellow where I see tool marks going right through the bones. 

 

This needs professional prep.  Have I said that before? 

 

 

[Crazyhen]

It’s really a pity that the fossil was uncovered with such damages.  No fine prepping work, the fossil was dug up and the covered matrix was partly removed roughly and carelessly by workers with no training and experience.  This is sadly what’s going on.  I am asking for teeth photos and hopefully it’d shed some light on the identity of this fossil.

[Aurelius]

This should go to a museum, if the person who has it doesn't have the skills to prepare it properly.

[Crazyhen]

Close-up photos of the head and teeth.

[jpc]

Sadly, the first two pictures show a row of broken off teeth.  We need much closer pix of the teeth in the third photo to get an idea of what they look like.   These pix show the badly prepped skull very well.  Ugh.  

[Carl]

My God, that prep makes me woozy with despair... A fine, fine specimen has been brutalized.

[jpc]

Carl is much better at saying what I want to say.  

[Troodon]

Sad since it's such a rare specimen

[LordTrilobite]

Ugh, indeed. Exactly what Carl said.

[zekky]

I think the top part or the skull is carved in the rock and painted tbh.