Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]






Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!
Make a forum zoo!

Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Extinct Animal Questions
Topic Started: Nov 26 2013, 10:24 PM (193,448 Views)
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Alright, how much do we know about each fragment of skin? The pics (except on trike's case) dont make it much clear where they came from and which parts are left unpreserved, aswell as their full extent,you say they came from the hips and lower tail, but theres a lot inbetween that, im just curious about the extent of our knowledge on these creatures.
Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 10 2014, 07:47 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luca9108
Member Avatar
Master of Dinosaurs

Question: Lived striped hyenas and snow leopards in Europe at the ice age? I read this in a book but it was a old book because that I don't know if it right.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


There were Cave Hyaenas in Eurasia, but they were a different species from the striped hyaena.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luca9108
Member Avatar
Master of Dinosaurs

Furka
Nov 10 2014, 01:40 PM
There were Cave Hyaenas in Eurasia, but they were a different species from the striped hyaena.
That I know :P . Cave Hyenas were a Subspecies of the spotted hyena.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Austroraptor
Nov 10 2014, 07:46 AM
Alright, how much do we know about each fragment of skin? The pics (except on trike's case) dont make it much clear where they came from and which parts are left unpreserved, aswell as their full extent,you say they came from the hips and lower tail, but theres a lot inbetween that, im just curious about the extent of our knowledge on these creatures.
Chasmosaurus's skin came from around the hips I think. If I'm right, ye can actually see it sticking out through the skin on the left of the b/w pic, and the flanks from the colour pic. Centrosaurus, I have no idea myself. It seems to me to be more from the flanks rather than the hips. But I'm not entirely certain.

...

Inb4"thebitswedonthavemayhavebeenquilled".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Incinerox
Nov 10 2014, 03:24 PM

Inb4"thebitswedonthavemayhavebeenquilled".
Well, yes, but atm we just dont have enough evidence to tell.

Its not unplausible, but not backed by anything other than artistic license either.

So yes, theres nothing really pointing against quills either im afraid, but its all up to speculation.
Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 10 2014, 04:34 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


What about that bay Chasmo found last year ? Did it have skin impression too ?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Austroraptor
Nov 10 2014, 03:48 PM
Theres nothing really pointing against quills
Except everything we actually do know. I have some further details on the skin impressions after quite literally just skimming wikipedia:

CHASMOSAURUS
 
Chasmosaurus specimen NMC 2245 recovered by C.M. Sternberg was accompanied by skin impressions. The area conserved, from the right hip region, measured about one by 0.5 metres. The skin appears to have had large scales in evenly spaced horizontal rows among smaller scales. The larger scales had a diameter of up to fifty-five millimetres and were distanced from each other by five to ten centimetres. They were hexagonal or pentagonal, thus with five or six sides. Each of these sides touched somewhat smaller scales, forming a rosette. Small, non-overlapping convex scales of about one centimetre in diameter surrounded the whole. The larger scales were wrinkled due to straight grooves orientated perpendicular to their edges. From top to bottom, the large scale rows gradually declined in size. Unfortunately, nothing can as yet be learned about the coloration of Chasmosaurus from the known fossil skin impression samples.


TRICERATOPS: My own notes on the integument given that wikipedia says almost nothing about it
so I looked on Google

Similarly to Chasmosaurus, Triceratops had large, round scales were surrounded by smaller polygonal scales. The round scales had small, conical tubercles at their central point for unknown purposes. This integument is known from several patches of skin, ranging from approx a foot long to over 6ft. I cannot confirm where exactly the skin was located on the trike, but at least some of smaller patches of similar integument were located in area around the left femur and ilium. The largest patch I could find (6ft+ in length) most likely came from the back itself. In contrast, the small fragments of ventral scales under the cervical vertebrae suggest that at least the the throat was covered in crocodilian-like rectangular scales.


MONOCLONIUS (not Centrosaurus
my bad) a la Barnum Brown

It is now known that the belly and sides was a free tuberculated skin comparable to the epidermis of the Trachodontidae but of different pattern with low, polygonal, non-imbricating tubercles. With another specimen, No. 5430, probably this genus, seven dermal plates were preserved, all similar in form, symmetrical and about equal in size. Each is characterised by a narrow, elongate base and a high median centre. They are about an inch wide, an inch and a half long, and an inch and a half high. In that specimen the pelvis, a part of the tail, and the hind limbs are preserved and the plates were probably located above the spines in the caudal region similar to those of centrosaurus.


But since the whole quills matter was started byPsittacosaurus, lets tackle this issue at its core:

PSITTACOSAURUS
 
Most of the body was covered in scales. Larger scales were arranged in irregular patterns, with numerous smaller scales occupying the spaces between them, similarly to skin impressions known from other ceratopsians, such as Chasmosaurus. A series of what appear to be hollow, tubular bristles, approximately 16 centimeters (6.4 in) long, were also preserved, arranged in a row down the dorsal (upper) surface of the tail. According to some scientists "at present, there is no convincing evidence which shows these structures to be homologous to the structurally different feathers and protofeathers of theropod dinosaurs." As the structures are only found in a single row on the tail, it is unlikely that they were used for thermoregulation, but they may have been useful for communication through some sort of display.


Quite frankly, to suggest that there were quills on advanced ceratopsians anywhere else other than a row along the tail would be like assuming the whole of Carnotaurus's right side was plumed while the left was scaly. Even then, Monoclonius suggests that even that didn't happen.

As for baby chasmosaurus...
Posted Image

Yes. It did.

But I can't find anything that says where it came from. So using the released pics:
Posted Image

I'm thinking it's that dark patch on the shoulder. It's hard to say for certain because of the lack of detail.
Edited by Incinerox, Nov 10 2014, 06:24 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Ok, i'm convinced, quills were a peculiarity of psittacosaurus and did not appear on anything else, they may have had spines, but not quills, and i'm impressed to see how much overwhelming evidence we have about it.

dude, well done! Now i'm curious about what dinosaurs we have impressions of exactly and just how much we have (be them quills, scales, feathers, spines, or anything really) as a casual paleo drawer, i'd love to know so i could represent my dinos more accurately.

Seems like it was a good decision to give my Einiosaurus Thick spines rather than bristly quills.

Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 10 2014, 07:59 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CyborgIguana
Member Avatar


Just...resist the common temptation to give fluff to absolutely everything. That's the best advice I can give for now. :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Austroraptor
Nov 10 2014, 07:37 PM
Ok, i'm convinced, quills were a peculiarity of psittacosaurus and did not appear on anything else, they may have had spines, but not quills, and i'm impressed to see how much overwhelming evidence we have about it.

dude, well done! Now i'm curious about what dinosaurs we have impressions of exactly and just how much we have (be them quills, scales, feathers, spines, or anything really) as a casual paleo drawer, i'd love to know so i could represent my dinos more accurately.

Seems like it was a good decision to give my Einiosaurus Thick spines rather than bristly quills.

You'd probably be better off giving Einiosaurus just them rounded scales with rosettes of smaller ones like in Monoclonius.

As for other things, gimme a while coz there's a surprisingly HUGE lot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Incinerox
Nov 10 2014, 08:13 PM
You'd probably be better off giving Einiosaurus just them rounded scales with rosettes of smaller ones like in Monoclonius.

Fair enough, altough i didn't knew anything of monoclonius by then, i won't edit that reconstruction tough, atleast as of now, as honestly most of it is speculative (as is most of my stuff really) not only the spines, tough everything among the realm of plausibility.
Edited by Yi Qi, Nov 10 2014, 08:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Taurotragus
Member Avatar


Dang it Incinerox, you ruined my awesome trike drawing with quills. xD xD xD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yi Qi
Member Avatar


Diabloceratops
Nov 10 2014, 08:37 PM
Dang it Incinerox, you ruined my awesome trike drawing with quills. xD xD xD
Its always bound to happen, a reconstruction we like changing or being disproven, as nature doesn't work to appease human tastes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stargatedalek
Member Avatar
I'm not slow! That's just my moe!

what about tianyulong? doesn't it still leave plausibility of some form of "soft integument" within ceratopsians?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
3 users reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply