Skip to main content

Thecodontosaurus antiquus

This is my attempt at a reconstruction of Thecodontosaurus antiquus. No one really knows what the skull looked like except for a juvenile of a closely-related southern Welsh species Pantydraco caducus (formerly known as Thecodontosaurus caducus) so I pretty much made it up - loosely basing it on Benton et al. (2000). The interesting thing about Theco is that there are so many postcranial jumbled together that no one has any idea what the forelimb to hindlimb ratio is. I attempted a lower fore-hind limb ratio - so as to make it look like Theco is actually not obligatory bipedally nor quadrupedally, basically facultative.

Thecodontosaurus was discovered in 1834 at the Durdham Down in Clifton, Bristol, UK and is the fourth dinosaur to be named. It is also the oldest dinosaur from Britain at 203-215 million years old. The original Clifton materials were destroyed in the second world war when a bomb hit the Bristol City Museum. However, some elements, including a braincase, had fortunately escaped destruction as they had been taken back to the United States by Othniel Marsh as part of a collections exchange with the Yale University Museum in the late 19th century.

Most of the more recent studies on Theco have been conducted on materials collected from a cave deposit in a quarry in Tytherington, just north of Bristol, in the 1970s. Over the course of the next few decades, numerous specimens (at least from 30 or so individuals) were prepared out, but the University of Bristol has just under 6 tons of bone-bearing rocks still awaiting preparation.

Recent work suggests that Bristol and its surrounding areas, including south Wales where Pantydraco lived, were a series of tropical islands - in which case, Pantydraco may just be another island species of Thecodontosaurus.

Comments

Zach said…
Where does Thecodontosaurus shake out in terms of saurischian phylogeny? I've read varying accounts, everything from a fairly general prosauropod to a basal prosauropod to a basal SAUROPOD to a basal sauropodmorph.

I also read that Thecodontosaurus may be an insular dwarf, which is kind of cool.
Hi Zach,

According to Yates (2003), theco is supposed to be a very basal sauropodomorph with only Saturnalia being more basal.

And yes, I think it is a fascinating idea that theco may be an insular dwarf. I don't think there were anything much bigger than theco around the Bristol area anyway...

Popular posts from this blog

The difference between Lion and Tiger skulls

A quick divergence from my usual dinosaurs, and I shall talk about big cats today. This is because to my greatest delight, I had discovered today a wonderful book. It is called The Felidæ of Rancho La Brea (Merriam and Stock 1932, Carnegie Institution of Washington publication, no. 422). As the title suggests it goes into details of felids from the Rancho La Brea, in particular Smilodon californicus (probably synonymous with S. fatalis ), but also the American Cave Lion, Panthera atrox . The book is full of detailed descriptions, numerous measurements and beautiful figures. However, what really got me excited was, in their description and comparative anatomy of P. atrox , Merriam and Stock (1932) provide identification criteria for the Lion and Tiger, a translation of the one devised by the French palaeontologist Marcelin Boule in 1906. I have forever been looking for a set of rules for identifying lions and tigers and ultimately had to come up with a set of my own with a lot of help

R for beginners and intermediate users 3: plotting with colours

For my third post on my R tutorials for beginners and intermediate users, I shall finally touch on the subject matter that prompted me to start these tutorials - plotting with group structures in colour. If you are familiar with R, then you may have noticed that assigning group structure is not all that straightforward. You can have a dataset that may have a column specifically for group structure such as this: B0 B1 B2 Family Acrocanthosaurus 0.308 -0.00329 3.28E-05 Allosauroidea Allosaurus 0.302 -0.00285 2.04E-05 Allosauroidea Archaeopteryx 0.142 -0.000871 2.98E-06 Aves Bambiraptor 0.182 -0.00161 1.10E-05 Dromaeosauridae Baryonychid 0.189 -0.00238 2.20E-05 Basal_Tetanurae Carcharodontosaurus 0.369 -0.00502 5.82E-05 Allosauroidea Carnotaurus 0.312 -0.00324 2.94E-05 Neoceratosauria Ceratosaurus 0.377 -0.00522 6.07E-05 Neoceratosauria Citipati 0.278 -0.00119 5.08E-06 Ovir

Hind limb proportions do not support the validity of Nanotyrannus

While it was not the main focus of their paper, Persons and Currie (2016) , in a recent paper in Scientific Reports hinted at the possibility of Nanotyrannus lancensis being a valid taxon distinct from Tyrannosaurus rex , using deviations from a regression model of lower leg length on femur length. Similar to encephalisation quotients , Persons and Currie devised a score (cursorial-limb-proportion; CLP) based on the difference between the observed lower leg length and the predicted lower leg length (from a regression model) expressed as a percentage of the observed value. The idea behind this is pretty simple in that if the observed lower leg length value is higher than that predicted for its size (femur length), then that taxon gets a high CLP score. I don't particularly like this sort of data characterisation (a straightforward regression [albeit with phylogeny, e.g. pGLS] would do the job well), but nonetheless, Persons and Currie found that when applied to Nanotyrannus , it