At last year’s SVP there was a symposium that focussed on
many aspects of the unique continent of Laramidia and this year that other long
lost land on the other side of the Western Interior Seaway, Appalachia, also came
under close scrutiny. One of the presentations by Steve Brusatte, of the
American Museum of Natural History, and colleagues looked at the theropods of
Appalachia including ornithomimids but especially tyrannosaurs which we will
look at now.
Compared to the wealth of fossils that are known from
Laramidia, the record of Appalachian forms is sparse. This does not mean,
however, that there are no specimens available and recent work has
reinterpreted those fossils that were already held in collections as well as
the new fossil discoveries of recent years. The rapid evolution of phylogenetic
techniques has enabled these fossils to be classified with some degree of
confidence and the tyrannosauroids Appalachiosaurus
montgomeriensis and Dryptosaurus aquilunguis are extremely
interesting specimens.
I recently blogged about these tyrannosaurs here and Brusatte
et al are able to provide yet more
detail that helps understand what was happening in Appalachia during the Late
Cretaceous. The holotypes of these animals preserve both cranial and
postcranial elements and the most recent phylogenetic analysis places them as
intermediate forms between Asian taxa such as Guanlong and Dilong and
the more derived tyrannosaurids of North America epitomised by such animals as Gorgosaurus and Daspletosaurus.
The authors suggest that these primitive forms in Appalachia
remained isolated after the initial migration of basal tyrannosauroids from
Asia was cut off by the Western Interior Seaway and that this particular
landmass may have been a retreat from what was happening in the west during
tyrannosauroid evolution. This backs up earlier work (Brusatte et al 2011) and suggests to me that
there are probably many other primitive forms of dinosaur to be found and the
authors point out that there is additional undiagnostic tyrannosauroid material
that, although may be referable to either Appalachiosaurus
or Dryptosaurus, may equally
represent other taxa.
Also featured on this blog here, and numerous other blogs
and websites, is the continuing fascination with the forelimbs of tyrannosaurs
and one presentation, that also received some publicity at the time, was a look
at the forelimb musculature of these animals by Sara Burch of Stony Brook
University.
Only the forelimb of Tyrannosaurus
has been studied with any intensity but Burch looked at the forelimbs of eleven
tyrannosauroids as well several other outgroup taxa for comparison. The purpose
was to analyse any morphological change within the group as well as trying to
identify any evolutionary traits that may indicate a reduction in forelimb use.
It appears that the most rapid change in forelimb
musculature took place in the early evolution of Tyrannosauridae proper
although a few basal tyrannosauroids were also identified as displaying change.
The scapula and humerus both display enlarged muscle attachment sites. Various
other muscle attachments also highlight the significant morphological change
that took place as the forelimb reduced in size. Burch then identified the numerous
functional changes that occur due to the reshaping of the muscles in tandem
with the resulting changes in the various tendons.
The results show that there was an obvious reduction in some
musculature whilst others became more robust.
What is fascinating here that, despite a superb analysis performed by
the author, there appears be no clear functional evolutionary hypothesis for
the forelimb. The arm in tyrannosauroids, as well as closely related taxa, was
clearly capable of different functions and I suspect that the evolution of the
theropod forelimb in general was fluid within taxa and did not neccesarily
follow a common path. Even within tyrannosaurids proper there are obvious
differences.
Incidentally, I have
skimmed over this presentation since, I must confess, musculature is not a
strong point for me and is something I must address. But the presentation was
much more lucid and made a lot of sense at the time. It was afterward when you
are trying to take it all in that it starts to confuse......
Thomas Carr continues with his awesome work on tyrannosaurs
and presented his research into the ontogeny and phylogeny of the cephalic
ornamentation of these animals. There is a basic cephalic pattern that all
tyrannosauroids conform to that includes processes on the jugal, lacrimal,
postorbital and the rugosities of the nasal.
Carr used these characters as the base codings for a
phylogenetic analysis of all derived tyrannosauroids ie Bistahieversor + Tyrannosauridae. Firstly the appearance of
ornamentation appears in the same order through ontogeny. Firstly the ventral
jugal horn appears, followed by the lacrimal process and then the postorbital
process. Both the lacrimal and postorbital horns get larger throughout growth.
Carr suggests that this is important since it signifies that these bony growths
probably evolved to help recognise maturity and species recognition between taxa.
Interestingly, the same ontogenetic trend is followed in the
early evolution of tyrannosauroids as a whole: the early primitive form Dilong (the appearance of the corneal process of the jugal), the
latter more derived Appalachiosaurus
(the lacrimal process appears) and then in Bistahieversor,
the appearance of the postorbital process.
There is also significant variety in the ornamentation
throughout ontogeny. Most juvenile tyrannosauroids display as many three
hornlet tips on the lacrimal horn but two of these are lost in adulthood. The
one exception is Tyrannosaurus who
loses the tip altogether at maturity.
Also of use is the fact that cephalic ornamentation can be
used to diagnose taxa at the species level and there are certain
characteristics, for example in Albertosaurus
sarcophagus and Tyrannosaurus respectively,
of the postorbital horn and the appearance of osteoderms that “cover” the
lacrimal and postorbital that enable these identifications to be made.
Carr states that these species specific characteristics
highlight the important of ornamentation in enabling species to recognise each
other. He points to those formations that contain sympatric taxa such as Albertosaurus libratus and Daspletosaurus torosus in Laramidia and Alioramus altai and Tyrannosaurus bataar in Asia, as providing reasonable corroboration
to back this hypothesis out.
Carr obviously looked at Alioramus
in great detail due to his collaboration on the A. altai monograph and Alioramus
obviously displays extreme ornamentation compared to other tyrannosaurids. Also
of vast interest was his belief that he considers Raptorex to be a valid taxon since he was able to check out the
fossils recently and characteristics in the lacrimal and horns have led him to
this assertion.
Finally, I had the opportunity to talk to Thomas Carr at SVP
and was very grateful that he spent some time with me chatting about all things
tyrannosaur. Aside from discussing his presentation I asked him about his
recent work on Daspletosaurus and was
treated to a sneak preview of his upcoming monograph and it’s a big document –
a VERY big document! I have been waiting for this to happen for a long long
time and I was delighted that it was Thomas who was doing it. I cannot give too
much away for obvious reasons but there will be, at last, details revealed about
one of the new species of Daspletosaurus
and maybe more…….
Following on from the aforementioned Alioramus monograph, the same team, this time led by Eugenia Gold
of the Richard Gilder Graduate School, have been looking at the extreme
pneumaticity of the skull of Alioramus. Because the holotype of Alioramus altai is so complete the team were able to CT scan all of
the pneumatic bones and the internal recesses of the skull including those of
the face, palate and lower jaw and they were looking for clues into the origins
of the coelurosaurian cranial sinuses as well as the morphological changes
required to accommodate the evolution of the long snout in this taxon.
Results reveal that Alioramus
displays a significant amount of derived coelurosaurian/avian characteristic
recesses and vindicates the belief that this suite of characters evolved early
in Theropoda. This study also reveals
that these very same cranial recesses suggest that cranial pneumaticity is
stable in theropod evolutionary remodelling – even at the extreme snout
lengthening stage of Alioramus.
The origins of tyrannosauroids remains one of the most
interesting and vibrant aspects of our science. We have come to realise that
the ancestors of the group probably evolved back in the Middle Jurassic and
maybe even earlier. The absence of diagnostic remains has proved to be a
stumbling block in our investigations but the new discoveries made in China and
reappraisal of material from North America is now shedding light on this interesting
aspect of the group.
Mark Loewen, of the University of Utah, and his colleagues
have been looking at this in some detail and performed a phylogenetic analysis
of 57 taxa and included neotheropod and coelurosaur outgroups to broaden the
context of the analysis and then, in tandem with this, also re-examined the
remains of the taxon Stokesosaurus clevelandi from the Cleveland-Lloyd
Quarry in Central Utah.
Stokesosaurus not
only retains its tyrannosauroid status and this is now reinforced by the identification
of substantial new elements now assigned to the taxon. These include a
premaxilla, maxilla, braincase and ilia. Bones from the craniofacial region are
similar to those of Dilong, Guanlong and Proceratosaurus whilst the ilia are of particular interest and
compare favourably to other recognised tyrannosauroids such as Eotyrannus and Juratyrant.
What this research helps to explain is the close
relationship between Stokesosaurus and
other early tyrannosauroids although we have to accept that there are still not
that many specimens about that help fill the void between the Middle to Late
Jurassic and the Early Cretaceous - a span of some 50 million years – so
sampling remains an issue. More derived
tyrannosauroids such as Dilong,
Eotyrannus and Yutyrannus appear
closer to Tyrannosauridae although, again, there is a yawning gap of around 40
million years between these animals and Tyrannosauridae proper. As I continue
to stipulate – sampling bias is an unavoidable element that must not be discounted
and Roger Benson recently mentioned to me that such sampling issues are
figuring high on his current agenda.
Never the less, this research emphasises my recent thoughts
on tyrannosauroid evolution and the emergence of Tyrannosauridae – namely that
it is most likely that there were many different dispersal and evolutionary
events throughout the Jurassic and Cretaceous involving North America, Asia and
Europe and I am very confident that there are many new tyrannosauroids still to
be discovered.
And finally, Zhuchengtyrannus magnus is a large tyrannosaurine recovered from Upper Cretaceous deposits in Shandong Province, China and was brought to the world early in 2011 by Dave Hone et al. In that paper it was mentioned that it was likely that there was A secondary sympatric taxon from the same formation and now Corwin Sullivan, of the IVPP in Beijing, and colleagues have now revealed more detail about this tyrannosaurid.
And finally, Zhuchengtyrannus magnus is a large tyrannosaurine recovered from Upper Cretaceous deposits in Shandong Province, China and was brought to the world early in 2011 by Dave Hone et al. In that paper it was mentioned that it was likely that there was A secondary sympatric taxon from the same formation and now Corwin Sullivan, of the IVPP in Beijing, and colleagues have now revealed more detail about this tyrannosaurid.
The quarries at Zhucheng have produced thousands of bones
over the years from various dinosaurian taxa and amongst these remains were found
tyrannosaurid teeth and the odd non diagnostic element. Eventually more
diagnostic material came to light and Zhuchengtyrannus
became the first named tyrannosaurid from the quarries.
Other material, however, including a maxilla and a dentary,
are clearly different from the aforementioned taxon. The authors stress that
this may not necessarily be a new taxon but may, indeed, be the remains of T. bataar despite the fact there are
subtle morphological differences from that particular species. But as we know,
and especially with Asian tyrannosaurids at the moment, morphological changes
throughout ontogeny were rapid and apparently virtually continuous so these
secondary remains are probably more likely to be from T. bataar.
Also of interest is that fact that the dentary from this
animal displays a clear morphology which appears to be a dental abscess. The
swollen area was CT scanned and appears to reveal evidence for osteomyelitic
infection which has caused the deformation in the dentary. Although recognised
in other dinosaurs eg hadrosaurs, this is an exceptionally rare example of this
kind of infection in a theropod dinosaur. The authors speculate that that the
condition would have impeded the tyrannosaurs feeding capabilities and,
ultimately, led to a downturn in the animal’s wellbeing.
References
Brusatte, S.; Benson, R.; and Norell, M. (2011). The Anatomy
of Dryptosaurus aquilunguis
(Dinosauria: Theropoda) and a Review of Its Tyrannosauroid Affinities. American
Museum Novitates, 3717, 1-53.
Brusatte, S.L.;
Carr, T.D.; Norell, M.A. 2012: The osteology of Alioramus, a gracile and
long-snouted tyrannosaurid (Dinosauria: Theropoda) from the Late Cretaceous of
Mongolia. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, (366)
Brusatte, S.L., Choiniere, J.N., Benson, R.B., Carr, T.D.
& Norell, M.A. 2012. Theropod dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of Eastern
North America: Anatomy, systematics, biogeography and new information from
historic specimens. Journal of
Vertebrate Paleontology, SVP Program and Abstracts Book, 2012, pp70.
Burch, S.A. 2012. Evolution of the forelimb musculature in
Tyrannosauroidea (Dinosauria: Theropoda). Journal of Vertebrate
Paleontology, SVP Program and Abstracts Book, 2012, pp70.
Carr, T.D. 2012. Ontogeny and phylogeny of cephalic
ornamentation in Tyrannosauroidea (Dinosauria: Coelurosauria). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, SVP
Program and Abstracts Book, 2012, pp75.
Gold, E., Brusatte, S.L. & Norell, M.A. 2012. Pneumaticity
patterns in the skull of Alioramus altai,
a long snouted tyrannosaurid (Dinosauria: Theropoda), from the Late Cretaceous
of Mongolia. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, SVP Program and Abstracts
Book, 2012, pp102.
Hone, D.W., Wang, K.Z., Sullivan, C., Zhao, X., Chen, S.,
Li, D., Ji, S., Ji, Q. & Xu, X. 2011. A new large tyrannosaurine theropod
from the Upper Cretaceous of China. Cretaceous
Research 32 (4): 495 – 503.
Loewen, M.A., Sertich, J.J. & Irmis, R.B. 2012. The
early evolution of tyrannosauroid dinosaurs: new anatomical, phylogenetic and
biogeographic evidence. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, SVP Program and
Abstracts Book, 2012, pp129.
Sullivan, C., Hone, D.W., Rothschild, B.M. & Wang, K.Z.
2012. Tyrannosaurid dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous Wangshi Group of
Zhucheng, Shandong Province, China: coexisting giant carnivores and a tyrant
with a toothache. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, SVP Program and
Abstracts Book, 2012, pp181 - 182.
.




2 comments:
Extremely interesting, especially the part about tyrants' cranial ornamentation; for reasons unknown it's a part of the anatomy of tyrannosaurids that always fascinated me...
(i blame the JP rex with his menacing brows!)
HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
Thanks for your interest as always Alessio - seasons greetings to you too!
Post a Comment