HOME | DD

palaeozoologist — Concaventor by-nc-nd

Published: 2011-02-08 22:53:44 +0000 UTC; Views: 7178; Favourites: 131; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description Well, I'm a bit tardy to the party when it comes to a life restoration of this magnificent beast, but I eventually got around to it.

This drawing is based off of my own original Concavenator skeletal. One of the things that I tried to do was give it the sub-rectangular, large, crocodile-like belly scales that were reported to be preserved. Few artists have restored them in their depictions. The scale pattern was patterned after crocodiles, though slightly modified.

Also note: no feathers! Originally, the paper described what were supposed to be quill knobs. However, this has quickly fallen out of favor and are probably best interpreted as intermuscular lines. See here for more info: [link]

Also, most interpretations show sacral spines protruding above the ilia, but the fossil does not indicate this. Interestingly, this means it was "double-humped" because the anterior caudal vertebrae also have elongated spines.
Related content

palaeozoologist - Alamosaurus (small scales)

palaeozoologist - Atlasaurus drawing

palaeozoologist - Marshosaurus _again_

palaeozoologist - Futalognkosaurus dukei

palaeozoologist - Alamosaurus drawing with croc scales

palaeozoologist - Andesaurus life reconstruction

palaeozoologist - Alamosaurus (in color)

palaeozoologist - Marshosaurus life drawing

palaeozoologist - Uberabatitan

TheHellckan - Staurikosaurus

LADAlbarran2001 - Dilophosaurus wetherilli

Typothorax - Coelophysis

unlobogris - Aucasaurus garridoi

maniraptora - Teyuwasu barbarenai

Durbed - Delapparentia turolensis

dewlap - Tyrannosaurids

Anuperator - Cope's duckbill

E-Smaniotto - The Alarming Lizard
Comments: 35

LeonPitigala66 [2016-05-21 00:59:44 +0000 UTC]

Thank you for giving it square scales, literally no artwork I have seen on Concavenator give it square scales.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to LeonPitigala66 [2016-05-24 04:36:26 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the compliment, just trying to follow the description really. Although I am not the only one who has done this, see: i.ytimg.com/vi/5TXBpQSuwQw/max… , for example

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Terizinosaurus [2015-08-20 17:28:50 +0000 UTC]

Nice

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Algoroth [2012-08-07 00:56:54 +0000 UTC]

Wonderful work! Oh, yes!!!! U R invited....[link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Algoroth [2012-08-19 01:55:41 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the invite! Not sure if I'll have time to do this...I haven't done a recent skeletal for Puertasaurus and I strongly disagree with how Nima (Paleo-King) has restored his one. I'll keep this in mind, though.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Algoroth In reply to palaeozoologist [2012-08-19 23:55:08 +0000 UTC]

Your version would be super! I use his idea because I like it...no real idea how accurate it is...but other thoughts on how Puertasaurus looked would be great.

You get good life into your restorations, so I'm especially interested in seeing yours. Just a sketch would be fine.

When I do my version, I'll be using my own thoughts on both dinos. Freedom of concept is the byword here...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TyrannosaurusPrime [2011-08-17 08:24:14 +0000 UTC]

Awesome!!!!! That is one wierd dinosaur though.... What do you think the humps (if that's the right word) are used for?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to TyrannosaurusPrime [2011-08-18 01:44:43 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

I don't know what the elongated neural spines were for in Concavenator. Presumably, they were for display or species recognition but those are only guesses. The truth is, we may never know what they were for, so have fun speculating!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Imnurhest In reply to palaeozoologist [2012-04-23 03:59:54 +0000 UTC]

I once thought the spines were for steering, like a dorsal fin of a shark. But, I guess we'll never know...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TyrannosaurusPrime In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-08-18 06:52:05 +0000 UTC]

Ok. BTW check this out: [link] (Poor Ornitholestes.....)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to TyrannosaurusPrime [2011-08-23 21:22:29 +0000 UTC]

Hmmm, gotta say I'm a bit disappointed with the comedic antics of Dinosaur Revolution...sure things like this happen to chickens whose head isn't cut all the way off, but the entire head of the Ornitholestes is off, no way it could run around that long, especially with the massive amount of blood loss shown.

The famous "Mike the Headless Chicken" only survived the 18 months it did due to a series of highly improbable events (even more improbable with an allosaur, mind you, with jaws so large it would engulfed most of the front half of the Ornitholestes--not just the head).

Apparently in the case of "Mike the Headless Chicken" the axe had missed the carotid artery and a clot had prevented it from bleeding to death. Although most of his head was severed, most of its brain stem and one ear was left on the body. Since basic functions such as breathing, the heart-rate, reflexes and other basic functions are controlled by the brain stem, "Mike" was able to live for so long "without" a head. Not gonna happen with a completely headless Ornitholestes, I'm afraid.

Also, I know I'm being picky, but the Ornitholestes really should have a covering of protofeathers.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TyrannosaurusPrime In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-08-24 06:02:45 +0000 UTC]

Ok. BTW according to Tom Holtz (who is a consultant), while they "lost the battle to put feathers on Ornitholestes, all the other dinosaurs in the program that were supposed to have feathers will have them. BTW is this possible to Shunosaurus: [link] And looks like Torvosaurus is treated like a Butt Monkey in the show (everyone innthe watering hole, even the smaller young adult Allosaurus, is out to get him): [link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to TyrannosaurusPrime [2011-08-25 17:21:53 +0000 UTC]

Well the news about the other feathered dinosaurs is good.

As for the Shunosaurus and the hallucinogenic mushrooms, while it is possible, I have not heard of any fossilized hallucinogenic mushrooms. Modern mushroom genera that contain hallucinogenic species often times have other species that are not hallucinogenic so I think it would be difficult to tell from fossils if they are or are not hallucinogenic. Still, it is possible, although unlikely.

I agree that the Torvosaurus scenario is a bit unlikely, too. I'd think a predator probably wouldn't attack so openly and wildly, unless it was rogue.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TyrannosaurusPrime In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-08-26 06:47:16 +0000 UTC]

Ok thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Algoroth [2011-06-30 14:32:15 +0000 UTC]

Has more than one specimen been found? If not, how do we know this is valid?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Algoroth [2011-07-02 00:24:12 +0000 UTC]

No, to my knowledge more than one specimen has not been found. What do you mean by valid? The name, or my reconstruction? I'm confused....

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Algoroth In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-07-02 02:43:42 +0000 UTC]

I am sure your restoration is fine, Zach. It can be claimed that, if only one specimen is found of anything, it might be a freak, rather than a species, like the original doubts about Pachyrhinosaurus.

I try not to be sneaky with critiques. If I say I like it, I like it.

I was just wondering if this marvel was unique. It's a cool dino!

Oh yes! By-the-way!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Algoroth [2011-07-03 02:17:11 +0000 UTC]

Well, Concavenator is probably not unique, as the type specimen for Becklespinax has similar posterior dorsal vertebrae. Unfortunately, Becklespinax is only known from these odd posterior dorsals so it's hard to tell if it and Concavenator are congeneric or not. Some paleontologists have even suggested that they likely are congeneric. IMO, it's pretty likely that the "hump" is real. If not, it had to be a pretty common genetic defect to be preserved in the fossil record twice! I find that possibility unlikely, although still in the realms of possibility.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Algoroth [2011-06-25 18:41:54 +0000 UTC]

Weirdosaurus! Beautiful drawing and awesome job on the restoration!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Algoroth [2011-06-27 02:14:44 +0000 UTC]

Thanks you very much!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Tomozaurus [2011-03-30 02:44:40 +0000 UTC]

Great work. You're the first person I've seen to actually reconstruct this animal with the skin impressions that were described in the paper.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Tomozaurus [2011-03-30 18:43:39 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, really appreciate the compliment.

Yeah, I have noticed that a lot of people leave out the scale pattern on the skin--although I think I have seen a couple others with crocodile belly scales somewhere on the internet...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Tomozaurus In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-03-30 23:28:33 +0000 UTC]

Your welcome. I'll have to have a look around for those others.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Tomozaurus [2011-03-31 02:21:22 +0000 UTC]

Here's one: [link]

Not the most anatomically accurate, however.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Tomozaurus In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-03-31 03:18:26 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, that one's not the best anatomically. I'm pretty sure the impressions look more like what you've done that what that person has done anyway. He or she has also included the arm quills even though the supposed "quill knobs" are obviously an intermuscular line.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Tomozaurus [2011-03-31 03:26:45 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, I agree. The paper made it sound more like they were subrectangular, somewhat large scales, but not the plate-like bands that artist uses. On the other hand, a lot of people who draw (unrealistic) crocs do the same thing to invoke the scale patterns, and it is a bit more cartoon-ish looking than other drawings.

And yeah, Concavenator probably didn't have the arm quills (or at least, the evidence that was supposed to indicate their existence actually does no such thing, as you noted).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Tomozaurus In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-03-31 03:40:23 +0000 UTC]

Exactly what I go out of the paper as well. Looks like we're on the same page.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EmperorDinobot [2011-02-10 11:38:55 +0000 UTC]

This is really nice. I didn't like the idea of the quills or feathers. I thought those knobs were muscular attachments instead. Besides, no carnosaur has ever been found with integumentary 'extras'.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to EmperorDinobot [2011-02-11 19:34:51 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the compliment.

I guess it is still possible this guy had feathers or proto-feathers or quills or something somewhere on its body, but I don't see any good evidence for it yet. I mean, it seems some fuzzy integument covering was basal to the Ornithodira, since pterosaurs, heterodontosaurs, psittacosaurs and coelurosaurs have 'em. So, it's within the realm of possibility. For now, though, we do have evidence of croc-like scales, so I hedged my bets and gave it a completely scaly covering.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmperorDinobot In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-02-12 00:31:05 +0000 UTC]

I never put feathers or anything that's not coelurosaurian or basal marginocephalia.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pilsator [2011-02-09 22:38:31 +0000 UTC]

Very neat. This attention for detail is something I miss in a lot of work.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to pilsator [2011-02-11 19:30:30 +0000 UTC]

Thank you. I think your artwork is no less detailed than mine. For what it's worth, I think you have a very nice style of drawing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pilsator In reply to palaeozoologist [2011-02-12 04:08:29 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for your kind words

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Spacechap [2011-02-08 23:03:28 +0000 UTC]

Whoa that looks awesome, I really like the idea for the crocodile coloration. After looking at that link I think you were right in not putting feathers, they seem a bit ridiculous for this species, but then again, so is the anterior hump.
All and all, awesome job, definitely going to watch for more.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

palaeozoologist In reply to Spacechap [2011-02-11 19:28:50 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, glad you like it and thanks for the fav! It's much appreciated

👍: 0 ⏩: 0