0:00

This episode is brought

0:02

to you by

0:05

Colorado Northwestern Community

0:07

College. Join them

0:09

for two weeks

0:11

digging up dinosaur

0:13

bones from the

0:16

Jurassic period

0:18

in Northwest Colorado

0:20

this summer. For

0:23

details go to CNNcc.ed.EDU

0:25

slash Dino Dig. I'm

0:28

Garrett and I'm Sabrina.

0:30

And today in our

0:32

534th episode, we've got

0:34

some news, including a

0:37

new carcaredontosaurid. We also

0:39

have a correction from

0:41

our book, which is

0:43

about carcaredontosaurus. Yes. We're

0:46

going to announce our Dynodules

0:48

winner, and we have Dinosaur

0:50

of the Day, Dakota Don,

0:52

not to be confused with

0:54

Iguanodon. There's also

0:56

a... Fun fact, which is

0:59

that the new caradontosord was

1:01

almost named Alasaurus, or something

1:04

that sounds a lot like

1:06

Alasaurus. Spelled slightly differently,

1:08

but fortunately that possible

1:11

error in judgment was avoided.

1:13

But before we get into

1:15

all of that, as always, we'd like

1:17

to thank some of our patrons, and

1:20

this week we have 10 new

1:22

patrons to thank, and they are

1:24

Matt, Anthony, Michelle, Francisco.

1:26

Or as one of our daughters

1:28

would say, Franskisko,

1:30

Jason, Karibdis, Heavy,

1:32

Devisi, Amelia, Argragarg,

1:35

and Nick's Ako. Thank

1:37

you all very much for joining.

1:39

Yes, thank you so much. We

1:42

really appreciate our community.

1:44

And I like the

1:46

reference to the Hitchhiker's Guide

1:48

with Argragarg. Yeah. And

1:51

I also like the

1:53

Greek Sea Monster, Karibdis.

1:55

I love all the Greek mythology stuff.

1:57

Lots of good references in these

1:59

names. And as a reminder, if you'd

2:01

like us to change your shout-out name

2:03

at any time, you can send us

2:05

a message in Patreon and we will update

2:07

it. And if you want to join and be

2:10

a Dino at all, then head over to

2:12

patreon.com slash, I know Dino. And also,

2:14

just as a side note, real quick, we

2:16

are running our annual listener survey, so if

2:18

you want to let us know about what

2:20

you like about the show and ways that

2:23

we could make it even better, then head

2:25

over to bit.Y slash IKD Survey Survey

2:27

Survey Survey. Yeah, it's kind of funny.

2:29

It's almost like we're doing it

2:31

on a fiscal year and it's

2:33

April. So we're doing our annual

2:35

things in April rather than doing

2:38

it on a calendar year basis

2:40

in December. We'll probably change back

2:42

to calendar year next time. Speaking

2:44

of our community, we want to

2:46

thank Tomborex for pointing out. the

2:49

error in our National Geographic kids

2:51

book that just came out. It didn't

2:53

take long. No. What was it like the

2:55

day after it came out if we find

2:57

out about the first error in it? That's

3:00

awesome that someone read the book that

3:02

fast. Thank you and thank you for supporting

3:04

us by buying the book. Yes. And

3:06

thank you for pointing it out because I

3:08

mean errors happen but it's good to

3:11

know so we can fix it because we

3:13

did alert our publisher. It'll be fixed in

3:15

reprints. Oh they told us that.

3:18

It's good. And the error is

3:20

that Giganatosaurus in the little fast

3:22

facts box says that it was

3:25

a late Jurassic dinosaur? Yes. Which

3:27

is unfortunate. It is. We think that

3:29

it was probably a copy and paste error

3:31

because when you're doing all those fancy graphics,

3:33

a lot of times the easiest way to

3:36

get it on every page is to copy

3:38

and paste it. I know I do with

3:40

that all the time in different forms. It

3:42

does look really cool. I like the fast

3:45

fact section. It's got a cool little map

3:47

that shows where in the world it was

3:49

discovered and all that. And I remember carefully

3:51

looking at all the maps to make sure

3:54

that little dot was in just the right

3:56

place. But unfortunately it looks like in the

3:58

copy and pasting process. the maybe

4:00

diploticus one got maybe that was

4:02

the one that was getting copy

4:05

and pasted because I think it

4:07

had the exact year range that

4:09

ended up in the giganadisora

4:12

spread so I think it was one

4:14

of those things where you copy and

4:16

paste something 50 times yeah and you

4:18

just missed the one so our bad

4:21

we missed it yeah we didn't notice

4:23

it during the step when we

4:25

had the almost final draft for

4:27

review That's it. We did have

4:29

expert reviewers and fact checkers for this

4:31

book. It's just sometimes the things were

4:34

checked in a word doc format and sometimes

4:36

they were checked when it was more of

4:38

the final layout. Yeah, and we noticed

4:40

some other things on that same page

4:42

I was looking at my notes. I

4:44

corrected something that said it was 162

4:47

centimeters, I was like that should say

4:49

163 centimeters long just to be complete,

4:51

but I missed the late Jurassic versus

4:53

late Cretaceous thing on the same page.

4:55

It's frustrating. Miss the other detail. Yeah.

4:58

Well, I'm glad it'll be corrected in

5:00

the reprints. Yes. And I also like

5:02

that in the same spread, we mentioned

5:04

that lived about 30 million years before

5:06

T-Rex. So if you look at that,

5:09

you might think, wait, T-Rex was 66

5:11

million years ago, and this says it's

5:13

from the late Jurassic, that doesn't add

5:15

up, and maybe hopefully people will notice

5:18

which one is the mistake. It was

5:20

all done on purpose to test whether you

5:22

would catch the error or not the error

5:24

or not. critical thinking. Yes, that's what

5:26

it is. We do mention in the

5:28

book that there are going to be

5:30

mistakes or rather there will be changes

5:33

and some of the things in the

5:35

book will be inaccurate eventually. We didn't

5:37

think it would necessarily be this soon

5:39

and in this way, but you know, it is what

5:41

it is. Yes, well, but thank you again,

5:44

Timrex for letting us know. I do

5:46

want to thank the whole team at

5:48

National Geographic Kids though because Yes, we

5:50

have the one error. I'm glad it's

5:52

going to be fixed in the reprints,

5:54

but we are so happy with how

5:57

the book came out. Mm-hmm. It is

5:59

so pretty. Yeah. There were so

6:01

many people that worked on

6:03

it. Of course, there's the

6:05

artist, Franco Tempesta, who did

6:08

an amazing job with all

6:10

of the illustrations, and our

6:12

editor, Katie, our expert reviewers,

6:15

Tito and Aline, who caught so

6:17

many things for us. Oh, yeah.

6:19

And the whole team at NatGio

6:22

Kids, Catherine the Fact Checker, There

6:24

was another editor Christina who helped

6:26

us, Lisa Lori, and so many

6:28

others on the marketing team, just

6:31

everybody we really appreciate. And

6:33

of course our Velasa readers and

6:35

our community for supporting us with

6:38

this book, like just the amount

6:40

of support and help we've gotten

6:42

for this book has been so

6:44

heartwarming. So thank you. And if there

6:46

are other errors, we'll be mad at

6:49

ourselves for missing them, but we do

6:51

appreciate knowing that they're out there.

6:53

Dino questions. If you have any

6:55

feedback about the book, or if you really

6:58

like the book, you could give us

7:00

a review wherever you got it. That

7:02

would be very helpful. Yes. I don't

7:04

think we have any reviews on Amazon

7:07

yet as of this recording. And those

7:09

are very helpful. They are. Hint hint

7:11

hint. But yeah, I'm super pumped with

7:13

the book. I was so happy with

7:15

how it turned out. I love looking

7:18

at all the pictures in it. It's

7:20

almost all new art. It's just so

7:22

cool. And that one error is pretty

7:24

minor, I think, in the grand scheme

7:26

of things? Well, I'm annoyed at us

7:28

for not noticing. Yeah, it's an easy

7:30

one to catch, unfortunately. It's not like

7:32

some length estimate or something that

7:35

you have to actually look up.

7:37

This is one that we know

7:39

just by looking at it, like,

7:41

oh no, that's not a Jurassic

7:43

dinosaur. That's a gratacious dinosaur.

7:45

What are we thinking? And now

7:48

it's time for the stunning conclusion

7:50

of our dinosaurs championship. All right.

7:52

Who won? Well first we need

7:54

a recap on where we were.

7:56

Sure sure. So I believe I

7:58

had 19 points. and you had

8:01

15 points going in. I'll take your

8:03

word for it. I'm pretty sure.

8:05

But regardless, the championship is

8:07

worth eight points. So it

8:09

was gonna come down to

8:11

who selected the correct dinosaur

8:14

for the championship, the

8:16

championship, of course, being

8:18

between giraffe Titan and Tyrannosaurus.

8:21

And the winner was

8:23

giraffe Titan. What? Whoa. Did you

8:25

not expect that? I did. That

8:27

was the one that I picked.

8:29

as the championship winner. I thought

8:31

there might be an upset with

8:33

your appetite. Well, well done. Yeah, so I

8:35

got a total of 27 points in my

8:37

bracket out of a possible 32. And you

8:39

won. Yeah, I definitely won

8:42

against you. I don't know if I

8:44

would have won overall. I think I

8:46

might have. I'm going to have to

8:48

run the numbers. But I think you

8:50

ended up with a total of 15

8:52

points because that last one is worth

8:54

eight points just for the one guess.

8:57

So even though we got a similar

8:59

number of... match-ups right. You got most

9:01

of yours right in the first round.

9:03

I got all this later rounds right,

9:05

right, which is the way to go, if

9:07

you can choose. So yeah, giraffe tighten

9:09

pulled off the big upset. It

9:11

was a very close race. I

9:14

was checking in on it periodically

9:16

to see how well giraffe tighten was

9:18

doing, because I was hoping giraffe

9:20

tighten would pull it off. And

9:22

there were a lot of comments

9:25

going back and forth on whether

9:27

or not... T-Rex should win if

9:29

T-Rex is the best or if

9:32

giraffe- tighten should win and I

9:34

liked Ryan the biochemist at the

9:36

end said all hail the new

9:39

king of the dinosaurs. I'm

9:41

not not mad about it

9:43

being a sore pod. Yeah, but are

9:45

you mad that you doubted

9:47

your favorite group and didn't

9:50

have it go to the finale?

9:52

What are you trying to

9:54

like fuel the fire or

9:57

something? I'm happy I saw a

9:59

pod one because I won. There

10:01

wasn't an enchilosor, so if there

10:03

had been an enchilosor, I might

10:05

have been tempted to put that

10:07

one all the way to the

10:09

end, and then I would have

10:11

really lost. But yeah, giraffe Titan

10:13

won the 2025 Dino Dules Mesozoic

10:15

Championship, as I like to call

10:17

it. Nice. If this was popular,

10:19

we'll find out during our survey,

10:21

but if it was popular, we

10:24

might do this again next year

10:26

and just use... the top 16

10:28

dinosaurs from 2025, I think it

10:30

would be fun to have a

10:32

more even playing field of all

10:34

new dinosaurs. So none of them

10:36

have any extra name recognition, because

10:38

none of them will be super

10:40

well known. Unless there's a new

10:42

tyrannosaur species or something. Yeah, I

10:44

guess that's always possible. But then

10:46

as we've seen today. It doesn't

10:48

necessarily mean that it'll win just

10:50

because it's a new tyrannosaurus. True.

10:52

But it is likely that it

10:54

would make it at least a

10:56

couple rounds in. We have to

10:59

figure out how we would sort

11:01

them, because we did this one,

11:03

you know, Triassic, Jurassic, and Lake

11:05

Cretaceous. But if we're doing it

11:07

based on a year worth of

11:09

dinosaurs, there's a high probability that

11:11

those wouldn't be so even. Maybe

11:13

we just throw one into a

11:15

bucket that it doesn't really belong

11:17

in. I don't know. We'll have

11:19

to see. Well, I'll also have

11:21

to see if people even like

11:23

this. But next week we will

11:25

announce the winner. I just need

11:27

to check with the winner if

11:29

they want to be officially recognized

11:31

before I share who won. So

11:34

stay tuned for that. So because

11:36

there's that mistake in our book,

11:38

I decided we should do a

11:40

caradontosaurid today to appease the caradontosaurus

11:42

fans, maybe, or at least do

11:44

a little something. Make it up

11:46

a little bit. Yeah, hopefully. So

11:48

there is a new caradontosaurid species

11:50

that was named. The name is

11:52

the only way though that this

11:54

caradontosaurid is new. The bones obviously

11:56

are over 95 million years old

11:58

from the criteria. not the Jurassic.

12:00

They were dug up over a

12:02

hundred years ago and no one

12:04

has even seen these bones in

12:06

over 80 years. So it's all

12:09

around old. This might sound similar

12:11

to another dinosaur. The fossils

12:13

were found on an expedition led

12:16

by Ernst Stromor a

12:18

hundred and fourteen years.

12:20

Stromer's collection was stored

12:22

at the Bavarian State

12:24

College of Paleontology in

12:26

Munich. Stromer and his

12:28

colleagues, especially Richard Mark Graf,

12:31

spent years searching for fossils

12:33

in Africa. Like many dinosaur

12:35

paleontologists, Stromer started out looking

12:38

for mammal remains. And then he

12:40

found dinosaurs, including Spinosaurus.

12:42

Yep. Specifically, he was looking

12:45

for human remains. He correctly

12:47

subscribed to the hypothesis that

12:49

the first humans evolved in

12:51

Africa, and he wanted to find some

12:54

of those remains. The most relevant site

12:56

that he explored is the Bahari

12:58

oasis in Egypt, west of Cairo.

13:00

He went there because he thought the

13:02

rock there was from the Eocene,

13:04

which was well after non-avian dinosaurs

13:06

went extinct. But it turns out that

13:08

area, the formation was way older. Yes,

13:10

fortunately for us, the formation was about

13:12

twice as old as he thought, dating

13:14

back to right in the middle of

13:16

the Cretaceous, which is about 100 million

13:18

years ago. Not... a hundred and

13:21

fifty million years ago in the

13:23

late Jurassic. Like our book says,

13:25

from 1910 to 1914, Strommer and

13:27

really mostly Markraff found fossils from

13:29

sharks, turtles, crocodilians, and dinosaurs in

13:31

the area, but it took years

13:34

for some of the fossils to

13:36

make it back to Germany. At the

13:38

time of their expeditions, Egypt was

13:40

controlled by the British and

13:42

political tensions between Britain and

13:45

Germany prevented transporting the fossils

13:47

back to Germany. for quite a

13:49

while. In 1915 in the middle of

13:51

World War I, Stromer named

13:54

Spinosaurs Egypticus from some of

13:56

the remains that were found

13:58

in the Baharia oasis. The species

14:00

name Egypticus is after Egypt. And

14:02

then after World War I ended,

14:04

he eventually arranged transport to Munich

14:06

in 1922 of some of the

14:09

other dinosaur fossils. It took some

14:11

time because of the war. Yes.

14:13

A couple years later in Algeria,

14:15

which was then controlled by the

14:17

French, geologist Charles Depare and Justin

14:19

Sauvornen found another large carnivorous dinosaur,

14:21

as was the fashion. They named

14:23

it as a species of megalosaurus.

14:26

They will wastebasket tax it. Yeah,

14:28

it's a big cardivore, let's name

14:30

it after megalosaurus, Saharicus, in 1925.

14:32

Sahara Desert? Yeah, Saharicus was after

14:34

the Sahara Desert, where it was

14:36

found. Stromer noticed the teeth from

14:38

his old collection, at least some

14:41

of the teeth, matched the new

14:43

quote-unquote megalosaurus species, and he assigned

14:45

his fine to that species. But

14:47

in the process, he recognized that

14:49

it shouldn't be called a species

14:51

of megalosaurus, because it really didn't

14:53

seem all that similar to megalosaurus,

14:55

other than being a large carnivore.

14:58

So he came up with the

15:00

new name, Karkaradontosaurus. And that's after

15:02

the great white genus, Karkarodon. Hmm.

15:04

There's a case of learning from

15:06

the teeth. Yes. Sometimes dinosaurs were

15:08

named just on teeth, and, you

15:10

know, later on, it's found that's

15:12

not enough. Yeah. Well, well, well,

15:15

that's basically the case here, here,

15:17

here, Previously, megalosaurus a hericus, fine

15:19

was basically the teeth. And he

15:21

thought those teeth were similar to

15:23

great white teeth, which means, in

15:25

a way, you can think of

15:27

carcarodontosaurus as a great white shark

15:30

that roamed on land. A land

15:32

shark. I feel like there's a

15:34

cartoon of sharks that did that.

15:36

There's street sharks, which is a

15:38

cartoon. There's also an S&L sketch

15:40

called land shark. I think I

15:42

was thinking of street sharks. Yeah.

15:44

I watched street sharks as a

15:47

kid. It used to kind of

15:49

scare me a scare me a

15:51

scare me a little bit. But

15:53

back to carcarodontosaurus, it actually was

15:55

more ferocious, I would say that

15:57

a great white shark, the... are

15:59

more impressive, almost more like a

16:01

megalodon tooth than a great white

16:04

tooth. Stromer did not change the

16:06

species name because there was no

16:08

reason to change the species name,

16:10

so the official name became Carcaredontosaurus

16:13

Sohericus, which is interesting because the

16:15

holotype was from the Sahara

16:17

Desert and Stromers was another

16:19

example that was from Egypt,

16:21

whereas with spinosaurus today it's kind

16:24

of going the other way around where we

16:26

have the original from one place going the

16:28

other way. Unfortunately, most of

16:30

Stromer's fossils were lost from the

16:32

Allied bombing during World War II.

16:34

For those who aren't familiar, the

16:36

allies, mostly Britain's Royal Air Force

16:39

and the U.S. Air Force, basically

16:41

destroyed Munich, including many priceless dinosaur

16:44

fossils in 1944. Including the holotype

16:46

of Spinoos. Yes. And the most

16:48

frustrating part is that it was

16:50

completely avoidable. Besides the obvious that

16:52

the allies could have just chosen

16:54

not to carpet bomb the entire

16:57

city. There was an initial bombing in

16:59

1940, a much smaller bombing, and it

17:01

was an attempt by the Royal Air

17:03

Force to kill Hitler. They bombed the

17:05

hall where he made a speech on

17:07

the night of November 9th, 1940, but

17:10

unfortunately it was a few minutes after

17:12

Hitler finished a speech and he escaped

17:14

unscathed. Probably partly because of

17:16

this bombing, Ernst Romer tried to

17:18

get his collection moved to a

17:20

safer location. Oh, yes, but the

17:22

Nazis didn't like him. Actually they...

17:24

punished him in many ways, including

17:27

sending his sons to the front

17:29

lines. Yeah, because he didn't get

17:31

along with the Nazi policies, right?

17:33

Mm-hmm. And I think he openly

17:35

spoke about it. Which now makes him

17:37

kind of a hero, but at the

17:39

time was risky behavior in Munich.

17:42

But then four years later in

17:44

1945, the allies decided to completely

17:46

carpet bomb the city of Munich.

17:49

One reason I could find is

17:51

that the city was a

17:53

major center of engine production.

17:55

It's where BMW, Bavarian Motor

17:57

Works, is and was headquartered.

17:59

They made... lots of engines for

18:01

planes and other machines that were used

18:03

in World War II. There were also

18:06

strategic airports around the

18:08

Munich area, including Oberfafen-Hofen,

18:11

to the southwest. Hopefully I got

18:13

that pronunciation right. That airport

18:16

was the location of the

18:18

Dornier plant, which produced the

18:20

Luftwafa's fastest piston engine aircraft

18:22

in World War II, which

18:25

is the Dornier-D-O-335, case you're

18:27

curious. It used a pair of

18:29

V-12s, one at the front and one

18:31

at the back of the plane in

18:34

a push-pull configuration, which is kind of

18:36

interesting. It had over 1,700 horsepower and

18:38

it could reach 474 miles an hour,

18:40

763 kilometers an hour. That's pretty fast.

18:43

Although there were much faster jet and

18:45

rocket-powered aircraft. Sorry, that was just a

18:47

random World War II aside because I

18:49

can't help it. Because you're a dad

18:52

now? Yeah. There's a joke that Malaney

18:54

made that every dad has to be

18:56

a World War II expert. due diligence.

18:58

Studying for some kind of trivia contest

19:00

in the future. It will happen at some

19:03

point. So it's possible that the development of

19:05

that aircraft and others like it was

19:07

the motivation for the bombing, but even

19:09

if that was the motivation, it didn't

19:11

really work. The first 10 examples of

19:13

that plane were completed just the next

19:15

month. So even though they carpet bombed

19:17

so much so much, it really didn't

19:20

slow much down. Unfortunately, another

19:22

likely reason, and maybe a more likely

19:24

reason for the indiscriminate bombing, is that

19:26

Munich is considered the Nazi party's birthplace,

19:28

so destroying it was seen as useful

19:30

propaganda for the allies, so they probably

19:32

just wanted to basically wipe Munich off

19:34

the face of the earth and show

19:36

a bunch of pictures of it and

19:38

be like, look, we destroyed the Nazi

19:40

thing without thinking about the people that

19:43

lived there, including people like Stromer, who

19:45

wanted nothing to do with the Nazi

19:47

party. So the bombing of Munich

19:49

killed thousands of people, wounded over 10,000,

19:51

and destroyed over 90% of the old

19:53

part of the city. That destruction included

19:56

most of the Bavarian state

19:58

collection of paleontology. which of

20:00

course included spinosaurus, the

20:03

titanosaurid giptosaurus, and the

20:05

caradontosaurid material that we've

20:07

been talking about. Luckily though,

20:09

the endocast of the braincase

20:11

from the skull of the

20:13

carcadontosaur material survived. And that's

20:15

basically the only surviving

20:17

piece of the carcaredontosaur material

20:20

is that braincase. Not terrible.

20:22

I should say endocast of the braincase.

20:24

No, it's not the worst thing to have

20:26

for sure. And then more recently a

20:29

surviving photo of a mounted specimen

20:31

was discovered. Oh, that's nice. It's

20:33

kind of like how there's photos of

20:35

the Spinosaurus mounted too. Oh, there are?

20:37

I was thinking we only had drawings of

20:40

it. There's at least one photo.

20:42

Oh, cool. So this photo is

20:44

up close. It reminds me a

20:46

lot, actually, ironically, of the megalosaurus

20:48

mount up in Oxford, where it's

20:50

basically a leg with partial hips

20:52

and there's also a couple vertebra.

20:54

and a little bit of skull

20:56

material with it. It's very similar

20:58

to that megalosaurous mount in a lot

21:01

of ways. But like that megalosaurous

21:03

mount, there's a fair amount of diagnostic

21:05

information in those bones. So

21:08

this photograph is good enough that

21:10

Kellerman and others just named a

21:12

new caradontosord in plus one based

21:14

largely on that photo and also

21:16

on the endocast of the brain

21:18

case. So that carcaredontosaurid is

21:20

no longer considered to

21:23

be... Carcaredontososos, Saharicus. They

21:25

named it Tamari raptor,

21:27

with the explanation of quote,

21:30

meaning thief from the beloved

21:32

land is a combination of

21:34

one of the more informal

21:36

ancient Egyptian names for Egypt,

21:39

Tamari, meaning beloved land,

21:41

and the Latin word for thief,

21:43

raptor. And then Markraphi is, quote,

21:46

in reference to Richard Markraph,

21:48

the Austrian fossil collector who

21:50

discovered most of the dinosaur

21:52

remains described by Stromer, end

21:54

quote. Yes, they worked very closely together

21:56

for many years and had a

21:58

lot of exchanges. over the years

22:01

during the war. Yeah, I believe

22:03

Markraf had been living in Egypt

22:05

for a while. I saw one

22:07

account that he was living there

22:09

for maybe a decade before Stromer

22:11

and him started working together, like

22:14

around the year 1900, doing other

22:16

work before they started working together.

22:18

And by war, I mean, World

22:20

War I. Yeah, because it's research

22:22

spans both wars. So those original

22:25

carcaredontososaurus teeth that were called megalosaurus

22:27

saharicus by deparae back in 1925

22:29

have since been lost and are

22:31

likely not diagnostic enough to name

22:33

a genus anyway. Oh yeah, teeth.

22:36

Yeah, unlike mammals, which Stromer was

22:38

initially more familiar with. So in

22:40

1995 a nearly complete skull was

22:42

found in the Kemkemkem beds of

22:44

Morocco and then in 2007 it

22:46

was officially designated as the neotype

22:49

for carcarysaurus saharosaurus saharicus. replacing the

22:51

holotype as the type specimen and

22:53

the one that is the official

22:55

designated keeper of that name that

22:57

all the future discoveries have to

23:00

be compared against? Because the stronger

23:02

material is older, there could be

23:04

an argument that it should be

23:06

the holotype, but the authors were

23:08

happy to give it a new

23:11

name instead. Neither the older stronger

23:13

material or the neotype material is

23:15

from the same location in Algeria.

23:17

So neither of them have a

23:19

great argument for being the neotype.

23:21

But if anything, the Moroccan neotype

23:24

is closer, at least geographically. I'm

23:26

not entirely sure about the exact

23:28

age comparison of the specimens. The

23:30

authors also say that the material

23:32

in the one that was named

23:35

the neotype in Morocco is more

23:37

similar physically to what we know

23:39

of the original holotype. So it's

23:41

a more suitable neotype. But in

23:43

any event... This new slash old

23:46

carcarant Dante Sored, Tomery Raptor, has

23:48

several differences that you can see

23:50

from the photo. The most obvious

23:52

one is a, quote, horn-like rugosity

23:54

on the nasal. Oh. So a

23:57

rough horn-like thing on the snout?

23:59

Yes. Some people have called it

24:01

a quote-unquote horned dinosaur, which is

24:03

upsetting to me because that is

24:05

the shorthand for a seratopsian. Yeah,

24:07

except now we know seratopsians aren't

24:10

named for their horns. Yeah, I

24:12

know. They're named for their rostrum,

24:14

their beaks. But nobody calls seratopsians,

24:16

the beaked dinosaurs. But this horn

24:18

also is only about an inch

24:21

or three centimeters tall. It could

24:23

have been longer in life, especially

24:25

with a caroten covering, but a

24:27

couple of inches of horn on

24:29

a skull that's four or five

24:32

feet long isn't exactly the main

24:34

feature of the skull. I would

24:36

argue it's the huge mouthful of

24:38

serrated teeth. That's what the prey

24:40

would be looking at. Yeah. Although

24:42

maybe potential suitable mates would be

24:45

looking at that horned and focused

24:47

on that. I don't know. Without

24:49

the caroten sheath. The horn on

24:51

its snout is about the same

24:53

size as one of its teeth,

24:56

just the erupted part of the

24:58

tooth, not including the root. With

25:00

the sheath, it's probably more like

25:02

the size of the tooth, including

25:04

the root. So it's kind of

25:07

a tooth-like projection, almost. You can

25:09

look at it that way. Probably

25:11

wasn't serrated, but yeah. The horn

25:13

is located right in the middle

25:15

of the snout, about halfway between

25:18

the nostrils and the nostrils and

25:20

the eyes, and there's just the

25:22

one in the one in the

25:24

middle. It also did have a

25:26

pair of ridges, one above each

25:28

eye, sort of looking like angry

25:31

eyebrows as a lot of these

25:33

allesoroids had. And another feature that

25:35

it had, which was different than

25:37

carcaredontosaurus saharicus, is that Tamary raptor

25:39

has a larger cerebrum. That's one

25:42

of the features that we can

25:44

tell because we have that surviving

25:46

endocast of the brain and then

25:48

the neotype of carcaryontosaurus saharicus has

25:50

a good enough skull. that we

25:53

can compare the cerebrum, which is

25:55

pretty cool. Overall, the size of

25:57

Tamari raptor is smaller than the

25:59

carcarydontosaurus ahericus neotype, the maxilla, the

26:01

bone on the upper jaw that

26:03

holds the teeth, if complete. would

26:06

probably be about 70 centimeters or

26:08

28 inches long, and it probably

26:10

would have had about 12 or

26:12

13 teeth in each Maxilla. So

26:14

you're talking about similar number of

26:17

teeth really to T-Rex, and that

26:19

same ballpark, also large and serrated.

26:21

Stromor estimated that this Tamery raptor,

26:23

back when he was calling it

26:25

Karcare Datsaurus, was about eight or

26:28

nine meters, or about 26 to

26:30

30 feet in overall body length.

26:32

Pretty good size. And it seems

26:34

like a pretty good estimate too,

26:36

saying that it's a little bit

26:38

smaller than the caradontosaurus neotype, which

26:41

is more in the 40-foot type

26:43

ballpark. The interesting piece to me

26:45

is the last sentence of the

26:47

abstract, which says, quote, the theropods

26:49

of the Baharia oasis and the

26:52

Moroccan Kemkim group are thus not

26:54

as closely related as previously thought,

26:56

and the proposed faunal similarities between

26:58

these two strata need further examination,

27:00

end quote. Oh, Spino-Saurus. I know,

27:03

and that's something I've been saying.

27:05

So, like most people, I get

27:07

excited when something confirms something I've

27:09

been saying. I was very excited

27:11

by this, because I've been saying

27:14

for a little while, we shouldn't

27:16

be naming Spino-Saurus egypticus from a

27:18

different specimen in the chem-cam beds

27:20

in Morocco, when it's literally Egypt-Egypt

27:22

Spino-Saurus. Might we want a neotype

27:24

from Morocco, when Dale Russell... named

27:27

Spinosaurus Moroccanus, you know, Spinosaurus from

27:29

Morocco a while back, I don't

27:31

see any reason to name a

27:33

neotype from Morocco, especially when we're

27:35

seeing things like, they didn't have

27:38

the same carcaredontosaur, there's good reason

27:40

to believe that they wouldn't have

27:42

the same Spinosaurus Moroccanus, which... Obviously

27:44

it has been disputed and there's

27:46

a lot of people that think

27:49

Spinosaurus, Egypt, should get a neotype

27:51

from that amazing new find that

27:53

is our Ibrahim has been describing

27:55

in pieces over the years. You

27:57

could argue it's individual variation. You

27:59

could, but they're just so far

28:02

apart in geography. You know, they're

28:04

like thousand plus miles apart. They're

28:06

not from the same formation, so

28:08

they wouldn't have been the exact

28:10

same time period. It just doesn't

28:13

make sense to me to name

28:15

them the same species. I could

28:17

see the argument both ways, though.

28:19

Because yeah, thousands of miles, but

28:21

some dinosaurs did migrate. Yeah, the

28:24

really risky thing for Spinosaurus fans

28:26

is if you name it Spinosaurus

28:28

Moroccanus and then you discover later

28:30

that there are other species that

28:32

are sort of slated in between

28:35

them, then you might have to

28:37

split out Spinosaurus Moroccanus into its

28:39

own genus. And then it would

28:41

no longer be Spinosaurus. It would

28:43

have to get its own name.

28:45

And Spinosaurus would only be that

28:48

Ernst Stromer fine from way back

28:50

in the day we don't have

28:52

any more. And we'd have to

28:54

have some new name for this

28:56

one. And Spinosaurus is such a

28:59

cool name and everybody's so familiar

29:01

with it that it would be

29:03

unfortunate if it was only relegated

29:05

to this old thing that was

29:07

destroyed. Well, we'll see what happens.

29:10

Maybe there'll be more research on

29:12

this. It would be really really

29:14

frustrating if in like 50 years

29:16

we found another really good example

29:18

from Egypt but the neotype of

29:20

Spino-saurus egypticus was in Morocco and

29:23

then they had to come up

29:25

with a new name for the

29:27

one that's in Egypt it would

29:29

just be so confusing and that's

29:31

the whole point of these names

29:34

is not to be confusing. So

29:36

the one egypticus in my opinion

29:38

should be based on one from

29:40

Egypt. The one true egypticus. new

29:42

in virtually no way other than

29:45

the fact that it has a

29:47

name now, Tamery Raptor. And it's

29:49

cool too that Richard Markraff finally

29:51

got a dinosaur named after him

29:53

because he was such a big

29:56

part of those fines that we

29:58

all know so much about. Yes,

30:00

he was. I remember when I was

30:02

researching Ernst Stromer, Richard

30:04

Markraff's name came up

30:06

a lot. Yeah, from what I could

30:08

tell he did most of the finding

30:10

of the fossils and Stromer did most

30:13

of the writing up of them. Maybe

30:15

some of the analysis or most of

30:17

the analysis. Well, we will

30:19

get to our Dinosaur of the Day

30:22

in just a moment, which is not

30:24

a Therapod, not even a carnivore.

30:26

Have some diversity. Yeah, there

30:28

we go. But first we're going to take

30:30

a quick break for our sponsors. This

30:33

episode is brought to you

30:35

by Colorado Northwestern Community College.

30:37

You can learn from the

30:39

experts there this summer. Yeah, both

30:41

in the field and in the

30:43

lab, paleontologists there will guide you

30:46

through the process of taking dinosaurs

30:48

from the rock to a museum-ready

30:50

showpiece. Yeah, you'll learn the proper

30:53

techniques for handling some of the

30:55

world's most valuable objects. in my opinion,

30:57

dinosaur fossils. No need to

31:00

panic, because you'll know the proper

31:02

techniques. Yeah, I guess it's not just

31:04

my opinion. They are

31:06

extremely valuable specimens. In

31:08

the field, this includes identifying

31:11

fossils, digging them up, stabilizing

31:13

them, and jacking them for

31:15

transport. In the lab, it means

31:17

separating the rock from the bone,

31:20

using an air scribe, and preserving

31:22

them for future generations. There are

31:24

sure to be surprises both

31:26

in the field and in

31:28

the lab, and having experts

31:30

to help problem-solve is invaluable.

31:33

Yes, and because you can learn so

31:35

much in this program, you can get

31:37

up to eight college credits

31:39

if you're interested. So

31:41

head over to CNCC.edu/ Dinodig

31:44

to get all the details, and

31:46

make sure you register online by

31:48

May 31st. Again, that CNCC.ED

31:51

slash Dinodig. Craving your next

31:53

action-packed adventure, Audible delivers thrills of

31:55

every kind on your command, like

31:58

Project Hail Mary by... Weir, where

32:00

a lone astronaut must save

32:02

humanity from extinction, narrated with

32:05

stunning intensity by Ray Porter.

32:07

From electrifying suspense and daring

32:09

quests, to spine tingling horror

32:11

and romance and far-off realms,

32:13

unleash your adventure aside with

32:15

gripping titles that will keep

32:18

you guessing. Discover exclusive Audible

32:20

originals. Hotly anticipated new releases

32:22

and must listen bestsellers that

32:24

hook you from the first

32:26

minute. Because Audible knows there's

32:28

no greater thrill. than the

32:30

one that speaks to you.

32:33

Discover what lies beyond the

32:35

edge of your seat. Start

32:37

your free 30-day trial at

32:39

audible.com/Wundery U.S. That's audible.com/Wundery U.S. And

32:41

now on to our Dinosaur of the

32:43

Day Dakota Dawn, which was a

32:46

request from Pachy Selzke-Saurus via our

32:48

patron Discord. So thank you. Moving

32:51

a bit away from Therapods

32:53

and carnivorous dinosaurs.

32:55

Dakota was an a guanadant that

32:57

lived in the early Cretaceous in what

32:59

is now South Dakota in the US.

33:01

It was found in the Lakota formation.

33:04

And it looked similar to a guanadon.

33:06

It could walk on all fours, it had

33:08

a bulky body, a long tail, and an

33:10

elongated head. And for a long time, it

33:13

was known as an aquanadon. It was

33:15

estimated to be about 20 feet or

33:17

6 meters long and weigh one metric

33:19

ton. It was first described in

33:21

1989 by David Weishample and Philip York,

33:24

but they described it as iguanodon

33:26

Lakota ensis. And the species name refers

33:28

to quote, the land of the Lakota

33:30

and the horizon from which the type

33:32

specimen was collected, end quote. There's a

33:35

lot of dinosaurs from Lakota lands. So,

33:37

yes. Makes sense that you would get

33:39

at least one species named after you.

33:41

Mm-hmm. They described a partial skull in

33:44

parts of the skeleton. A man

33:46

named Lewis Rosso had found the fossils

33:48

when hunting rattlesnakes on a hogback, and

33:50

a hogback's a long narrow ridge or

33:53

series of hills. And this was near

33:55

Sturgis, and he excavated them with the

33:57

help of his family. Dale Rosso, who's...

34:00

Lewis's son told John Willard from

34:02

the South Dakota School of Minds

34:04

and Technology about them, and Lewis

34:06

had been storing the fossils in

34:08

his garage. But now the fossils

34:10

are donated, they're at the Museum

34:12

of Geology. There's debate about where

34:14

Dakota Don, or formerly known as

34:16

Guanadon, fit in. Some paleontologists considered

34:18

it a new species of a

34:20

guanadon. Some considered it to be

34:22

the same as a guanodon burnisartensis,

34:24

which was found in Europe, that

34:26

would mean that this species had

34:28

a really wide geographic range. Yeah,

34:31

I would say so. North America

34:33

and Europe? From an island in

34:35

Europe all the way over to

34:37

North America. And this is in

34:39

the Cretaceous when they were really

34:41

separated? Yes, so that's... I mean,

34:43

think about that with the Spinoers

34:45

debate. Yeah, maybe not. And some

34:47

considered it to be a new

34:49

genus. I thought it was interesting

34:51

because the paper that first described

34:53

Dakota Don when it was described

34:55

as a guanadone Lakota insist said

34:57

that it was quote the first

34:59

species from the United States that

35:02

can be clearly referred to the

35:04

European genus a guanadone and they

35:06

also said it was the quote

35:08

first indisputable record of a guanadone

35:10

from North America. It's a genus

35:12

that's less problematic than as a

35:14

species. Yes. I think it's just

35:16

hard for dinosaurs to be indisputable.

35:18

Yeah. That's true. Bold claims. So

35:20

they described the nearly complete skull

35:22

part of the lower jaws and

35:24

two vertebrae one from the neck

35:26

and one from the tail and

35:28

the skull has been described as

35:30

oblong long and oval It was

35:33

considered to be a guanodon because

35:35

of the proportions of its face

35:37

the way its beak looked and

35:39

the patterns of the teeth as

35:41

well as other patterns on the

35:43

bones However this species this specimen

35:45

was larger than a guanodon atherfield

35:47

incis another species of aquanodon, and

35:49

it also had fewer teeth and

35:51

a few other minor differences compared

35:53

to the European aquanodon species. So

35:55

Gregory Paul renamed it Dakota Don

35:57

in 2008, and that genus name

35:59

means... Dakota Duth was found in

36:01

South Dakota. When Gregory Paul named

36:04

Dakota on in 2008, he

36:06

mentioned that Guanadon was a

36:08

quote, taxonomic grab bag, which is

36:10

another way of saying waste basket

36:12

taxon. I think I like that better. Grab

36:14

bag. Yeah. Anyway, he said that the

36:17

species had lived most of the

36:19

early Cretaceous and they were in

36:21

most of the northern hemisphere, which

36:23

just seems like too much. Yes. But

36:25

as a, I mean, genera sometimes are

36:27

really broad. It just depends. Species

36:30

Species shouldn't be so broad,

36:32

but genera occasionally. It doesn't

36:34

help that a guanadon was first

36:36

named based on teeth. Yeah, that's for

36:38

sure. Going back to the teeth thing.

36:40

And more specimens of a guanadon have

36:43

been found, which does help. And since

36:45

then, there's been a lot of splitting.

36:47

There have even different specimens

36:49

of iguanadontians that were on

36:51

the same tiny little island

36:53

off of Great Britain. If there's

36:56

multiple genera there, this one that's

36:58

way over... on Lakota lands, the

37:00

US clearly seems like it should be

37:02

a different genus. Yes. So Gregory Paul

37:04

found the skull of Dakota Don

37:06

to be very different from iguanodon.

37:08

And he described the skull

37:11

as having classic iguanodont proportions,

37:13

meaning it's long, it's low,

37:15

it's narrow, there's the long

37:17

beacon jaws, and it has

37:19

large nostrils. But the skull had

37:21

enough differences to be its own

37:23

genus. There's a lot of details in

37:25

the jaw and it also has a relatively

37:27

large hole in the front of the eye

37:29

sockets. He also considered Decodadon to

37:32

be basal to Aguanodon, so it

37:34

doesn't have as many new features or

37:36

derived features. In 2014, Boyd and Pagnac, along

37:38

with the grandchildren of Lewis Rosso, went

37:40

back to where the Dakota Dawn fossils

37:42

were first found and they were able

37:44

to locate the original site where the

37:46

fossils were found as well as more

37:48

bones. Awesome. Yeah, that can tell you

37:50

a lot more about the dinosaur. That'd

37:53

be so cool going to where your

37:55

grandparent found dinosaur fossils and getting to

37:57

find more of that same animal. Yeah.

37:59

I can't imagine how cool that would

38:01

be. So in 2015 those fossils got redescribed

38:03

as well as the new bones and

38:06

the holotype now includes a partial skull,

38:08

lower jaws, one backbone, and two tail

38:10

bones. In the 2015 paper they found

38:12

that some of the bones had been

38:14

misidentified and there were some deformations

38:16

in the skull that made the

38:18

first descriptions inaccurate. But they did

38:20

find two features in the skull that

38:23

made it unique, including a triangular projection

38:25

near the top of the head that...

38:27

goes into the underside of the prefrontal. That's another bone near

38:29

the top of the head. The details, the details make a

38:31

difference with dinosaur species. They do, because if you're the

38:33

exact same species, why would your skull have different bones

38:35

in it? As some other dinosaurs that lived around the same

38:38

time and place as Dakotodon include the encylosaur, the

38:40

armored dinosaur, Now some

38:42

other dinosaurs that lived around the

38:44

same time and place as Dakotodon include

38:46

the Ankylosaur, the Armored Dinosaur, Hoplidosaurus. The

38:49

iguanodont osmoscosaurus and an

38:51

indeterminate sauropod managed to get

38:53

a sauropod. near

38:56

the end of the episode. Snuck it in.

38:58

And some other animals that lived around

39:00

the same time and place include

39:02

small mammals, fish, and turtles. Although

39:04

now that we're mentioning it, the

39:06

lost dinosaur from the Baharia oasis,

39:09

Egyptosaurus, is also a

39:11

titanosaur. So there was a sore pot

39:13

mentioned a little bit earlier too. I

39:15

just didn't mention that it was a

39:17

sore pot. The gyptosaurus could be anything.

39:19

Maybe I shouldn't be so harsh

39:22

on calling something a species on different

39:24

sides of the world. Because even though

39:26

the odds of it being the same exact

39:28

species that could mate isn't really the criteria

39:30

that we use with paleontology. You have to

39:32

actually find something different in the bones. So

39:35

if you can't find anything different, you don't

39:37

really have anything different, you don't really have

39:39

any choice but to assign it to the

39:41

same species. Sometimes it takes a while to

39:43

find those details. You work with what you've

39:45

got. And sometimes the details don't really

39:48

fossilize. And there's probably a lot of

39:50

things that are lumped together right now

39:52

as the same species. that wouldn't have

39:54

been in life, but we just don't

39:56

see the differences in the bones.

39:58

And our fun fact of the day is... that

40:00

the peer-reviewed article,

40:02

which named Tamarie Raptor,

40:04

was originally going to

40:06

call it Allisaurus. Yes, oh

40:08

yes, this was, somebody wrote

40:11

this comment on the dinosaur mailing

40:13

list. Yeah, it's spelled a-l-l-l-i

40:15

source, so it looks quite

40:17

a bit different than Allisaurus.

40:20

It's It's

40:23

A -L -L -L -I

40:26

-S -S -A -U -R -U

40:28

-S which to me reads

40:30

is Alisaurus. Yeah. Or

40:32

Alisaurus. Alisaurus. Yeah. But

40:35

it's pretty close to

40:37

Alisaurus. Especially since we

40:39

don't really say Alosaurus.

40:41

Most people say Alisaurus.

40:43

So then this is Alisaurus.

40:46

Basically the same. But

40:48

that is a really

40:50

cool name because the

40:52

entomology of Alisaurus is

40:54

a combination of the

40:56

Arabic for Marauder. Alis, and

40:58

the Greek for lizard, for soris,

41:00

so basically it means like the

41:03

marauding dinosaur, which is just a

41:05

cool name. Allis soris. Isn't that

41:07

what I said? You were saying

41:09

al. I think it'd be alisaurus.

41:12

No, it's alisaurus, like algebra.

41:14

Oh. That's why it's so similar.

41:16

Yes. I'm not that familiar

41:18

with Arabic. So I guess that's

41:20

good news for alisaurus fans,

41:22

that you don't have to worry

41:25

about. Allisaurus. Stealing some of

41:27

the thunder. Yes, that could be

41:29

confusing. Especially since it's an

41:32

allisoroid. The allisoroid, alisaurus.

41:34

Not to be confused with

41:36

alosaurus. That would be confused

41:38

with alosaurus. That note, that

41:40

wraps up this episode of Einodino.

41:42

Thank you for listening. Stay tuned.

41:45

Next week we'll have even more

41:47

new dinosaurs, or at least one

41:49

new dinosaurs. We've got a lot

41:51

of new dinosaurs to cover. And

41:54

don't forget to take our listener

41:56

survey at bit.li slash IKD Survey

41:58

25. Thanks again. and

42:01

until next

42:04

time.