Mostrando postagens com marcador Brontossauro. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Brontossauro. Mostrar todas as postagens

quarta-feira, 15 de abril de 2020

 https://www.nhm.ac.uk/content/dam/nhmwww/discover/brontosaurus-reinstated/brontosaurus-3d-render-reconstruction-full-width.jpg.thumb.1920.1920.png

For over 100 years scientists thought that Brontosaurus and Apatosaurus were the same dinosaur as their bones look very similar © Daniel Eskridge/Shutterstock

Brontosaurus : reinstating a prehistoric icon

Brontosaurus is one of the world's most beloved dinosaurs, unusual, perhaps, for a reptile whose validity was doubted for more than 100 years.
Brontosaurus was a large sauropod, a group of typically large dinosaurs with long necks and long tails. It lived during the Late Jurassic Period, from about 156 to 145 million years ago.
The first recorded evidence of Brontosaurus was discovered in the 1870s in the USA. But by the early 1900s, scientists had started to question whether the fossils used to name Brontosaurus actually came from another dinosaur, the remarkably similar Apatosaurus.

Due to the rules of scientific naming - the first name published gets priority - Brontosaurus was relegated to scientific history and the fossils reassigned to Apatosaurus. That was until a study in 2015 unexpectedly found evidence that Brontosaurus was distinct from Apatosaurus all along, signalling the reinstated status of this iconic dinosaur.

The discovery and discarding of Brontosaurus

Brontosaurus and Apatosaurus were discovered at a time in the late 1800s known as the Bone Wars or the Great Dinosaur Rush. This was a period of time when two American palaeontologists - Othniel Charles Marsh and Edward Drinker Cope - competed to discover and name the most dinosaurs. In their intense rivalry they resorted to tactics like spying, theft and even the destruction of bones.
OC Marsh and his fossil collecting assistants
Othniel Charles Marsh (centre, back row) and his fossil collecting assistants competed with other palaeontologists to find dinosaurs during the Bone Wars in the late 1800s. Image via Wikimedia Commons (CC0 1.0)
In 1877 Marsh named Apatosaurus ajax, a long-necked and long-tailed dinosaur found in the Morrison Formation in Colorado, USA. Two years later, another sauropod skeleton was named from the same formation but in Wyoming. This dinosaur was fairly complete and larger than the earlier Apatosaurus. Marsh named it Brontosaurus excelsus, meaning 'noble thunder lizard'.
Shortly after Marsh's death and the discovery of a dinosaur skeleton with features of both Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus, Elmer Riggs argued in a 1903 publication that there were not enough similarities between the two dinosaurs for both genera to exist. Riggs was an American palaeontologist who specialised in fossil mammals, but also named another well-known sauropod dinosaur, Brachiosaurus.
As Apatosaurus had been named first, its name was kept and Brontosaurus excelsus became Apatosaurus excelsus.
A diagram of Brontosaurus from 1896
A diagram of Brontosaurus from 1896, based on the fossil material found by Marsh and his team during the Bone Wars. Image via Wikimedia Commons (CC0 1.0)

Reviving Brontosaurus

For over 100 years, the name Brontosaurus went unused by palaeontologists, although the dinosaur certainly lived on in the minds of the public, making appearances in films, on logos and on postage stamps.
This changed when a group of palaeontologists began work to understand and revise the diplodocid family tree. This group of dinosaurs included the bulky Apatosaurus, as well as other, more slender animals such as Diplodocus.

The study used 81 specimens from collections around the world and looked at 477 anatomical traits. The scientists ultimately showed that Brontosaurus was distinct from Apatosaurus, one of the main differences being that Apatosaurus was more massive and robust with a thicker and lower-set neck than Brontosaurus.
Dippy the Diplodocus in Hintze Hall at the Natural History Museum in South Kensington
Diplodocus belongs to the same family as Brontosaurus and Apatosaurus, but was a more slender animal

This research, published in 2015, was only possible because a number of new diplodocid dinosaurs had been found in recent decades.

Prof Paul Barrett, a dinosaur researcher at the Museum, says, 'The skeletons of Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus are very similar to each other in many ways, and other than their general proportions are mainly distinguished by detailed differences in the neck and back, and shoulder bones.
'These differences are only clear when you're able to examine a large number of different skeletons to see how these features vary from animal to animal.'

Is Brontosaurus back for good?

Many palaeontologists are ready and willing to welcome Brontosaurus back. Some cite that there are just as many differences between Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus as there are between other closely related genera, and many more differences than there often is between species of the same genus.
Paul says, 'The authors of this study make a convincing case for regarding them as different animals. They do seem to differ in consistent ways and seem to occupy separate branches of the sauropod tree.
'I am happy to accept their conclusions for now, though of course the discovery of new skeletons might force us to change our minds if new evidence comes to light.'
A 3D render of three Brontosaurus
A 2015 study found that Brontosaurus and Apatosaurus are actually distinct from each other © Daniel Eskridge/Shutterstock

Some experts have been more hesitant, however. There has been concern that the fossils that Apatosaurus is based on haven't been described in detail, and without this, comparing this dinosaur with Brontosaurus is problematic.

Others argue that determining differences between the dinosaurs is subjective. They suggest that if other traits were chosen, the two dinosaurs might appear less distinct, as there is no standard way of picking significant characteristics.

While palaeontologists may not all agree with the revival of the genus, those who have long loved Brontosaurus may be glad to see this iconic dinosaur be given back its official status.
'Brontosaurus is one of those iconic names that never went away, despite the best efforts of palaeontologists,' says Paul.
'I think it's because it's easy to remember in comparison with many other dinosaur names, it rolls easily off the tongue, and who wouldn't like the idea of a "thunder lizard"?'

Was Brontosaurus adapted for battle?

The group of dinosaurs called sauropods all had long necks and tails.
Brontosaurus and some other sauropods had large claws on their hands. Although some have suggested that they were for self-defence, it is more likely that the dinosaurs used their claws to help grasp trees to reach high up foliage, or dig scrapes in the ground to make nests and search for water.
A sauropod claw
Some sauropods had large claws on their hands. This claw was found in Wyoming, USA.

But by comparing the dinosaurs to living animals, scientists have come up with a few potential reasons for their extremely long necks.

It could be that, like giraffes, sauropods including Brontosaurus used its long neck to get to leaves out of reach of other herbivores looking for food. Or perhaps they were able to sweep their long necks over a large area of lower vegetation to feed efficiently without having to move too much.
A third suggestion is that a longer neck would help attract mates and ward off competitors. Some scientists think that a few of the traits seen in the necks of Brontosaurus and Apatosaurus specifically suggest they were adapted for combat.

These dinosaurs have thicker necks than many other sauropods, and they are more triangular in cross section. The shape may have protected important soft tissue such as the trachea (windpipe) and major blood vessels.
These traits suggest that the neck could have been optimised to resist damage from impacts such as those caused by smashing the neck downwards or sideways onto something. This could be comparable to giraffes displaying necking behaviour or the upright battles of male elephant seals.

Did Brontosaurus live in water?

Historically, scientists thought that large dinosaurs like Brontosaurus would have spent most of their time in water. They reasoned that the dinosaurs' bodies were so massive that they wouldn't have been able to support their own body weight if they lived on land, and instead would have used the water to help hold them up.
An out of date reconstruction of Brontosaurus living in water
Palaeontologists used to think that Brontosaurus and other sauropods would have spent most of their time in water. Image by Charles Knight via Wikimedia commons (CC0 1.0)

Elmer Riggs, responsible for the downfall of the beloved Brontosaurus in 1903, was one of the first scientists to argue that such sauropods lived on land. His proposal was largely ignored until the 1970s, when more research confirmed his theory. The structure of the limbs, backbone, hands and feet are all adaptations for supporting great weight on land.

Fossil evidence remains in dinosaur tracks made in the soft sediment of prehistoric rivers and lagoons, however. So although these prehistoric giants probably spent most of their time on land, they likely waded in the shallows. Living elephants are similar in that they live on land but spend time near water to bathe and drink, and can cross large rivers to reach new feeding grounds.
Now that the existence of Brontosaurus is recognised once again, scientists can set to work researching this dinosaur's appearance and behaviour.

quinta-feira, 28 de fevereiro de 2019

Palaeontology: Giants unearthed

Nature volume 496, page 30 (04 April 2013) | Download Citation
Xu Xing revels in an enthusiast's tour of the Mesozoic era and its denizens.

My Beloved Brontosaurus: On the Road with Old Bones, New Science, and Our Favorite Dinosaurs

By
Scientific American: 2013. 272 pp. $26 9780374135065
Brian Switek is a science writer with a deep understanding and broad knowledge of evolution. His books offer a compelling mixture of reliable information, personal experiences and thoughts, anecdotes about palaeontological research and even science philosophy, delivered in a breezy and engaging style.
Sculptor Brian Cooley's reconstruction of a Tyrannosaurus rex. Image: REUTERS
In My Beloved Brontosaurus, Switek — a fan of dinosaurs since childhood — describes his tours of famous excavation sites, selected museums and high-tech research laboratories across the United States. He meets and talks to a host of palaeontologists, including fossil-bone expert Mark Goodwin at the University of California Museum of Paleontology at Berkeley. By getting close to the people and the science that they move forward, Switek paints a comprehensive picture of how our understanding of dinosaur evolution gradually advances. Along the way, he shows how dinosaur palaeontology is a cultural touchstone in the United States and many other countries.
Switek touches on widely discussed topics, such as how dinosaurs rose to dominance early in the Mesozoic era (250 million to 65 million years ago) and why all of them — except the strange feathered ones we know as birds — died out when the era ended. But his focus is on how dinosaurs lived.
Switek picks through recently discovered fossils such as the carnivorous feathered dinosaur Sciurumimus albersdoerferi found in Germany in 2011. And he discusses cutting-edge methods such as the use of computed tomography scanning to investigate fossils' nasal passages, brain cavities and other internal cranial features. A recurring theme of the book is that new specimens, technologies and thinking are making it possible to investigate how dinosaurs mated, matured and became gigantic; to study their social life and the diseases that afflicted some individuals; and even, as in the case of the small, bird-like Anchiornis, to reconstruct aspects of their coloration.
Some of Switek's best palaeontological stories come from the history of the discipline. He explains how his favourite dinosaur when he was a child was popularly known as brontosaurus, but had in fact been known scientifically as Apatosaurus since 1903, when it was reclassified as a species of the latter genus. Eventually, the new name filtered through to museum exhibits and popular books, and although brontosaurus may not have disappeared entirely, the current generation of dinosaur-savvy children are aware of its obsolescence.
More often, Switek focuses on recent advances. The rediscovery of an animal called Effigia in an old collection of fossils at the American Museum of Natural History in New York helped researchers to show that some early relatives of crocodilians were similar to many dinosaurs — not only did they have a near-vertical rather than sprawling hindlimb posture, but they were also bipedal. A reluctant field decision to break the thigh bone of a Tyrannosaurus rex for ease of transport exposed a type of bone tissue seen today in female birds that are about to lay eggs, revealing the dinosaur's gender. And a graduate student's thesis research on the ink sacs of a fossil squid led to a method for partially reconstructing the colours of some extinct animals, including dinosaurs.
I have a few quibbles. In some instances, Switek recounts a conversation he had with a scientist to lend authority to an account of a discovery, but the details on how inferences were made and hypotheses tested are left out. The phylogeny-based definitions given for some animal groups are slightly inaccurate, and there are occasional lapses in the reliability of the scientific storytelling. For example, in discussing the importance of Effigia, Switek glosses over the fact that near-vertical hindlimb posture (although not bipedality) was already known to be widespread among early members of the crocodilian lineage.
The book largely revolves around the dinosaur stars from the early days of North American palaeontology, and space for recent discoveries made by researchers elsewhere is limited. Similarly, some fascinating new research directions are discussed briefly or not at all.
Switek does not mention the 34 juveniles of the small, parrot-beaked dinosaur Psittacosaurus that were found preserved with an adult in Chinese strata — a fossil that is among the best evidence to support the existence of parenting in dinosaurs. He also omits the use of isotopic analysis to reconstruct the lifestyle of the mysterious spinosaurs — massive carnivorous dinosaurs with vaguely crocodile-like heads. Nor is there anything about molecular studies on the development of feathers, fingers and toes in modern taxa, which have contributed greatly to our understanding of the morphological evolution of birds.
Of course, not even a brontosaurus-sized book could include everything. Switek has succeeded in covering a wide range of interesting topics in dinosaur palaeontology with infectious enthusiasm.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Xu Xing is professor in the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing.

    • Xu Xing

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xu Xing.

domingo, 24 de maio de 2015

quinta-feira, 16 de abril de 2015

O Brontossauro está de volta

Novas pesquisas encontram fortes indícios da existência do dinossauro 

Charles Q. Choi
 
SHUTTERSTOCK

Alguns dos maiores animais que já perambularam pela Terra foram os grandes dinossauros de pescoço e cauda longos, conhecidos como saurópodes.

O mais famoso desses gigantes provavelmente foi o brontossauro, ou “lagarto trovão”.

Mas, por mais enraizado que esse titã esteja no imaginário popular, cientistas acreditaram por mais de um século que ele de fato jamais existiu.

O primeiro exemplar do gênero Brontosaurus foi batizado em 1879 pelo renomado paleontólogo Othniel Charles Marsh e esse espécime ainda está em exibição no Grande Salão do Museu Peabody de História Natural da Yale University, em New Haven, Connecticut.

Em 1903, porém, Elmer Riggs, outro paleontólogo, julgou que o Brontossauro aparentemente era do mesmo gênero que o Apatossauro (Apatosaurus), que Marsh havia descrito originalmente em 1877.

Nesses casos, as regras da nomenclatura científica determinam que o nome mais antigo deve ter prioridade, condenando o Brontossauro, portanto, a mais uma extinção.

Não mais. Um novo estudo sugere ressuscitar a colossal criatura.

Depois de muitas análises, cientistas chegaram à conclusão que os fósseis originais de brontossauros e apatossauros parecem suficientemente diferentes para pertencerem a grupos distintos.

“Em geral, um brontossauro pode ser mais facilmente distinguido de um apatossauro por seu pescoço mais longo e mais estreito”, explica o principal autor do estudo Emanuel Tschopp, um paleontólogo de vertebrados na Universidade Nova de Lisboa, em Portugal.

“Portanto, embora os dois sejam animais tremendamente massivos e robustos, apatossauros são ainda mais extremos que brontossauros”.

O estudo, de quase 300 páginas, analisou 477 características físicas diferentes em 81 espécimes de saurópodes; uma empreitada que envolveu cinco anos de pesquisa e numerosas visitas a coleções de museus na Europa e nos Estados Unidos.

O objetivo inicial da pesquisa era esclarecer as relações entre as espécies que compõem a família dos saurópodes, conhecidas como diplodocídeos, ou membros da família Diplodocidae, que inclui diplodocos, apatossauros e agora brontossauros.

Os cientistas concluíram que existem três espécies conhecidas de brontossauros: Brontosaurus excelsus, o primeiro a ser descoberto, B. parvus e B. yahnahpin.

Tschopp e seus colegas Octávio Mateus e Roger Benson detalharam suas descobertas on-line em 7 de abril no megaperiódico científico revisado por pares e de acesso aberto PeerJ.

“Estamos muito felizes com a volta de Brontosaurus”, festejou Jacques Gauthier, curador de paleontologia de vertebrados e zoologia de vertebrados no museu Peabody, que não participou do estudo.

“Cresci sabendo [tudo] sobre brontossauros, e que nome imponente lhe deram ‘lagarto trovão’. Nunca gostei que tivesse sido rebaixado e fundido em apatossauros”.

Para Mike Taylor, paleontólogo de vertebrados na University of Bristol, na Inglaterra, que não participou dessa pesquisa, a coisa mais empolgante sobre o novo estudo é “a magnífica abrangência do trabalho que o grupo realizou, as ilustrações lindamente detalhadas e informativas, e o extremo cuidado para tornar todo o trabalho reproduzível e verificável. Ele realmente estabelece um novo padrão. Sinto uma profunda admiração pelos autores”, elogiou.

Outro paleontólogo de vertebrados, Mathew Wedel da Western University of Health Sciences, em Pomona, na Califórnia, que também não colaborou no artigo, concorda e vai além: “a incrível quantidade de trabalho envolvida aqui é a base na qual outras pesquisas se fundamentarão durante décadas futuras”.

Tschopp salienta que há uns 15 anos ou mais a pesquisa do grupo teria sido impossível nesse nível de detalhe.

Foi só graças a muitas descobertas recentes de dinossauros similares a apatossauros e brontossauros que pudemos reexaminar o quanto essas criaturas de fato eram diferentes, e insuflar nova vida no brontossauro, observa ele.

Embora Kenneth Carpenter, diretor e curador de paleontologia no Eastern Prehistoric Museum da Utah State University (USU), considere o estudo impressionante, ele ressalta que o fóssil no qual o apatossauro se baseia nunca foi descrito em detalhes, e sugere que os pesquisadores deveriam ter feito isso, se quisessem compará-lo a brontossauros.

“Afinal, o brontossauros é válido?”, pergunta ele e acrescenta: “Talvez. Mas acho que o veredito ainda não é final”.

Considerando-se tudo, as novas conclusões enfatizam que “saurópodes eram muito mais diversificados e fascinantes que imaginávamos”, opina Taylor.

De fato, reconhecer o brontossauro separadamente de apatossauros só é “a ponta do iceberg”, prevê ele.

“O imenso apatossauro montado no Museu Americano de História Natural provavelmente também é algo diferente, ou novo, que ainda tem de ser classificado e batizado. E é possível que outro apatossauro muito completo, exposto em um museu em Tóquio, seja mais um dinossauro inédito e distinto”.

Essa recém-descoberta diversidade de saurópodes enfatiza “que o [período] Jurássico na América do Norte em que esses animais viviam pode ter sido um tempo bem esquisito”, analisa Wedel.

“Você basicamente teve uma explosão dessas ‘coisas’ em ambientes que poderiam ter sido muito rigorosos e inclementes, o que leva à pergunta como eles poderiam ter encontrado alimentos suficientes para sustentar todos eles”.

Em outras palavras: a pesquisa que ajudou a ressuscitar o brontossauro também pode ter originado novos mistérios.

 Publicado em Scientific American em 7 de abril de 2015.