Back in 2005, three years before their paper on the WDC Supersaurus known as Jimbo was published, Lovelace at al. presented their work as a poster at the annual SVP meeting.

I keep wishing there was a single place out there where I could look up Jensen’s old BYU specimen numbers for Supersaurus , Ultrasaurus and Dystylosaurus elements, and find the modern equivalents, or vice versa. Then I realised there’s no reason not to just make one. So here goes! The first column shows the specimen numbers as used in Jensen (1985), and last column contains Jensen’s own assignments except where noted.

I got a wonderful surprise a couple of nights ago!

{.size-large .wp-image-16202 .aligncenter loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“16202” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2019/07/10/cabinet-of-curiosities-jessie-atterholts-office/atterholt-office-1/” orig-file=“https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/atterholt-office-1.jpg” orig-size=“1800,2400” comments-opened=“1”

One of the strange things about Jensen’s 1985 paper is that the abstract implies that he informally considered the Ultrasauros scapulocoracoid to be the type specimen.

Poor Dystylosaurus . Always the bridesmaid. No-one seems to care much about it, yet the one and only vertebra that bears that name is the single most diagnostic elements out of all the individual bones that have been assigned to Supersaurus over the years.

{.size-large .wp-image-16186 .aligncenter loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“16186” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2019/07/07/james-herrmanns-dinosaur-sculptures-for-the-cincinnati-museum-center/james-herrmann-galeamopus-skeletal-4/” orig-file=“https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/james-herrmann-galeamopus-skeletal-4.jpeg” orig-size=“640,427” comments-opened=“1” image-meta=“{"aperture":"18","credit":"","camera":"Canon EOS 5D Mark

We have summer-house in the garden, divided into two rooms.

Since the previous installment of this epic, we’ve taken two brief digressions on how little importance we should attach the colours of bones in our photographs when trying to determine whether they’re from the same individual: cameras do lie, and in any case different bones of the same individual can age differently.

I’ll see your face-of-the-blessed-virgin-in-a-waffle and raise you the fourth dorsal vertebra of the Giraffatitan brancai paralectotype BM.R.2181 (formerly HMN S II) in a dandelion leaf: {.alignnone .size-full .wp-image-16141 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“16141” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2019/06/30/its-a-miracle/img_20190629_131844/” orig-file=“https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/img_20190629_131844.jpg”

Last time, I noted that photographs of the exact same object, even under the same lighting conditions, can come out different colours. That is one of the two reasons why I am not persuaded that the very different colours of my photos of the two Supersaurus scapulae is strong evidence that they are from different individuals.