By one of those happy coincidences that you sometimes get, today saw the publication of not one but two dinosaur ontogeny papers: this morning I was sent a copy of Woodruff and Fowler (2012) on ontogenetic changes in the bifid spines of diplodocoids, and tonight I was alerted to Werning (2012) on Tenontosaurus growth trajectories based on osteohistology. It’s interesting to compare them.

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-5016 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“5016” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2012/01/01/happy-new-year/dippy-kiss-2/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/dippy-kiss.jpg” orig-size=“720,960” comments-opened=“1” image-meta=“{"aperture":"0","credit":"","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":""}” image-title=“dippy-kiss”

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-4997 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“4997” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2011/12/25/what-everyone-wants-to-find-under-the-tree/christmas-sauropod/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/christmas-sauropod.jpg” orig-size=“960,717” comments-opened=“1”

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-4931 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“4931” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2011/12/13/best-exhibit-ever/wedel-lab-humboldt-3-everyone/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/wedel-lab-humboldt-3-everyone.jpg” orig-size=“2272,1704” comments-opened=“1”

I’m just back from a three-day conference in Bonn, Germany, which I unhesitatingly nominate as the best I’ve ever been to.  To begin with, the subject was a guaranteed winner: sauropod gigantism.  I can hardly overstate how awesome it was to hear 43 talks about or relevant to sauropod gigantism (sixteen on the first day, fifteen on the second and twelve on the third).

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-4638 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“4638” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2011/11/05/denver-diplodocus/denver-diplodocus/” orig-file=“https://svpow.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/denver-diplodocus.jpg” orig-size=“1500,1038” comments-opened=“1” image-meta=“{"aperture":"3.1","credit":"","camera":"COOLPIX

In our recent paper on how the long necks of sauropods did not evolve primarily due to sexual selection (Taylor et al. 2011), one of the ideas we discussed is that sexual dimorphism between the necks of male and female sauropods would be an indicator of sexual selection.  And, rather despairingly, we wrote (page 4): But I wonder if we realise just how true this is, and how blind we are flying?

For reasons that will soon become apparent (yes, that’s a teaser), Matt and I wanted to figure out how heavy Camarasaurus was.  This is the story of how I almost completely badgered up part of that problem.  I am publishing it as a cautionary tale because I am very secure and don’t mind everyone knowing that I’m an idiot.

You may remember that when I wrote about Amphicoelias diplobrontobarowassea the other day, I rather ungraciously complained that “I don’t want to talk about that.

Well, this is frustrating.  Over on the VRTPALEO mailing list, all the talk at the moment is of the new paper by Henry Galiano and Raimund Albersdörfer (2010), describing their rather comically named new species Amphicoelias brontodiplodocus .  And to be fair, the material they’re describing is sensational, and the photographs in the paper are pretty good.