File talk:Dino - Allosaurus - 1.jpg

Allosaurus?

Hi Gretarsson,

You don't agree that this skull belongs to a Megalosaurus, File:Dino - Megalosaurus - 1.jpg. But I think that on the label in the museum they wrote Megalosaurus. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 08:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Skull reconstruction of Megalosaurus; unknown bones are rendered in dark grey

Allosaurus skull reconstruction…

…and another one…

…and yet another one.

All three look as if they were identical to the alleged “Megalosaurus” skull reconstruction (which is because all four are probably replicas of the same Allosaurus fragilis skull reconstruction, based on the work of Madsen, 1976)

Hi DenesFeri,

then there are three possibilities:

1) The labelling was plain wrong, which would be a really severe lapsus, and I can hardly imagine that.

2) You confused the label with that of a nearby exhibit of Megalosaurus.

3) Your memory is incorrect.

Anyhow, the skull reconstruction on your picture is extremely similar to the skull reconstruction of Allosaurus fragilis as published by Madsen (1976, Plate 1). Furthermore, there are only a few skull bones known from Megalosaurus (cf. drawing in the upper image to the right). For instance, the lacrimal is not known. So reconstructing the skull of Megalosaurus with a prominent lacrimal “horn” would be quite speculative since most Megalosaurids from which the lacrimal is known do not have a pronounced lacrimal “horn” (e.g. Torvosaurus, Dubreuillosaurus, Eustreptospondylus). Also, the skulls of megalosaurids are generally rather low and elongated, accompanied by a dorsal/nasal process of the maxilla that is directed posteriorly rather than dorsally. So the skull of Megalosaurus may have resembled that of Torvosaurus rather than that of Allosaurus… --Gretarsson (talk) 11:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Gretarsson, I'm not an expert in dinosaurs, so I believe you. And thank you for the correction! Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 08:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)