Osteology of the Dorsal Vertebrae of the Giant Titanosaurian Sauropod Dinosaur Dreadnoughtus Schrani from the Late Cretaceous of Argentina
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Rowan University Rowan Digital Works School of Earth & Environment Faculty Scholarship School of Earth & Environment 1-1-2017 Osteology of the dorsal vertebrae of the giant titanosaurian sauropod dinosaur Dreadnoughtus schrani from the Late Cretaceous of Argentina Kristyn Voegele Rowan University Matt Lamanna Kenneth Lacovara Rowan University Follow this and additional works at: https://rdw.rowan.edu/see_facpub Part of the Anatomy Commons, Geology Commons, and the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Voegele, K.K., Lamanna, M.C., and Lacovara K.J. (2017). Osteology of the dorsal vertebrae of the giant titanosaurian sauropod dinosaur Dreadnoughtus schrani from the Late Cretaceous of Argentina. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 62 (4): 667–681. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Earth & Environment at Rowan Digital Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Earth & Environment Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Rowan Digital Works. Editors' choice Osteology of the dorsal vertebrae of the giant titanosaurian sauropod dinosaur Dreadnoughtus schrani from the Late Cretaceous of Argentina KRISTYN K. VOEGELE, MATTHEW C. LAMANNA, and KENNETH J. LACOVARA Voegele, K.K., Lamanna, M.C., and Lacovara K.J. 2017. Osteology of the dorsal vertebrae of the giant titanosaurian sauropod dinosaur Dreadnoughtus schrani from the Late Cretaceous of Argentina. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 62 (4): 667–681. Many titanosaurian dinosaurs are known only from fragmentary remains, making comparisons between taxa difficult because they often lack overlapping skeletal elements. This problem is particularly pronounced for the exceptionally large-bodied members of this sauropod clade. Dreadnoughtus schrani is a well-preserved giant titanosaurian from the Upper Cretaceous (Campanian–Maastrichtian) Cerro Fortaleza Formation of southern Patagonia, Argentina. Numerous skeletal elements are known for Dreadnoughtus, including seven nearly complete dorsal vertebrae and a partial dorsal neural arch that collectively represent most of the dorsal sequence. Here we build on our previous preliminary descrip- tion of these skeletal elements by providing a detailed assessment of their serial positional assignments, as well as comparisons of the dorsal vertebrae of Dreadnoughtus with those of other exceptionally large-bodied titanosaurians. Although the dorsal elements of Dreadnoughtus probably belong to two individuals, they exhibit substantial morpho- logical variation that suggests that there is minimal, if any, positional overlap among them. Dreadnoughtus therefore preserves the second-most complete dorsal vertebral series known for a giant titanosaurian that has been described in detail, behind only that of Futalognkosaurus. The dorsal sequence of Dreadnoughtus provides valuable insight into serial variation along the vertebral column of these enormous sauropods. Such variation includes the variable presence of divided spinodiapophyseal laminae and associated spinodiapophyseal fossae. Given that dorsal vertebrae are the only elements that overlap between known remains of most giant titanosaurian taxa, the dorsal series of Dreadnoughtus provides a means to directly compare the morphologies of these sauropods. The dorsal vertebrae of Dreadnoughtus and Futalognkosaurus have dorsoventrally narrow transverse processes, unlike the condition in Puertasaurus. Further, Dreadnoughtus and Argentinosaurus have ventromedially inclined prezygapophyses, whereas Futalognkosaurus has almost horizontal prezygapophyses. The continued inclusion of new, well-represented skeletons of titanosaurians such as Dreadnoughtus in phylogenetic and functional morphological studies will aid in deciphering the interrelationships and paleobiology of Titanosauria. Key words: Sauropoda, Titanosauria, Dreadnoughtus, dorsal vertebrae, Cretaceous, Cerro Fortaleza Formation, Argentina. Kristyn K. Voegele [[email protected]] and Kenneth J. Lacovara [[email protected]] (corresponding author), Department of Geology, Rowan University, 201 Mullica Hill Road, Glassboro, NJ 08028, USA. Matthew C. Lamanna [[email protected]], Section of Vertebrate Paleontology, Carnegie Museum of Natu- ral History, 4400 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. Received 26 May 2017, accepted 18 October 2017, available online 16 November 2017. Copyright © 2017 K.K. Voegele et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (for details please see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. representatives of this group, preservational biases—such Introduction as the amount of sediment needed to fully bury a large sauropod—result in their frequently fragmentary preser- Titanosauria is a diverse clade that includes what are argu- vation (González Riga and Astini 2007; Casal et al. 2014). ably the largest-bodied and the smallest known sauropods The holotype of Dreadnoughtus schrani (MPM-PV 1156) (Wilson 2006). Unfortunately, however, many titanosaurians is an exception, being roughly twice as skeletally com- are known only from very incomplete remains (Upchurch et plete (Lacovara et al. 2014; Ullmann and Lacovara 2016) al. 2004). As a consequence of the large body sizes of many as the next most completely represented giant titanosau- Acta Palaeontol. Pol. 62 (4): 667–681, 2017 https://doi.org/10.4202/app.00391.2017 668 ACTA PALAEONTOLOGICA POLONICA 62 (4), 2017 rian, Futalognkosaurus (Calvo et al. 2007a, b; Calvo 2014). at the individual, species, and higher taxonomic levels Dreadnoughtus is consequently an important taxon for un- (Wilson 2012). Because a broad consensus on the phylo- derstanding the anatomy of these dinosaurs. genetic relationships of most titanosaurian taxa has not yet Dreadnoughtus was discovered in the Upper Cretaceous been reached (Upchurch et al. 2004; Curry Rogers 2005; (Campanian–Maastrichtian) Cerro Fortaleza Formation of Carballido and Sander 2014; Salgado et al. 2015; Poropat Santa Cruz Province in southern Patagonia, Argentina. A total et al. 2015, 2016; González Riga et al. 2016; Gorscak and of 145 bones were recovered from the partially articulated ho- O’Connor 2016), well-preserved dorsal vertebral series such lotype and the somewhat smaller paratype (MPM-PV 3546), as that of Dreadnoughtus can provide data important for including seven mostly complete dorsal vertebrae and one resolving titanosaurian relationships (Wilson et al. 2011). dorsal neural arch fragment (Lacovara et al. 2014). Of what Here, we provide a detailed description of the dorsal verte- are frequently regarded (by, e.g., Benson et al. 2014; Lacovara brae of Dreadnoughtus schrani, building upon their initial et al. 2014; González Riga et al. 2016; Ullmann and Lacovara description by Lacovara et al. (2014). We also discuss the 2016; Carballido et al. 2017) as the largest titanosaurian taxa yet probable serial positions of these vertebrae and compare described (i.e., “Antarctosaurus” giganteus, Argentinosaurus, these elements to those of other titanosaurian taxa, espe- Dreadnoughtus, Elaltitan, Futalognkosaurus, Notocolossus, cially other gigantic forms. Paralititan, Patagotitan, and Puertasaurus), only Futalo- gnkosaurus (Calvo et al. 2007a, b) and Dreadnoughtus have Institutional abbreviations.—MPM-PV, Museo Padre Mo- more than 70% of their dorsal series described in detail. The lina, Paleontología de Vertebrados, Río Gallegos, Argentina. only bones that overlap between all of these largest taxa are Other abbreviations.—ACDL, anterior centrodiapophy- axial elements. Dorsal vertebrae representing up to nine se- seal lamina; ACPL, anterior centroparapophyseal lamina; rial positions may be preserved, collectively, between the aPCDL, accessory posterior centrodiapophyseal lamina; holotype and the most complete paratype of the recently de- a-SPDL, anterior ramus of spinodiapophyseal lamina; CDF, scribed giant titanosaur Patagotitan (Carballido et al. 2017), centrodiapophyseal fossa; CPAF, centroparapophyseal fossa; but these await detailed description. Six dorsal vertebrae are CPOF, centropostzygapophyseal fossa; CPOL, centropostzy- described for Argentinosaurus (Bonaparte and Coria 1993; a seventh undescribed posterior dorsal is reported by Salgado gapophyseal lamina; CPRF, centroprezygapophyseal fossa; and Powell 2010), whereas Elaltitan (Powell 2003; Mannion CPRL, centroprezygapophyseal lamina; PACDF, parapoph- and Otero 2012) and Paralititan (Smith et al. 2001; MCL yseal centrodiapophyseal fossa; PADF, paradiapophyseal personal observation) each include three dorsal vertebrae, fossa; PCDL, posterior centrodiapophyseal lamina; PCDL-F, and Notocolossus and Puertasaurus each include only one posterior centrodiapophyseal lamina fossa; PCPL, posterior dorsal vertebra (Novas et al. 2005; González Riga et al. 2016). centroparapophyseal lamina; POCDF, postzygapophyseal The preserved axial remains of “Antarctosaurus” giganteus centrodiapophyseal fossa; PODL, postzygodiapophyseal include only two incomplete caudal vertebrae, making it the lamina; POSDF, postzygapophyseal spinodiapophyseal only giant titanosaurian to be preserved without dorsal ver- fossa; POSL, postspinal lamina; PPDL, paradiapophyseal tebral remains (Huene 1929). Despite the limited informa- lamina; PRSDF, prezygapophyseal spinodiapophyseal fossa; tion available on the dorsal vertebral series in most gigan- PRSL,