tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post1911325133073318542..comments2024-03-29T00:13:46.845-07:00Comments on Antediluvian Salad: Spinosaurus Unauthorized II: Spino Identity Crisis & Island Hopping HipposDuane Nashhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-4766749560466562972020-11-24T20:56:27.516-08:002020-11-24T20:56:27.516-08:00If you desire to obtain much from this article the...If you desire to obtain much from this article then you have to apply these strategies to your won blog.impotencehttps://besterectiledysfunctionpills.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-55451057155411010572020-11-24T20:53:21.701-08:002020-11-24T20:53:21.701-08:00I know this if off topic but I'm looking into ...I know this if off topic but I'm looking into starting my own weblog and was wondering what all is required to get setup? I'm assuming having a blog like yours would cost a pretty penny? I'm not very internet smart so I'm not 100% positive. Any tips or advice would be greatly appreciated. Appreciate iterection pills online viagrahttps://besterectiledysfunctionpills.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-50282713152428371482015-12-22T22:13:26.714-08:002015-12-22T22:13:26.714-08:00I think with or without thicken skin, there is a g...I think with or without thicken skin, there is a good reasoning for underwater walking Spinosaurus. Monitor lizard video footage both includes swimming and bottom walking behavior. Maybe Spinosaurus lived like this too. YW Leenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-29091135566288111272015-11-18T00:33:05.624-08:002015-11-18T00:33:05.624-08:00About the underwater running: I've mantained f...About the underwater running: I've mantained for a long time now, and feel supported by the new Spinosaurus find, that the large claw in spinosaurids is a locomotive organ used to anchor the animal in the mud and pull it forward, greatly reducing the amount of overall body movement needed to do so and improving stealth when closing in on potential prey. This is, of course, different from just about everything we habe today afaik.Thomas Diehlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05062076693215115940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-68728524056533943312015-11-12T17:43:01.319-08:002015-11-12T17:43:01.319-08:00Additionally, as I mentioned in my post, the "...Additionally, as I mentioned in my post, the "radical" proportions that Ibrahim et al. came up with do not hinge on the material that Evers et al. argue belong to S. brevicollis but reies primarily on FSAK-11888.Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-9848879101316857322015-11-12T16:07:50.854-08:002015-11-12T16:07:50.854-08:00Thanks for commenting Scott.
Good points on the ...Thanks for commenting Scott. <br /><br />Good points on the first three paragraphs but I do have to differ on your contention in the last paragraph that "speculating on hippo-like or other aquatic lifestyles based on the is building your house on a foundation of sand IMO" . Regardless of what the proportions are or even what bones belong to whom I think there is a wealth of evidence that Spinosaurus was primarily aquatic. The list is really too long to go through again but I think Ibrahim do a fine job of it in their paper/supplemental info and don't get enough credit for establishing multiple lines of evidence for a primarily aquatic existence.<br /><br />I also think people over-embellish the use of the qualifier "radical" for the new proportions for Spinosaurus. I don't think the proportions are radical compared to other aquatic tetrapods, I think they are pretty darn conservative for such a lifestyle. I take an environmental/ecosystem approach to how animals fit into their environment. In my mind a belly sliding, bottom walking fish eater makes more sense than an upright-bipedal not quite terrestrial not quite aquatic quasi switch hitter in massive mangrove/deltaic/tidal environments. IMO the latter animal is the radical interpretation - and still the one we have no evidence for - in this environment. Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-63297403138597013132015-11-12T15:01:07.271-08:002015-11-12T15:01:07.271-08:00I just became aware of this from Andrea Cau's ...I just became aware of this from Andrea Cau's blog. Interesting points - it's true that I missed the histology section while wading through the Ibrahim et al supplement, but I don't see it as terribly convincing - the lack of an EFS in appendicular bones is actually the norm in saurischian specimens, even those with completely fused neural arches. So even if the legs don't go with the other elements the odds are that the limb elements would lack an EFS.<br /><br />Also note that I'm not claiming that the Ibrahim specimen itself a chimera (though I wish that they'd have included more extensive taphonomic data in their supplement to justify the association - seems like a big deal when you are about to associate radical new proportions to a taxa). My objections are completely different - I think they've mis-scaled elements between Spinosaurus specimens, as well as between Spinosaurus and Sigilmassasaurus, making the reconstruction as published chimerical.<br /><br />Finally, I had hoped it was obvious from the date on it that my Spinosaurus skeletal is not current (nor my current interpretation). I guess I'll update it with a disclaimer to make that more clear. I do have some specific ideas on the skeletal proportions, but I'm doing a larger study on dinosaur vertebral columns and how to address missing data, and I won't be adding to the public discussion until I get that done (unless a future publication establishes the proportions with sufficient data, whatever those proportions turn out to be).<br /><br />I will say that I feel there is good reason to doubt the overall published proportions, so speculating on hippo-like or other aquatic lifestyles based on them is building your house on a foundation of sand IMO - but I'm happy to be proven wrong by more/better data.<br /><br />Scott Hartmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00195833796668977878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-72656513847465805282015-11-09T16:10:20.649-08:002015-11-09T16:10:20.649-08:00Hi Jaime thanks for comments.
I have no problem w...Hi Jaime thanks for comments.<br /><br />I have no problem with the length that they went to in making their comparative anatomical discussions.<br /><br />What I have a problem with is that they overshoot the scope of the paper a bit in my estimation and question the authenticity of FSAC-KK 11888 as one individual and cite only the potential problems with it (fossil dealer, dubious history of associated remains in the region) BUT completely omit mention of the very pertinent bone histology suggesting ONE sub-abdult individual that Ibrahim et al. performed. I am sure you can realize the potential pitfalls when certain lines of evidence are omitted in science communication. We can't just cherry pick the criticisms and ignore/omit mention of other lines of data.Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-9606934197955755482015-11-08T18:02:15.024-08:002015-11-08T18:02:15.024-08:00You talk about the apparent size of Evers et al, a...You talk about the apparent size of Evers et al, and its length, and compare it to that of Ibrahim et al. You I think unjustly contrast criticisms of length of the latter to then criticize the length of Evers et al.. Ibrahim et al. was a paper with veyr little meat; criticism is based on that fact, and that there are assertions for which no apparent space was given to justify; Evers et al., on the other hand, go to great lengths to justify their claims. Most people wanted a paper of this length from Ibrahim et al. to begin with. What is made more problematic is the degree to which Evers and others had to go to compare data, some of which hadn't been prepared even by now, such as from the holotype of *Suchomimus tenerensis* (aka, or more appropriately known as, *Cristatusaurus lapparenti*). <br /><br />So it's not that one was better and the other tedious, but that one was better, and the other way too brief for all that it argued. Sadly, the weaker of these papers, that of Ibrahim et al., instigated a meme in spinosaurid reconstruction without any clear basis in fact.<br /><br />And this leads me to your specific criticism of Evers et al....<br /><br />Let's focus on this comment:<br /><br />"This paper should have just focused on retrieving S. brevicollis as a unique species and not have - I don't know how else to put it - used its bully pulpit to cast doubt on the unique morphology of Spino B and FSAK-11888 - especially since the monograph of the latter is not even published and we don't even have the former anymore. Instead, among other critiques of Ibrahim et al., the authors question the synonymy of Stromer's spinosaur material with Ibrahim et al's. FSAK-11888 and reject their claim of a neotype."<br /><br />It was a claim of Ibrahim, and indeed, a concern of others, including Russell, about whether *Sigilmassasaurus brevicollis* was portion of the missing vertebrae of *Spinosaurus ...* something. To address this, and determine what *Sigilmassaurus brevicollis* was, they had to determine what was part of the other species. This leads to a comparative anatomical discussion of the material, and for variation in the neck across spinosaurids, to consider if the material simply varied amongst individuals.<br /><br />Because they had to then consider *Spinosaurus* B in this, and found the material comparable with *brevicollis*, this led them to have to consider if *brevicollis* was a species of *Spinosaurus*. Whether, in fact, it was distinct at all. And so on. Elimination of likelihoods led them to isolate the material as unique, but comparable to Egyptian material that was distinct from the tall-spined, constricted-based-spine taxa. So that implied merely that *brevicollis* is distinct, and that there's issues with the association of fossils.<br /><br />A character analysis would require first that *Suchomimus* and FSAC-KK 11888 be described properly, neither of which are happening this year, and possibly not the next. Evers et al. had to rely on unpublished data in order to make what comparisons they could, and it was problematic enough. Had they then also done a character analysis, on top of determining positional identity of vertebrae and comparisons across spinosaurids - which makes up the bulk of the paper - it would be much, much longer.Jaime A. Headdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16010646866890414128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-9544780424804967432015-11-08T17:13:45.523-08:002015-11-08T17:13:45.523-08:00Thanks babehunter 1324
Concerning the lack of thi...Thanks babehunter 1324<br /><br />Concerning the lack of thick skinned birds/reptiles: As I will build upon this theory in future posts I find it most probable that thick skin, a relatively shallow depth habitat, and underwater running all go together. There are no, nor has their ever been to my knowledge underwater running birds, they all use their wings or webbed feet for locomotion. Additionally their extensive air sac system - inhibits becoming negatively buoyant. Spinosaurids likely had air sacs but not as well developed as modern aves. So for these reasons birds fail to create a parallel with what I invoke for spinosaurids.<br /><br />Concerning reptiles... well maybe there are some better analogues. I have seen some video of monitors that sink to the bottom of bodies of water and it might be that their skin plays a role (again lack of research in this area). And certainly crocs can and do bottom walk - but they also float and have evolved dynamic buoyancy control. What we need is a lineage just starting to play around with the water - early whales (many of which lived in large eustaries i.e. shallow) would be great to look at... unfortunate situation and I also should mention we don't have any underwater running hunting animals as well.<br /><br />I kind of see where you are going questioning can reptiles even evolve the type of thick skin that hippos/manatees can... It's a good question but I see no reason that they can't or that it differed wildly - especially if nodules of bone/plate are part of the dermis. But I must concede that I have not fully investigated this line of inquiry and will give it some thought.<br /><br />I know it is not ideal - I would certainly prefer a nice pantheon of bottom running, thick skinned diapsids to choose from. At the same time we have seen through repeated re-invasions of the aquatic realm remarkable congruity in form and function between disparate lineages of tetrapods. The most cited ones being; ichthyosaurs and dolphins (thuniform shape); and plesiosaurs, sea lions, penguins (underwater flight). So there is a precedent for this type of commonality in form and function in terms of tetrapods adapting to water.Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-57111843371945734822015-11-08T01:50:24.045-08:002015-11-08T01:50:24.045-08:00Very nice entry tough I think I'll post a smal...Very nice entry tough I think I'll post a small retort I wrote on your DA page.<br /><br />"I do have to wonder, is there any non mammalian animal that has developed a heavy skin for negative buyonacy?<br /><br />It's is a very nice theory but I somewhat suspect that more attention should be padi to modern amphibious Archosaurs like crocodiles, cormorant, auk's, gannet's of which none of them seem to have developed thick skin to archieve negative buoycancy.<br /><br />Is it even possible to develop such an extremelly thick layered skin without having a mammalian-like glandular filled skin? My guess is that even if it might be possible is structure would differ wildly from those of aphibious mammals, there's also the fact that while Spinosaurus has very dense bones like most amphibious creatures it's reconstructed thoracic cavitiy seems to be very narrow compared to say Tyrannosaurus rex.<br /><br />If I had to bet I think that the sail played an important role in how Spinosaurus moved on the water... I'm not sure but I think that if Spinosaurus ever developed any soft tissue to increase it's negative buoncy I it would likely had developed around it's very large vertical procces."<br /><br />As said before I'm still enjoying those post greatly and it's a very interesting theory, looking forward for more.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14164538558433319744noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-92178308316285265802015-11-04T20:13:53.076-08:002015-11-04T20:13:53.076-08:00The hippos on various islands are all tetraprotodo...The hippos on various islands are all tetraprotodont; most of the hippos in Europe and Africa when the Mediterranian dried up were hexaprotodont.<br />Also Sicily has a Pliocene fauna without hippos followed by a Pleistocene fauna with hippos suggesting that the hippos on the islands are not remnants of Miocene ascestors that walked out to mountains in a dried out Mediterranean basin that later became islands when the basin refilled.<br />Furthermore Boisserie who has done much work on Hippo taxonomy seems to accept that they evolved from either H. antiquus or H. amphibius.<br />Corsica, Sardinia, the Cyclades and Dodecanese seem to be too near the mainland for dwarfed hippos to have been isolated on them.<br />Sicily is near the mainland but at low sea levels it links to the more isolated Malta; dwarfed hippos could have evolved on Malta at higher sea levels and then spread to Sicily later.<br /><br />The isolated deep water Greek island of Astypalaea and the island of Socotra off the horn of Africa are other locations on which dwarfed hippos could have evolved.<br /><br />Finally, elephants dwarf on more islands because once they reach an island they go ashore and are less inclined to leave.<br /><br />LeeB.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-19983143928056854642015-11-04T20:00:45.943-08:002015-11-04T20:00:45.943-08:00The local zoo has hippos in an enclosure with a wa...The local zoo has hippos in an enclosure with a water pond and space for them to come ashore.<br />The zoo has a creek running through it and previously they built their enclosure around the creek, with grills stopping them moving up or down the creek and a fence around it.<br />One night their was heavy rain and the creek began to flood; the hippos responded by walking through the fence surrounding the enclosure bending the bars like pretzels and headed off into the zoo.<br />One of the youngsters walked through another fence and was seen wandering around the adjoining park in the early morning.<br />Fortunately it returned to the zoo and the hippos were rounded up by trucks and returned to their enclosure after the water level subsided.<br /><br />After that the new enclosure was built.<br /><br />LeeB. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-27876574140110581422015-11-04T19:53:08.421-08:002015-11-04T19:53:08.421-08:00I tried a detailed comment the other day and disco...I tried a detailed comment the other day and discovered that the post able comments are limited in size.<br />So here is the short version.<br /><br />Hippos have evolved an efficient way of moving around underwater but it has a major flaw; if they are swept into deep water by a Tsunami or flood they will be trapped on the bottom and drown.<br /><br />They hear well underwater so if they become aware of an approaching deluge they will leave the water.<br />If they don't have time they will go to the surface and inhale as much air as possible causing them to float.<br />This at least keeps them alive.<br /><br />If swept into the sea they can use loud low pitched sounds as a depth sounder and can swim slowly to nearby submerged sandbanks.<br /><br />When the flood abates they can swim ashore.<br /><br />If swept into deep water they can't dive as this would cause them to sink to the bottom and drown.<br />They can therefore be caught in fishing nets by boats and towed ashore.<br /><br />They can colonise shallow water islands by walking or swimming out to them; if the island becomes overpopulated they can move back to the mainland.<br /><br />If they are swept out to isolated deep water islands they are trapped; over time they evolve dwarfed descendants which can come ashore on the island more easily to find food.<br /><br /><br />More to follow;<br /><br /><br />LeeB.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-83158251117071258022015-11-04T18:25:18.742-08:002015-11-04T18:25:18.742-08:00You know, I really find the idea of a superpredato...You know, I really find the idea of a superpredator that couldn't walk on two or four legs and couldn't swim (I actually doubt a spinosaur ever touched dry land at all; they could nets on vegetation rafts) but got around all over North Africa and crossed the Atlantic very appealing.BKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03759189747932749283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-20043463194463143292015-11-04T16:27:51.083-08:002015-11-04T16:27:51.083-08:00Just to mention the reconstructions: I don't s...Just to mention the reconstructions: I don't say this because I find the idea more fascinating, or because the artist turned up in the comments here, but I think I prefer Christopher's version. Davide's is more polished, but it's terribly busy. My eyes can't seem to decide what to look at. Add that it seems like it's trying to combine some of what Mark Witton calls the 'slasher pose' (and a bit of spiky shrinkwrapping) with the look of a painstakingly arranged NatGeo photo.<br /><br />In Christopher's piece the movement, the flow, the composition, whatever you want to call it, seems much more decisive, which gives it more oomph. It feels more like a still from a mind's-eye film, where I can well imagine the animal cruising in from out of the murk on the right side like a hippo or a big croc. I think it's helped by the pose (love the hands, in particular) and sense of weight. Again, it might veer further away from photorealism than Davide's - meaning no disrespect - but it <i>feels</i> more real.<br /><br />Not to disrespect the dayglo spino below that, either! Greatly enjoying the hippo-skinned version too, along with the whole post.Warren JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11743987856127631574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-74826685729728957452015-11-04T13:59:50.041-08:002015-11-04T13:59:50.041-08:00Thanks for comments.
@ Mickey Mortimer On the two...Thanks for comments.<br /><br />@ Mickey Mortimer On the two specimens multiple spinos from each formation - yeah that is what I meant sorry for confusion that both the Kem-Kem and Bahariya both had two specimens... sometimes it all ties my head in a knot... I think there might be several "species complexes" going on with loads of variety across the region.<br /><br />... on no-one talking about the bone histology from Ibrahim et al. paper: it might not be a conclusive bit of a data but it is worth mentioning.<br /><br />... on the default image of Spinosaurus (or whatever Spino B and neotype turn out to be) yes of course before all this new data came to light everyone - justly - assumed spino had normal leg proportions. But - and this is aimed at more popular type discussions/chats - there is this constant push to bring back a long limbed Spinosaurus despite no evidence at this point for such a proportioned animal in N. Africa. And I do want to poke fun at JP3 Spinos fanboys a bit too... ;")<br /><br />@khalil beiting Yes I would presume some challenges for a heavy bodied/bottom running lineage to take on pelagic adaptations. Maybe that is why they never fully became pelagic/marine animals (that we know of). On the other hand the ancestors of whales have been suggested to be underwater runners too I believe. But I think the oceans were full of marine reptiles/sharks/big fish/giant cephalopods at the time of Spino so not really a lot of empty niche space.<br /><br />@William Bailey yes the new proportions of Spino initially everyone is like wtf how could such an animal even live in a reasonable fashion. But I think underwater running takes care of a lot of the issues and with regards to speed/agility in the water using this form of locomotion - coming in future posts!!Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-88008838175702739272015-11-04T09:13:10.645-08:002015-11-04T09:13:10.645-08:00Great article and interesting approach to the elus...Great article and interesting approach to the elusive Spinosaurus's appearence and ecology. I feel a tad bit guilty for the whole "short-legged version debunking" because I drew a couple of humoristic drawings with the great theropod wandering what it is and making him like a Frankenstein's monster. I realize now I was a bit quick to make conclusions, wich is weird because I am actually quite supportive of Ibrahim's model. But spinosaurids being so weird, compared to our generalized vision of theropods, it is no wonder there is so much debate. I do wonder though, in light of your hippopotamus comparison, if a "underwater walking" locomotion is efficient for a large predator. But I suppose you will adress this in a future article. ^^ Again, great work !Guillaume Babeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06589225800590147697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-85342827478998832392015-11-04T03:34:31.072-08:002015-11-04T03:34:31.072-08:00Great post as always Duane ^^. So for my speculati...Great post as always Duane ^^. So for my speculative evolution project that I've been trying to get together for quite some time now, I'm trying to have an eventual raditation of fully aquatic, ocean going Spinosaurines, but seeing as how Spinosaurus most likely wasn't a good swimmer, how could such a lineage evolve from mere "bottom runners"? Also, it truely is nice to hear that the "JP Spino"/long legged Spino fanboys are on the defensive. Although, the main problem is that many of these fan boys have barely even read anything from or about the paper, so they are still constantly complaining about how they're still right. A few days ago, this one artist on DeviantArt restored Spinosaurus with incredibly, stork like legs, a weird made up sail, and even had Sigilmassasaurus as another long legged Spinosaurine. I asked him why he did so, and he replied with "because Spinosaurus is a chimaera, so we don't know what it even looks like anymore". That statement right there is enough to show how very little time that person took to actually look at the new wealth of knowledge (albeit a wealth of knowledge that is over complex thanks to the new paper).Iris-Katyayanihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06188961246186305190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-50656928989816723282015-11-03T19:37:10.941-08:002015-11-03T19:37:10.941-08:00"a succinct and clean argument for North Afri..."a succinct and clean argument for North Africa hosting at least two spinosaurids in the Kem-Kem and Bahariya respectively."<br /><br />Actually, they describe two different vertebral morphologies from the Kem Kem, and since they think Spino B is Sigilmassasaurus and that the latter isn't Spinosaurus, propose two Baharija taxa as well. Maybe you meant that and the wording was just confusing...<br /><br />"For all of these very vocal and visible blog postings not to mention this line of evidence is very interesting. Make of that what you will."<br /><br />I'd bet that like me, they just missed that detail. If Evans et al. can be accused of having a labyrinthine main paper, Ibrahim et al.'s 48 pages of supplementary info is similar. I could easily see the response that the rib and possible gastralium sampled don't go with the vertebrae either, or alternatively that subadult theropods are quite common and that the number of LAGs wasn't reported for each element.<br /><br />"It's high time we flip the script on long-legged Spinosaurus being the de facto representation - there is no evidence for that animal at all."<br /><br />While I do think the neotype and Spinosaurus B are single animals, without them the default is long legs simply because all other related theropods are long-legged. Just like the default body covering for any maniraptoran is feathers, even when we lack preserved soft tissue.<br /><br />Anyway, my main beef with Evers et al. is just that they spend so much time going over every detail that differs between specimens, but don't even try to find the similarities (e.g. between Spino B and the neotype). You could take two Tyrannosaurus rex specimens and find many of the same kinds of variations.Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-84838309426162211572015-11-03T15:01:55.464-08:002015-11-03T15:01:55.464-08:00@Bk Jeong whatever Spinosaurus turns out to be - s...@Bk Jeong whatever Spinosaurus turns out to be - several genera or several genera with multiple species - it's high time to turn the table on the long-leg adherents and put them on the defensive a bit... a long legged Spinosaurus is the animal we have NO evidence for at all, that is the real chimeric, mythical beast. What I can't wait for is more data on Icthyovenator - it would be very interesting if it showed a more transitional stage between longer legged baronychines and shorter legged spinos...Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-34249829456947083072015-11-03T14:55:45.209-08:002015-11-03T14:55:45.209-08:00Yes Christopher DiPiazza thanks for the pic and li...Yes Christopher DiPiazza thanks for the pic and like I said in the post I do think it is ahead of its time. I looked at crocs a bit for skin thickness and there might be something there. For simplicities sake I stuck with the hippo analogy because crocs have a liver/piston type arrangement that allows them to control their buoyancy, But they certainly are good underwater runners too.<br /><br />And I have seen those macaque videos very cool!!!Duane Nashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14467779935085970909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-35625771436168449082015-11-03T09:48:10.621-08:002015-11-03T09:48:10.621-08:00Always happy to lend images when permission is ask...Always happy to lend images when permission is asked and thank you for the link! Just to clarify, my reconstruction's skin was done with crocodilians in mind, which although do not appear as rotund/bulky as manatees and hippos, have very thick skin and are obviously adept at being underwater for periods of time. <br /><br />On a different note, have you seen certain kinds of macaques swim underwater? Despite their long limbs, when under the water, they hold their upper arms against their bodies to superficially shorten their limbs as they use short kicks and paddles to maneuver around. The video on this link shows it at around 1:20 in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usu02EwBljcChris DiPiazzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06732594604741735181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8161161431451849208.post-33777969122412341062015-11-03T05:30:31.089-08:002015-11-03T05:30:31.089-08:00As someone who kept saying both taxa were short-le...As someone who kept saying both taxa were short-legged, this is welcome news.BKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03759189747932749283noreply@blogger.com