Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Paralititan stromeri by Paleo-King Paralititan stromeri by Paleo-King
Forgotten Giants species #5: Paralititan stromeri

Meaning of name: Stromer's tidal giant
Location: Bahariya oasis, Egypt.
Length: ~90+ ft.
Mass: ~50 tons
Time: Late Cretaceous, Cenomanian epoch

***************************

Paralititan, the largest dinosaur so far known from the Middle East, has been known for over a decade without a single hi-fi scientific restoration being done. Here is the first one. :XD:

Paralititan was discovered in Bahariya, the same fossil site that yielded the first specimens of Carcharodontosaurus and Spinosaurus many decades ago. It's now known to be a common pattern that wherever you find giant herbivores, giant carnivores are also present. The species name honors Dr. Ernst Stromer von Reichenbach, who was the first to explore and excavate the Bahariya oasis back in the 1910s. Paralititan has often been proposed as a candidate for "biggest dinosaur" and usually gets compared to Argentinosaurus paleo-king.deviantart.com/art/… , though the type (and only) specimen of Paralititan is actually a good bit smaller than Argentinosaurus (and certainly not in the same class as Puertasaurus paleo-king.deviantart.com/art/… ). Nevertheless it's at least twice the mass of the Berlin Giraffatitan HMN SII. And Paralititan's maximum size may actually be a good bit larger than the type specimen, since there is no coracoid attached to its right scapula (whose front end is preserved unlike the left one), indicating that the coracoids on the type specimen had not yet fused to the scapulae when it died, and therefore this was not an adult animal.

Paralititan seems to be most closely related to Argyrosaurus fav.me/d48552m , based on the few remains known. Both had very wide, flattened "snowboard" humeri and appear to have been very robust animals. They appear to fall in more derived than lognkosaurs but more basal than most other lithostrotians (i.e. saltasaurs, nemegtosaurs, etc.)

Paralititan was discovered in sediments that indicate a mangrove area near the sea; shark teeth and petrified mangrove roots are common in the site. This adds an interesting twist to the prevailing theory of sauropods being dry-land animals. Such a massive animal could not have walked in ordinary swamps without sinking in, but the sand in a seaside mangrove would be able to support it, as the sand under its feet became packed and the water displaced from it with every step. On the other hand it may be possible that Paralititan lived nowhere near the mangroves, but its remains were washed out there by a flooding river; the skeleton of the type specimen may have been scavenged and broken up before then, as so little of it is left.

Aside from the type specimen discovered in 2001, there may have been other Paralititan remains that were never properly identified. Stromer reported in 1932 that he found a very large anterior dorsal vertebra, labeled 1912VIII64, which is illustrated in his paper as a centrum (of the wide, squat type common in intermediate and derived titanosaurs) along with part of the neural arch, and a tight trapezoidal neural canal. The overall morphology is similar to Epachthosaurus, Pellegrinisaurus, and some lognkosaurians. This vertebra may in fact belong to Paralititan, or simply a very large individual of Aegyptosaurus, though we will never know, as it was destroyed (along with the rest of Stromer's collection) in the allied bombing raids in World War II.

---------------------------
REFERENCES:

Smith, J.B.; Lamanna, M.C.; Lacovara, K.J.; Dodson, P.; Smith, J.R.; Poole, J.C.; Giegengack, R.; and Attia, Y. (2001). "A Giant sauropod dinosaur from an Upper Cretaceous mangrove deposit in Egypt". Science 292 (5522): 1704–1706.

Stromer, E. (1932a). Ergebnisse der Forschungsreisen Prof. E. Stromers in den Wüsten Ägyptens. II. Wirbeltierreste der Baharîje-Stufe (unterstes Cenoman). 11. Sauropoda. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Abteilung, Neue Folge, 10: 1-21.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconterizinosaurus:
Terizinosaurus Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2015
IT IS GREAT!!!:)
Reply
:iconnathanmalchow:
NathanMalchow Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Thats so cool you do these
Reply
:iconc0ke-wolf:
c0ke-wolf Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2014  Student Traditional Artist
It amazing how much living creatures lived before us.Somehow, the Diplodocus looks like the Paralititan .Well, i think all the quadrupedal animals look alike.
Reply
:iconelithedinoguy:
EliTheDinoGuy Featured By Owner Aug 7, 2014  Student General Artist
Which displays known elements: white or green?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 8, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
white. The green (shaded) parts are the missing parts.
Reply
:iconelithedinoguy:
EliTheDinoGuy Featured By Owner Aug 8, 2014  Student General Artist
OK, thanks
Reply
:iconmartinsilvertant:
MartinSilvertant Featured By Owner May 16, 2013  Professional General Artist
What an odd looking animal. It's certainly not a very beautiful creature. Beautiful illustration though.
Reply
:iconsameerprehistorica:
SameerPrehistorica Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Hobbyist
Paralititan is 70 tons ? They reduced Argentinosaurs to 75 tons.The weight difference is not much between these two from comparing your images.In Planet Dinosaur,they said Paralititan is 45 tons.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 8, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
Depends who "they" are. Everyone has different estimates right now. I wouldn't take what a TV show says at face value, they always have their handpicked "experts" who are mainly TV producers who usually know less about this stuff than you or me. For example "Dinosaur George".
Reply
:iconsameerprehistorica:
SameerPrehistorica Featured By Owner Aug 8, 2014  Hobbyist
This :D (Big Grin) Clap ------------- (I wouldn't take what a TV show says at face value, they always have their handpicked "experts" who are mainly TV producers who usually know less about this stuff than you or me.)

This one thing always will remain the same -------- (Everyone has different estimates right now.)
Reply
:iconstuchlik:
Stuchlik Featured By Owner Mar 26, 2013
If Argentinosaurs had 75 tons or 33 meters. Paralititan 27 meters could be close to 45 tons not 70.

27x27x27= 19683 33x33x33= 35937
35937/19683 = 1,83

Argentinosaurs must be heavier 1,83 times if some proportions.

27 meters Paralititan no way 70 tons. If 70 tons, 70x1,83 = 128 tons.

Sorry for my bad English.
Reply
:iconblazze92:
bLAZZE92 Featured By Owner Jan 5, 2013
Why is the humerus over 1.8m long? wasn't it 1.69m?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Feb 23, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
You're right. Fixed. :XD:

The scaling was a bit hasty the first time lol...
Reply
:iconblazze92:
bLAZZE92 Featured By Owner Mar 9, 2013
XD ok
Reply
:icontitanlizard:
titanlizard Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2012
Its fucking COOOLLL!!!
Reply
:iconcharla316:
charla316 Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2012
great drawing
Reply
:iconebelesaurus:
ebelesaurus Featured By Owner Aug 2, 2012  Student Filmographer
the size and scale of these animals..... jesus.... it's un imaginable
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 5, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Yeah, but Argentinosaurus and Puertasaurus are even bigger than this. :XD:
Reply
:iconebelesaurus:
ebelesaurus Featured By Owner Aug 5, 2012  Student Filmographer
jesus. woulda mean awesome to these animals in the flesh. maybe that's how the next generation will talk about tigers or whales
Reply
:iconbrolyeuphyfusion9500:
brolyeuphyfusion9500 Featured By Owner Jul 6, 2012
How accurate are the Paralititans from Monsters Resurrected then?
They look like this: [link]

Seems to me that they just scaled up the baby to make the adults.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 6, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Those look TERRIBLE! I mean I know argyrosaurids were massive and robust animals, but that think just looks overbulked on every inch of its body. These things look like someone from the 1920s designed them, they are THAT out of touch with the current level of knowledge in the field. They look like the plodding hulks in Knight and Burian's old paintings, rather than any current scientific rendering of sauropods. The legs are far too baggy and elephant-like, as well as having far too much mass lumped up near the top. The shoulder joint is too rounded, it looks like a copy of the hip joint! Dinosaurs didn't have a second set of ilia in their shoulders LOL! The shoulder joints should be more boxy, and probably not as wide as the hips. And don't get me started on the neck and tail... far too thick, wrinkles on top of wrinkles, the evidence for this just isn't there in any sauropod skin impressions. And of course I would go for a more vertical neck, given how huge the humerus is, this animal was probably a high browser.

Also their "gray and yellow ripoff of Todd Marshall's ripoff [link] of WWD's Brachiosaurus ripoff [link] of Dorling Kindersly's ripoff [link] of Brian Franczak's Brachiosaurus ripoff [link] of Araki's 1950s Kinto brachiosaurus [link] color scheme" colors are pretty overdone. I've seen easily a hundred dinosaurs from all sorts of families and niches painted in these colors. Lets try something original for once, Discovery Channel. Less househunters and octomoms, more dinosaur shows... by trial and error, you folks may eventually get SOMETHING right (honestly in the 90s they were heading in the right direction, then around 2001 everything became unhinged and dumbed-down).

Another problem is that the head looks too much like a bulked-up brachiosaur head, with flattened shout and steep crest. Paralititan was probably far too derived to look like this. Such a head may look better on Tastavinsaurus or another basal proto-titanosaur which still had some brachiosaur looks. Remember that Euhelopus, which is known from a decent skull, already has a very different nasal profile than brachiosaurs, and it's not even as advanced as the most basal titanosaur. Then consider that Paralititan is an intermediate or derived titansoaur, several nodes more evolved than Euhelopus, and you realize that its skull probably would have looked more gently sloping... like a cross between Malawisaurus and Nemegtosaurus. Or Euhelopus and Antarctosaurus. Take your pick of basal and derived non-brachiosaur titanosauriform skulls.
Reply
:iconalgoroth:
Algoroth Featured By Owner Aug 6, 2012  Professional General Artist
Knight sometimes made sauropod legs too thin, but plodding? Nah! The tails were dragging, yes, but the animals look alive.

This is one of the reasons I set my challenge. [link]

How many "modern" paleoartists would have done nearly as well, given the then current knowledge available in Knight's day? And remember--Knight did not operate in a vacuum--he had some of the best of his day advising him.

PLEASE read something about his methods; you might find them illuminating and interesting.

GSP loved to dis Knight, Burian, and other older paleoartists, but left some rather poor modern artists out of his sites. For shame! Without his predecessors, what would Paul have done?

As for the Paralatitan in that link...brrrr! I agree...overbulked, especially in the front...
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 6, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Paul actually has good things to say about Knight, but not Burian. Paul did get some ideas from his predecessors, but he also innovated a lot of stuff that they could never have dreamed of. It's safe to say he learned more from Bakker than from Burian or Zallinger.

Also I am aware of Knight's methods. They were top-notch for his day but he did not have the level of research that we have today at his disposal. At the time it was still a bit murky how the muscles fit over the bones of dinosaurs.

To my knowledge Knight never did "thin" sauropod legs. His "Brontosaurus" was very fat everywhere, including the legs.
Reply
:iconalgoroth:
Algoroth Featured By Owner Aug 7, 2012  Professional General Artist
To me, his bronto on land was just right. We problee never will agree on this, which is fine.

I got a lot of good to say about Burian, especially considering how he had to do his work.

Of course, Knight's available info was less than ours. He started operating over a century ago. I get ticked off a bit because we modern artists seem to think great art should be discounted because the artists had less info back then.

You do some gorgeous work. Some day soon, an intact Puertasaurus might be discovered and it might be a bit different from your current work. I would expect you to re-work your restoration because the new one would be far more accurate.

Does that mean the old one is suddenly bad art, or that you are a bad artist because your Mark 5 version was not quite right? No. It will remain just as beautiful a job, but not the one to go to for research or whatever.

I go to neither Knight nor Burian for the most scientifically accurate information, but I DO go to them for inspiration, for living work. The same with your restorations. IF your work was dead to my eyes, I would not even be talking to you.

Paul has done some great stuff, but he has yet to even be able to see Knight's dust for creating 'living' beasts in his art in a telescope, never mind surpassing the man. I've loved Paul's rex attacking a Triceratops drawing for years. Looked at it dozens of dozens of times. When looking for something that puts me in the thick of it and want to say "RUN!!!!!", Burian's rex attacking the duckbills raises goosebumps on me, wrong as the poses and anatomy might be. And THAT is what I am talking about.
Reply
:icontyrannosaurusprime:
TyrannosaurusPrime Featured By Owner Jul 7, 2012
Actually Discovery had a good dinosaur show in recent times: Remember Dinosaur Revolution?;) Their dinosaur reconstructions had interesting color scemes and many of them had vibrant colors, not to mention they had the most anatomically accurate dinosaurs of all time, and they did biostratigraphy REALLY WELL. Also, aside from the occasional anthropomorphism (justified since it was originally meant to be a docudrama rather than a full-on documentary), they did show many normal animal behaviors that were rarely shown (if at all) in popular culture (much of the screentime of the broken-jawed Allosaurus showed him either resting or drinking. Much of the screentime of the protagonist Tyrannosaurus rex pair showed them resting too).;)
Reply
:icongogosardina:
Gogosardina Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Sweet - been waiting for some time for you to produce a decent render of this wee beastie.
Reply
:iconcaptainkim:
captainkim Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2012
I really love sauropod dinos
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 26, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Thanks, they are my favorites too... especially brachiosaurs and titanosaurs.
Reply
:iconteratophoneus:
Teratophoneus Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2012
I thought your favourite is tarbosaurus
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
That's my favorite theropod :XD: . But I like sauropods better.
Reply
:iconalgoroth:
Algoroth Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Professional General Artist
AHAAAAAA!!!!!! COOL!!!!
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
I knew one of these days you would find your way here LOL :XD:
Reply
:iconalgoroth:
Algoroth Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2012  Professional General Artist
As usual, beautiful art, well researched and done with integrity.

Not to beat a dead horse...eff it! Beat the critter! Your walking stance...two legs off the gound at the same time, same side...is perfectly in line with reality. Elephants do it all the time. The kinetics/energy of a moving aniaml allow for the seeming anomaly. After all, if the naysayers are correct, neither us humans nor birds could walk.

We'd always be falling down!

One can also Youtubee elephantiles walking...big, full-grown HEAVY elefinks!!!-and see it happen before their beady little eyes!
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Yeah, the stance in all of these poses is a mid-stride stance, so it's a snapshot of the animal's movements, not a static pose. I've had a lot of odd complaints about that, but this is basically to be taken like a photograph, not a video. They obviously weren't holding their legs off the ground like this for minutes on end... the pose is valid since it's momentary.

What I didn't forsee was how the parts of the skin pattern when tinted green would end up resembling your avatar :XD:
Reply
:iconalgoroth:
Algoroth Featured By Owner Jun 16, 2012  Professional General Artist
My avatar is coolness personified...:iconraptorlaplz: so your cool art is right in keeping with it.

Just a thought...AHEM! Might be kinda cool to make a version of one of these titanosaur restorations with the dino having fallen over...on Sandow...with the dino saying, "That's a relief! That pose was a BITCH to hold!" and Sandow saying "Get OFF of me!!!!!" :rofl:
Reply
:iconvasix:
vasix Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
At last, the real Paralititan?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Yes. This is as real as it gets (at least until more remains turn up). :D
Reply
:iconvasix:
vasix Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I assume that many will be using your schematic now....
Reply
:iconfranchescco:
Franchescco Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2012
This is a great reconstruction, I've been waiting for a Paralititan one. I was wondering I always thought that this guy would be more closely related to Argentinosaurus, since they share some common traits such as a wide rib cage, thick lower arm bones, and living during the same time. However, now I too believe that Argyrosaurus is probably more closely related( similar humeri and shoulder features). I was wondering though, what would be the name for the clade consisting of both Argyrosaurus and Paralititan and could there be any other members?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Argyrosauridae (just like it says in the image). There may be other members but so far none identified. Aegyptosaurus and Petrobrasaurus MAY be members of this clade, but the remains of the latter need more analysis, and the former has been bombed to oblivion in WWII. Also the undescribed Australian titanosaurs "Cooper" and "George" may be members of Argyrosauridae, their humeri are also pretty wide and flat like Argyrosaurus and Paralititan.

Also if you look at the vertebrae of Argentinosaurus, it's clear the rib cage was not THAT wide... maybe barrel-shaped at best. The transverse processes are not very long. And no arm bones are known from Argentinosaurus.
Reply
:iconfranchescco:
Franchescco Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2012
Well, that help me understand more about Paralititan's taxonomic classification. And I heard about Austrosaurus and the other Australian Titanosaurs, one of them is the largest Australian Dinosaur. Are you going to make a reconstruction of Austrosaurus?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 11, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Maybe, but the problem with Austrosaurus is that it's so fragmentary. I haven't seen a lot of material for it.

Cooper and George are the largest dinosaurs so far found in Australia, but neither one has been described after well over a decade, and I even hear rumors that the specimens were not even completely collected (some bones were left in the rock). Australia unfortunately seems to have a real problem with describing and publishing their giant dinosaur finds... probably because most paleontologists there are mammal specialists who spend most of their time studying extinct cenozoic marsupials.

I'd love to illustrate all of the Aussie titanosaurs but unfortunately due to the lack of published papers for most of them, the only ones that are feasible to attempt are Wintonatitan and Diamantinasaurus. Those two at least have gotten a description paper with scaled photos of the bones.
Reply
:iconfranchescco:
Franchescco Featured By Owner Jun 11, 2012
Yeah that is true. So is Cooper and George Austrosaurus specimens or undescribed specimens that have yet to be given a valid name?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 11, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
They are undescribed and unnamed. They are not Austrosaurus, in fact you could argue that the Austrosaurus remains are so bad they are not even diagnostic, so that you can't tell WHAT is an Austrosaurus even if a complete one is found. Given that caveat, I still doubt that Cooper and George are Austrosaurus, since they appear to be much larger animals.

Just what sort of titanosaur Austrosaurus is may well be impossible to figure out, since the type material is so awful - we're talking fragments of vertebrae eroded almost beyond recognition, in fact to the untrained eye the titanosaur identity is only immediately obvious from the huge amount of internal (rather than external) pneumaticity.
Reply
:iconbrolyeuphyfusion9500:
Austrosaurus isn't really much compared to the titanosaurs you made reconstructions of.

Austrosaurus has been estimated to be about 15 meters long.
Will you ever make a reconstruction of a sauropod that is that small?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Yes. I am planning to reconstruct titanosauriformes of all sorts, starting with the biggest ones and working my way down. That said, unless I've missed something, Austrosaurus is so fragmentary that it might not be worth restoring.

I will even restore off a few bones, but if the bones are all weathered and smashed up then they aren't really diagnostic enough to do an accurate restoration. I've seen one restoration showing it as basically a saltasaurus-like animal, but what it really looked like is anyone's guess.
Reply
:iconfranchescco:
Franchescco Featured By Owner Jun 11, 2012
That means we need more dinosaur paleontologists in Australia. Well I hope we recieve more information from down under. ;)
Reply
:iconkazuma27:
Kazuma27 Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Sauropods were simply EPIC, there's nothing more to say about 'em ;)

by the way, i really love your style; clean, detailed and very life-like, bravo!
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 26, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
Thanks very much, I can see you definitely have good taste.

I try to keep my sauropods pretty conservative in ornamentation (osteoderms, studs, spikes and so on) and limit that to the evidence from related animals, but I do get a bit more wild with the color patterns. I don't think any dinosaur was simply all one solid color, though I could be wrong on that. When you're as big as most sauropods (and the current thinking is that they could see in color based on their eye socket structure) then you have little need of camouflage, most predators don't mess with you - and crazy color patterns are a big plus for attracting mates from a distance.
Reply
:iconkazuma27:
Kazuma27 Featured By Owner Jun 27, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah, guess you're right ;)
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
  • Art Print
  • Canvas
  • Photo




Details

Submitted on
June 3, 2012
Image Size
1.4 MB
Resolution
3868×2436
Submitted with
Sta.sh
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
9,676 (2 today)
Favourites
106 (who?)
Comments
72
×