Shop More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
May 22, 2007
Image Size
101 KB
Resolution
1024×410
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
7,555 (2 today)
Favourites
33 (who?)
Comments
14
Downloads
2,536
×
Speculative Bruhathkayosaurus by Steveoc86 Speculative Bruhathkayosaurus by Steveoc86
Bruhathkayosaurus. (Pencil Drawing touchups in photoshop)

Although it's described as a theropod according to various DML messages the description is poor and it is suspected by some to be a sauropod, if so probably a titanosaur. [link]

This image is highly speculative and asumes that it is a titanosaur.

It's proportionally based on leg bone measurements. The tibia is apparently 2m.

Other (unknown) leg proportions are based on other Titanosaur reconstructions and measurments suggested by palaeontologists at the Dinosaur Mailing Lists (~3m Femur, ~2.34m Humerus.)

The neck and tail lengths are completely speculative. (If Rapetosaurus and Saltsaurus are anything to go by it would have a shorter neck. These things vary a lot between species) Skull is also speculative.

Please note, this image is not ment to be taken too seriously this animal has been poorly described and is very fragmentry. This image is just to give and vague idea of size.

Some DML posts on this creature:

[link]

[link]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I may change this some time as I have recently seen reconstructions for Saltasaurus and Rapetosaurus and both have a really short necks. (Edit: actually Rapetosaurus has a very long neck....) The tail of saltasaurus is much longer then what I have drawn here, yet Rapetosaurs seems to have a fairly short tail. So.........I'll probably leave that.

I have since come across Pauls skeletal of Argentinosaurus. If it is asumed that Bruhathkayosaurus had proportions similar to his Argentinosaurus reconstruction, the torso would be about a meter longer.

I've seen skulls of a few of titanosaurs (many incomplete) and they seem to have skulls slightly more diplodicus like, so I may change that.
That said, Malawisaurus seems to have a very boxy Camarasaurus-like skull.

This version is now here: [link]

Update: 2/8/09: I have changed the angle of the neck and tweaked some other things. This version is now here: [link]

Update: 31/12/11: The previous versions have had a more horrizontal posture, with the shoulder blades high up on the ribcage, which is probably unlikely considering the limb proportions I have used. The previous version looked a little bit like saltasaurus, which is an unusually short necked titanosaur. Most titanosaur reconstructions seem to have an upward shope to the back.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconjurassicpark40:
JurassicPark40 Featured By Owner Dec 15, 2011
Big boy..
Reply
:iconskull-island-master:
Skull-Island-Master Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2010
lets say bruhatkayosaurus is a theropod, how big would he be ??
Reply
:iconsteveoc86:
Steveoc86 Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2010
Not sure, I haven't really ever looked into it. It would most probably be bigger than any T.rex or Giganotosaurus. Their tibia are in the 1.30m-ish range (If I remember correctly). The problem with having only one bone, you can produce a huge range of estimates.

On a side note, I saw a reconstruction of a titanosaur that has very long shin bones. If Bruhathkayosaurus was proportioned like that, it wouldn't be as big as my reconstruction above.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2009  Professional Traditional Artist
Wow nice drawing! Really smooth with the shading. Though this preliminary version hardly looks like it could be the "biggest" dinosaur IMO.

It's about the same size as Argentinosaurus, Andesaurus, Argyrosaurus, and a half-dozen other gigantic titanosaurs - if not a bit smaller. They're ALL huge, no doubt, but if Bruhathkayosaurus is anything like what you've illustrated, it's not significantly bigger than any of the others.

I've seen it illustrated elsewhere (though rather crudely) as a legendary monster that towered over Argentinosaurus, and whose wrists were higher than a man's head... though again both interpretations are equally good or bad until somebody writes a much better article on the remains (with more precise measurements and scaled photographs instead of the lousy crude line sketches the authors provided).

Though I do notice he's a bit short-bellied and thin for a titanosaur (a big one anyway). The legs are really good, but Argentinosaurus had a very long and deep torso, and I'd guess this fella did too.
Reply
:iconsteveoc86:
Steveoc86 Featured By Owner Aug 11, 2009
Thank you for the kind words,
I wouldn't call it preliminary, probably nonsence is better. ;)
I drew it before I had seen Greg Paul's Argentinosaurus, which as you say, has a longer torso. Also his has an upward sloping back which would increase the height of the shoulder etc.
With the exceptions of the limbs dientions, which are based on what was speculated on the DML, I scaled it based on other titanosaur reconstructions and kinda ''averaged'' them out. But I'm certain what I have here is larger than most large sauropods (inlcuding Pauls argentinosaurus) but it's quite a bit smaller than estimates for Amphicoelias.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 11, 2009  Professional Traditional Artist
Yeah, Greg Paul's version is a good approximation. The high shoulders and long neck make sense Argentinosaurus was a basal titanosaur, and it is already known to share some skeletal features with the brachiosaurs so a roughly similar shape was likely. Though Paul's version is still a bit too conservative in terms of size... (he made up for this by giving it a long whip-like tail that's not all that titanosaurian)

Ken Carpenter's giant titanosaurs on the other hand are downright horrible. He restores Argentinosaurus, Paralititan, etc. like scaled up carbon copies of the not-so-basal Saltasaurus (no artistic effort required, just cut, enlarge, and paste!) - a fallacy considering they are about as similar as Guanlong and T.rex!

Carpenter's version results in (not surprisingly) a much smaller Argentinosaurus due to the more "dwarfed" proportions. And a short Saltasaur neck didn't make much sense for such a huge creature. It wasn't even a Lithostrotian, and even some Lithostrotians, like Rapetosaurus, still had quite long necks! The main problem with drawing titanosaurs is that they are an incredibly diverse group, and yet so few of them are well known, so the results are anything but consensus-based.

Ahh, but that is a problem I WILL dare to crack.
Reply
:icontharos222:
Tharos222 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2008
*good details :D
Reply
:iconsteveoc86:
Steveoc86 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2008
Thanks! and thanks for the other favs! :)
Reply
:icontharos222:
Tharos222 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2008
god details
Reply
:iconbran-artworks:
Bran-Artworks Featured By Owner Jul 1, 2007  Student General Artist
woa¡¡¡¡amazing
Reply
Add a Comment: