I think some of that holotype is actually dromaeosaur material for what it's worth. Not all of it, but until DePalma lets anyone else look at the material we may not know.
@@ej2u545There was a turtle bone initially attributed to the collar bone of dakotaraptor, but there’s still other fossils currently recognized as having belonged to dakotaraptor.
@@Scion3Sevens Prior to this paper, most in the scientific community actually seemed to agree that Saurophaganax is its own genus, until this paper came out which made a very good case that the traits used to split Saurophaganax from Allosaurus at a genus level are actually sauropod traits.
@@juanyusee8197 Yes, I can read and am on top of this much more than you ... this is just another opinion. Consensus is a long, long way off in the community.
It still existed, it was just a larger sub-species of Allosaurus rather than it's own separate species. It was the the Kodiak brown bear to Allosaurus's grizzly bear rather than the tiger to Allosaurus's lion if that makes sense.
Saurophaganax is surprisingly popular within the paleo community. Especially that people basically counted it to be around the top 5 largest currently known therapods. After hearing the news, just silence and disbelief.
@@yozkopf3000 Wasn't the specimen dubbed leviathan pushed the estimate in the 8 ton range from a D13 which is now potentially know from a sauropod. Now the material we know that is definitively from an Allosaur is in the 4.5 ton range so the Allosaur in question did get smaller.
Ok, but it would be awesome naming lore if the new Allosaurus species was dubbed “Allosaurus Phaganax,” meaning “King Eater.” Like the new Allosaurus name and designation ate the old Lizard king.
Top 10, not top 5 but yeah.I mean that 8.3 ton for the Leviathan sounded way too exaggarated in the first place.Not to mention that the community immediately started spreading it overhyping Sauro despite that it was made up from multiple specimens.
We should really wait for more paleontologists to weigh in on this before jumping to conclusions. Still, to anyone who holds this as their favorite dinosaur, don’t let your personal attachment to Saurophaganax lead to rejection of the science. These paleontologists aren’t out to “get” Saurophaganax, they’re simply trying to get a more accurate picture of the Morrison.
@@RaptorChatter the comparison between “Saurophaganax” material, Allosaurus, and sauropod material do make for a compelling argument. The main point I really wanted to get across is to not attack research just because it “ruins” your favorite dinosaur.
I worked on Allosaurus for my masters project and got to see all of the Saurophaganax material at the OMNH. It was really cool to see but I knew something was off but I didn't have the expertise at the time to tell what specifically was up. Nice to know my sneaking suspicions were valid even if I couldn't tell why lol.
Big problem however. There are no overlap between the holotype of A. anax and the refered material. A. anax essentially created the exact problem that Saurophaganax has. A fragmentary holotype with unrelated attributed material that could or not be the same animal. Literally the only thing they have in common is being large Allosaurids from the same quarry. It would have been much better left as Allosauridae indet or Allosaurus indet. Creating a new species essentially based on nothing is just adding to the confusion.
Damn. Saurophaganax was my favorite non-Carcharodontosauroid Allosauroid, mostly because of its name, and now it's just regular ol' Allosaurus. Technically not really, it's a different species and still a lot bigger than fragilis, but the stinkin' rad name is now gone ;(
It's the ol' Spinosaurus treatment. A change so drastic a lot of people refuse to accept it. Personally, Saurophaganax does not fit a sauropod, given the "lord of lizard eaters" meaning. Allosaurus Anax is cool, but I'm always gonna call it Saurophaganax because it has stuck with me since Planet Dinosaur
@@azriel_xix I think it fits a sauropod well. Sauropods were the largest, toughest, and possibly the most aggressive animal in it's ecosystem. They weren't lizard eaters, but they were the lords of those who were.
Well I think we all see now what happens when descriptions are made by specialists. To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And to a theropod researcher, everything looks like a theropod
Honestly, I like the idea of Saurophaganax being a larger species of Allosaurus, because with all the different species getting a larger variant of such or such, gives the Allosaurus as a family and a genus for something to compete with all the other heavy hitters tbh
On the plus side, a dinosaur movie can now make a made up hybrid dinosaur called, “Saurophaganax” and say that it is completely made up, not needing to follow accuracy.
Man, the naming is hilarious. "Why is it named the King of the Allosauruses? Was it the biggest?" "No, it's an homage to Saurophaganax, because they used to think it was a different species." "Oh, but it's still really big and impressive?" "No, it was originally named Saurophagus and then they realized a bird was named that, so they had to change the name, and it is bigger than that bird." "...So it's called King of the Allosauruses because it's bigger than some small bird?" "Yup!"
We already have mature Allosaurus fragilis and they aren't quite as big. However, because not two individuals are identical, there is no reason to think that no A. fragilis couldn't get this large.
I love allosaurus so much. I'm sorry to people who like the saurophaganax name (it's a good name I can't pretend otherwise) but this is a win for allosaurus glazers.
It would be hilarious if that vertebrae turned out to be a new sauropod, because once it’s named, you cannot change it. “King of the lizard eaters was a herbivore”
It doesn't though. There's large Allosaurus material in the quarry. Parts of some of them are different enough to establish a new species. The postorbital, fibula, and the caudal vertebrae all point towards a new species of Allosaurus.
@@GiovannaBassani-ve3wmThey are not directly synonymized because the holotype of Saurophaganax isn't referred to the new Allosaurus species. Allosaurus anax is described based on other remains that used to be referred to Saurophaganax, which itself is considered dubious, because based on the holotype the researchers are not even certain if it's allosaurid in the first place. I don't think this is going to resolve anything though and I'm sure we'll see other studies countering this one or coming up with different arrangements of the taxonomy of these remains.
@@GiovannaBassani-ve3wm That was proposed during the time were paleontologists were arguing to saurophaganax being an Allosaurus a few years back but was never valid With parts of saurophaganax being sauropods and only one possibly of Allosaurus we are talking of a very different animal anyways
I read that this paper was from november so about 3 months now, and they say it was well recieved so unless a future paper contradicts it then this video is accurate
They've been debating this for about a decade so to say it's TO SOON is wrong, and one commenter on this thread is saying the paper was made in November.
Dude, this channel is exactly what I've been looking for. This video was perfect to learn something about paleontology and isn't assuming the only experience I have with dinosaurs is Jurassic Park lol. Even most of the paleo-centric channels I find seem to only skim the surface of the actual science and just want to talk about "big scary teeth". You make it super easy to follow along. Keep up the good work!
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't there an announcement a few years back of new Saurophagnax material from New Mexico at a different quarry, including some more skeletal remains?
Could be. That could also be Allosaurus anax though. Unless that odd vertebrae that was difficult to classify is in those remains and either articulated with other bones, or from an entirely one taxon bonebed it will be impossible to know though.
@@RaptorChatter I was right. There was a specimen assigned to Saurophagnax that was written about in 2015 from New Mexico that was more complete than the Oklahoma specimen. It consisted of about 5-6 tail vertebrae, a partial hip, an most of the right leg. Enough to be diagnostic enough to be identified as a theropod. I don't know if the chevrons are present in the New Mexico specimen. If so and they match the Oklahoma specimens, then Saurophagnax may very well remain a valid species. What I do know is that while the chevrons from the Oklahoma specimen are very similar to those of a sauropod, they are also quite similar to tyrannosaurids. I don't think I am quite ready to rule Saurophagnax out yet.
@@stuartwhitehead3167 Because the holotype of Saurophaganax is assigned to sauropod vertebrae, even if this newer specimen turned out to be the same animal as Allosaurus anax, it would be assigned to that species.
Watch it turn out like brontosaurus where it ended up being a different creature than thought except even more drastic going from an allosaurid to a sauropod
It's a shame that folks are upset about Saurophaganax when it's still somewhat there, just under a new name, _Allosaurus anax_ . This has also been a long time coming, paleonerds have been calling out the discrepencies for over a decade & the science is catching up. It's still in develop At the very least, it's still a species on its own and not a growth stage like Nanotyrannus or even proven to be 100% non-existant. Saurophaganax is still there, they just went through a name change.
By some real paleontologists yes. I have heard chatter about the nature of Saurophaganax being Allosaurus for decades, just nothing official yet. Science moves slowly sometimes, to make sure no mistakes are made. If you don't, you end up with mislabeling some Allosaur and sauropod remains as a nonexistent dinosaur called Saurophaganax.
10:35-11:28 Well, if the holotype specimen of Saurophaganax gets identified as a theropod dinosaur (but not a sauropod), I hope they will find more complete speciments (neotypes) in Oklahoma, compare it with the holotype & put the genus back valid next year (2025) or so. It will be a wonderful discovery, right👍😉🦖🌌
By the way, new information about Edmarka Rex suggests that it was simply a large 11m Torvosaurus. So Saurophaganax was simply a large Allosaurus, over 10 meters long and there was parity between the two species.
Dakotaraptor is pretty much considered a chimera and currently has no scientific value because the type specimen is in DePalma's private collection, Dracorex is a juvenile Pachycpehalosaurus/Stygimoloch (Stygimoloch could be a stratomorph or possibly a second species within the genus Pachycephalosaurus), Oxalaia has been argued to have more valid diagnostic characters differing from Spinosaurus in at least two papers published after the proposed synonymy in 2020, and Sigilmassasaurus has a newly assigned specimen though that doesn't make the genus less controversial at the moment. For Nanotyrannus, I think more study is required but the majority still disagrees with its validity.
@@j2023-w6x I just read about the palaeontologist DePalma. He was accused and then found guilty of "scientific misconduct" about 1 year ago. No wonder he is the one keeping Dakotaraptor in his private collection.
@@j2023-w6x Interesting about the spinosaurids. I'm aware there isn't much fossil evidence for Oxalaia, however I find it very mysterious as South America and Africa were practically one during the Cretaceous period. So I sorta am for the opinion that it's just a different species of Spino. Almost like a cosmopolitan species. As Allosaurus and Torvosaurus were both located in what is now the US and Portugal. Maybe one resided on the eastern side and the other more western as separate genus. Although I'm not certain of the temporal range between the two spinosaurids. I find it an extra fascinating case as Spinosaurus has the weirdest paleo history/story OAT. With Oxalaia most likely being the utmost closest relative to Spinosaurus. They both apparently reached about the same size. Although I've heard the Sigilmassasaurus estimates are off the charts. Haven't read much at all on it.
That isn't correct. There's multiple species bones used to describe Saurophaganax, two of which are definitely sauropods, so those can't go with the name. Especially as the other bone is indeterminate, so until that bone is figured out, which likely will take finding more fossils it is not really anything. It's just a name with no real group other than dinosaur.
@@william3100 Sorry for the late reply, but from what I have read of the paper so far, it sounds like the Meat Cleaver Chevrons and Dorsal Vertabrea asigned to Saurophaganax belong to a diplodocid, potentially both being Apatosaurus. However the Dorsal vertabrea are still both diagnostic and nondiagnostic enough to not confidently asign it to anything. As a layman who isn't knowlegable enough to say anything meaningful. I know that Saurophaganax is probably a nomen dubium. But with the Dorsal vertabrea and chevrons being the way they are, along with some of the dorsal centra being more like those of allosaurus and others more similar to diplodocids. I personally think attributing the Diplodocid material to Saurophaganax makes sense. Additionally since the abstract says this: "The name Saurophaganax maximus should refer to a previously undiagnosed diplodocid, instead of the large theropod recovered from the Kenton 1 Quarry" It makes it sound as though it could still be considered valid to some degree, as if they considered it entirely invalid, why wouldn't they just say in the abstract that said material was insuficient to leave it a valid taxon and that it was also a Nomen Dubium?
@@RaptorChatter but the other material still could, especially considering how they created the possible other species, allosaurus anax, was pretty messy. Multiple bones with two definitely being sauropods. Sounds like there's still enough material to potentially still say it's saurophaganax. We don't know enough to say it's definitely or more likely not.
This is just like in Dragon Ball Z how Majin Buu can absorb other fighters and take on their traits as a final trump card when he's losing a fight and/or backed into a corner. Allosaurus literally just said "You don't exist", pulled out the Uno reverse card, and absorbed all of Saurophaganax's power. After 30 years, the true Jurassic King has finally regained his his rightful throne. Feels good, man. #AllosaurusSweep
People like the name Saurophaganax. They should know better then to let their attachment to a taxon dictate their view on science, but apparently not everyone is mature enough
*THE ALLOSAURUS always remains victorious (everyone who says otherwise is wrong)* Jokes aside, fascinating stuff. Personally I was on the side of _"S. maximus_ is _S. maximus,_ not _A.ma ximus,"_ but it's wild to see that the true answer (as close as we can make it) may in fact be neither. Nonetheless, I for one welcome our new 13 metre Allosaurus king. Great stuff, Allo, knew you had it in you. Also refreshing to see some Theropod drama that isn't another fucking Spino argument.
Interesting that the Saurophaganax is actually a new species of allosaurus. Further, could it be that amax is just the adult form of other allosaurus species like fragilis or jimmadesni?
I still think whatever the bigger Allosaurus is should just be called saurophaganax, names need to mean something and if saurophaganax is a sauropod than why not start naming birds sea turtles
Based on bone histology the other Allosaurus species varied a ton in when they reached maturity, but the largest specimens were skeletally mature or near it. So it is likely that A. anax is a new species of very large Allosaurus.
Because names follow their holotype. Each species must be described as a specimen for all other animals to be compared to. The Saurophaganax holotype is not well preserved enough to show that it is one species, or that it is diagnostic enough to say what the animal is. Saurophaganax right now only applies to the damaged and inconclusive neural arch now.
I visited the Oklahoma natural history museum in Norman, OK and they have a big Saurophaganax on display. I find it funny that Oklahoma only has a tiny little sliver of the Morrison Formation in its panhandle but significant finds have been made there.
I am an Allosauroid fan, not a fan of any specific genus, and I view the bias/glazing towards these genera whether it's Allosaurus, Saurophaganax, another Metricanthosaurid or Carcharodontosaur Allosauroid-as nonsense. First of all, we know next to nothing about S. maximus, other than it being an exceptionally large Allosaurid with a cool name. Then there are people who get upset because this exceptionally large Allosaurid may no longer use that 'cool' name, as it might not represent a new genus. Do you know how ridiculous these people sound? Even if S. maximus is its own genus, it would still be an Allosauroid.
Omg thank you !! The whole toxic internet dinosaur hype train about this dinosaur in particular was SOOOOO extra and OBNOXIOUS these past couple years. I kept saying it's probably just a bigger Allosaurus, wait till we've found more evidence. 🙄🙄 Lots of large theropods, or dinosaurs in general had 3 different species which varied in size. It's all based off of hype and emotion and not scientific evidence. Everyone is allowed to be passionate and have a favorite dinosaur but not ignorantly so when it comes to the evidence or remains that have been studied. You can't just run away with pipe dream theories that aren't backed by anything real other than; 'you think the dinosaur is super cool and better and badder than T-Rex.' We knew near to nothing, had near to nothing on this animal FOR YEARS. Yet people are like oh it was 8 tons and 'basal' Carcharadontosaurid. When that is not even a real, paleontology term.. I really am convinced they are all actually* children and none of them are above the age of 20. It was all beyond absurd this was the best Christmas present for me really. lmao
In my opinion it’s too quick to judge since while the original holotype bone was found to be a chimera (multiple different species fossil’s) most other Saurophaganax fossils did belong to a larger species of allosauirdae. So we will have to wait and see
Epanterias, my beloved Jokes aside it's funny how the giant Allosaurus from Ballad of Big Al and my 1990-2000s dinosaur books for kids is back in business
@@Me-yq1fl After they take down the Diplodocus Al is scared away from the carcass by the appearance of a gargantuan Allosaurus female, which many people in recent years would more accurately have been represented by Saurophaganax (or if you're as cool as me, Epanterias). Given that both seem likely to be large Allosaurus individuals or species, it might have been right all along.
@@eddymercan7487 I didn't think of her as particularly gargantuan, only an adult female in a show where female dinosaurs are depicted as larger than males. And Al at the time wasn't sexually mature, so would have been much smaller. As far as I know, all Allosaurus depicted in that show are Allosaurus jimmedseni (though at the time they would just be Allosaurus fragilis).
People have been comparing the "Saurophaganax" holotype to Dakotaraptor, but I have to say this: this feels less like a Dakotaraptor situation (likely a chimera, but has some material that could be a distinct dromeosaurid) and more like an Ultrasauros situation (where we know for a fact that it's a chimera). Then again, this could change. Maybe Saurophaganax could turn out to be a theropod closely related to Allosaurus, or maybe it was a giant sauropod (potentially the 30 meter long Apatosaurine from Oklahoma). For now, since Saurophaganax's distinct characteristics are deemed to be undiagnostic, it's safe to call it a nomen dubium, and that it's probably does not exist.
Does that mean saurophaganax is proof that allosaurus grew to immense size? Why not call it allosaurus saurophaganax if it ends up being a large allosaurus? This way the name can still be used and associated with the fossils.
So what are we calling the species now and is it even a valid genus anymore SO CONFUSED same thing with Dakotaraptor everyone says it's no longer valid happened to Miragaia too !?!?!?
The genus was only named from the 3 vertebrae. None of those are diagnostic, so the name shouldn't be used for now. There is Allosaurus material which is diagnostic, which is not part of the Saurophaganax holotype. Therefore the Allosaurus material gets a new name.
Any news about the allosaur that got sold in Paris in 2016? I suspect it's an Allosaurus species after having crawled over the online auction pamplet on it(I mean it is kinda in the seller's interest to SAY that it is a whole new genus), but if it is a new genus, this may support the idea of a greater diversity of allosaurus line therapods from the Morrison.
hey i’m sorry to break the news but i think the allosaurus died around 145 million years ago 😢
lol
Fragilis indeed!
@@micahsmith4612 lol
Rip
I was about to say that both Allosaurus and Saurophaganax are both dead...
Dakotaraptor: sweating nervously
I think some of that holotype is actually dromaeosaur material for what it's worth. Not all of it, but until DePalma lets anyone else look at the material we may not know.
@@RaptorChatter true the Dakotaraptor's still has the leg bone with sickle claw and incomplete arms and etc
@@RaptorChatter wasnt it a single turtle rib?
Just break into Da palma house to see the holotype at this point. What's the point of this dude hiding a giant dromaeosaurid holotype from scientists?
@@ej2u545There was a turtle bone initially attributed to the collar bone of dakotaraptor, but there’s still other fossils currently recognized as having belonged to dakotaraptor.
I am not surprised that it is just another species of allosaurus, I did not expect it to be a full chimera though
Sauro was considered by many to be a sp. of allosaurus ... there was no general agreement on it
@@Scion3Sevens Prior to this paper, most in the scientific community actually seemed to agree that Saurophaganax is its own genus, until this paper came out which made a very good case that the traits used to split Saurophaganax from Allosaurus at a genus level are actually sauropod traits.
@@juanyusee8197 Yes, I can read and am on top of this much more than you ... this is just another opinion. Consensus is a long, long way off in the community.
🤓👆@@Scion3Sevens
at least it didn't have a fire-breathing goat head on its back and a snake for a tail
Sauro: Please... I don't wanna go, I don't wanna go
A. anax: LoL
It's literally the same animal, just re-examined and renamed. I don't see what the problem is.
@@Tyrell-d6o Sometimes it's important to get a NICE new name
@@Tyrell-d6o
I'll just refer to A.anax as Saurophaganax
@TheScarletMacawAnzu Saurophag anax
Still gonna call it Allosaurus Maximus or nicknamed Saurophaganax
Saurophaganax: I don't feel so good
A. anax: oh i feel better
It’s morphing into Allosaurus Phaganax: The King Eater
@@samiamrg7"Stand back, I'm gonna Anax!"
It still existed, it was just a larger sub-species of Allosaurus rather than it's own separate species. It was the the Kodiak brown bear to Allosaurus's grizzly bear rather than the tiger to Allosaurus's lion if that makes sense.
@@SpinosaurusTheProudSocialist Allosaurus is a genus
Saurophaganax is surprisingly popular within the paleo community. Especially that people basically counted it to be around the top 5 largest currently known therapods. After hearing the news, just silence and disbelief.
The creature formerly known as Saurophaganax didn't become smaller though. It just seems to be an Allosaurus species.
@yozkopf3000 the artist formerly known as saurophaganax
@@yozkopf3000 Wasn't the specimen dubbed leviathan pushed the estimate in the 8 ton range from a D13 which is now potentially know from a sauropod. Now the material we know that is definitively from an Allosaur is in the 4.5 ton range so the Allosaur in question did get smaller.
Ok, but it would be awesome naming lore if the new Allosaurus species was dubbed “Allosaurus Phaganax,” meaning “King Eater.” Like the new Allosaurus name and designation ate the old Lizard king.
Top 10, not top 5 but yeah.I mean that 8.3 ton for the Leviathan sounded way too exaggarated in the first place.Not to mention that the community immediately started spreading it overhyping Sauro despite that it was made up from multiple specimens.
Allosaurus Fragilis: "Why are you laughing?"
Saurophaganax Maximus: "You fool." **(Transforming into Allosaurus Anax)**
Allosaurus Anax: *"I. AM. YOU."*
Allosaurus Fragilis: *"¿¡NANI?!"*
YOU WERE MEANT TO DESTROY THE SAUROPODS, NOT JOIN THEM
Underrated
Maybe all this time... The real Saurophaganax was the friends we made along the way.
RIP Lord of the Lizard Eaters
This made my day thanks.
😂 lmao
That's funny
We should really wait for more paleontologists to weigh in on this before jumping to conclusions. Still, to anyone who holds this as their favorite dinosaur, don’t let your personal attachment to Saurophaganax lead to rejection of the science. These paleontologists aren’t out to “get” Saurophaganax, they’re simply trying to get a more accurate picture of the Morrison.
It was presented at the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology meeting in Nov. And was well received.
@@RaptorChatter dosen't mean its not subject to change
Never said it wasn't. Even mention that in the video. But the information presented here is the most up to date info there is.
@@RaptorChatter the comparison between “Saurophaganax” material, Allosaurus, and sauropod material do make for a compelling argument. The main point I really wanted to get across is to not attack research just because it “ruins” your favorite dinosaur.
They could be out to "get" saurophaganax for career success and acclaim, though.
Allosaurus had never been so happy before
Saurophaganax had never seen such bullshit before
@@MonchegorxSaurophaganax didn't exist.
@@leaguerpaleontology23 Saurophaganax had never seen
@@leaguerpaleontology23 even if it didn’t it was still a cool idea nevertheless.
the true saurophaganax is the friends we made along the way
Yes😢
The Batman comic where he’s yelling “Don’t leave me” while hugging his parents:
maoiyanoguoatataki
RIP Saurophaganax 🪦
Sorry, we're out of Snax, you'll have to wait until dinner.
Biggest Jurassic theropod is now Allosaurus annax.
12.8m long & 6.6 tonnes
This actually close to giga and t.rex now
NO. Allosaurus anax is very close in size to Torvosaurus
Really? What happened to Leviathan specimen?
@@Caio_rex_paleoProof?
@@Caio_rex_paleo It's true lol, Allosaurus anax bigger than Torvosaurus
First Troodon, now Saurophaganax too?
We live in the worst timeline.
We got Brontosaurus, Scolosaurus and Stenonychosaurus back. What more do you want?
@@Ozraptor4on avian side, we got Diatryma back too
I hope they be back at some point tbh, the same with Nanotyrannosaurus, also others like it too
That's what you get for using undiagnostic scrap as name-bearing specimens.
@@Ozraptor4boring boring boring
I worked on Allosaurus for my masters project and got to see all of the Saurophaganax material at the OMNH. It was really cool to see but I knew something was off but I didn't have the expertise at the time to tell what specifically was up. Nice to know my sneaking suspicions were valid even if I couldn't tell why lol.
Big problem however. There are no overlap between the holotype of A. anax and the refered material. A. anax essentially created the exact problem that Saurophaganax has. A fragmentary holotype with unrelated attributed material that could or not be the same animal. Literally the only thing they have in common is being large Allosaurids from the same quarry. It would have been much better left as Allosauridae indet or Allosaurus indet. Creating a new species essentially based on nothing is just adding to the confusion.
RIP Lord of the Lizard Eaters
As an allosaurus fanboy, allosaurus anax sounds awesome
Both are based af but giving it an actual subspecies name of allosaurus is really cool
anax*
As an Allosaurus fanboy, I agree
Sounds wrong
this put a weird image in my head before you edited lol.
Allosaurus: "That's what you get for trying to take my crown."
From itself?
Damn. Saurophaganax was my favorite non-Carcharodontosauroid Allosauroid, mostly because of its name, and now it's just regular ol' Allosaurus. Technically not really, it's a different species and still a lot bigger than fragilis, but the stinkin' rad name is now gone ;(
"Regular Allosaurus" Bro you don't know how big Allosaurus anax
It's the ol' Spinosaurus treatment. A change so drastic a lot of people refuse to accept it. Personally, Saurophaganax does not fit a sauropod, given the "lord of lizard eaters" meaning. Allosaurus Anax is cool, but I'm always gonna call it Saurophaganax because it has stuck with me since Planet Dinosaur
@@azriel_xix I think it fits a sauropod well. Sauropods were the largest, toughest, and possibly the most aggressive animal in it's ecosystem. They weren't lizard eaters, but they were the lords of those who were.
@@azriel_xix troodon, dakotarpator, andrewsarcus, etc..also changed and some became a chimera
Great video. I just found your channel and it's awesome. Thank you for doing this.
This hits differently knowing that Saurophaganax had been the state fossil of Oklahoma since 2000.
RIP Saurophaganax, you were too beautiful for this world
Allosaurus anax sounds badass
Not as much as saurohaganax
Well I think we all see now what happens when descriptions are made by specialists. To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And to a theropod researcher, everything looks like a theropod
Rest in peace my beautiful allosauroid king.
Allosauroid king it's Giganotosaurus
No... just no@@Giga_Enjoyer
I was about 8 when I was told that Allosaurus was lame because Saurophaganax was bigger and meaner. All these decades later, who is laughing now!
Honestly, I like the idea of Saurophaganax being a larger species of Allosaurus, because with all the different species getting a larger variant of such or such, gives the Allosaurus as a family and a genus for something to compete with all the other heavy hitters tbh
Possibly the coolest Dinosaur King character, you'll be in my heart, sour saggy snacks
On the plus side, a dinosaur movie can now make a made up hybrid dinosaur called, “Saurophaganax” and say that it is completely made up, not needing to follow accuracy.
Saurophaganax sounds like a toothpaste brand.
9 out of 10 dentists recommend Saurophaganax!
@fabricreative1930 10 out of 10 sauropods do not recommend Saurophaganax
@fabricreative1930 was the 10th dentist eaten?
Honestly a cooler name than Allosaurus.
Man, the naming is hilarious.
"Why is it named the King of the Allosauruses? Was it the biggest?"
"No, it's an homage to Saurophaganax, because they used to think it was a different species."
"Oh, but it's still really big and impressive?"
"No, it was originally named Saurophagus and then they realized a bird was named that, so they had to change the name, and it is bigger than that bird."
"...So it's called King of the Allosauruses because it's bigger than some small bird?"
"Yup!"
Who knows maybe this animal is a mature version of allosaurus frilgis
The largest definitive A. fragilis was close to 10 meters, but has no cranial elements preserved. You might be correct.
We already have mature Allosaurus fragilis and they aren't quite as big. However, because not two individuals are identical, there is no reason to think that no A. fragilis couldn't get this large.
I’m just joking, everyone
@@tyrannotherium7873 I mean it's a valid question. Asking questions is how we learn.
I love allosaurus so much. I'm sorry to people who like the saurophaganax name (it's a good name I can't pretend otherwise) but this is a win for allosaurus glazers.
It would be hilarious if that vertebrae turned out to be a new sauropod, because once it’s named, you cannot change it.
“King of the lizard eaters was a herbivore”
Absolutely. But it has happened before, and I'm sure it will happen again
It ate ALL the lizards, so had to switch.
It was the dinosaur with the coolest name ever, now it's just a king of different lizards.
I have my doubts on this paper, as it mostly hinges on too fragmentary of material. At this point, they should keep them as Allosauridae indet.
Me too
It doesn't though. There's large Allosaurus material in the quarry. Parts of some of them are different enough to establish a new species. The postorbital, fibula, and the caudal vertebrae all point towards a new species of Allosaurus.
@@RaptorChatter So dose Saurophaganax exsited or not?
@@MrWanapon no but maybe theres another Allosaurus species
@@Dimitriterrorman And that's Saurophaganax
Feels to quick to call it, with the paper even calling out that A.anax may become invalid if Sauro is found valid
Allosaurus anax? what happened to A. maximus? that was the main name i've seen used to refer to "saurophaganax"
@@GiovannaBassani-ve3wmThey are not directly synonymized because the holotype of Saurophaganax isn't referred to the new Allosaurus species. Allosaurus anax is described based on other remains that used to be referred to Saurophaganax, which itself is considered dubious, because based on the holotype the researchers are not even certain if it's allosaurid in the first place. I don't think this is going to resolve anything though and I'm sure we'll see other studies countering this one or coming up with different arrangements of the taxonomy of these remains.
@@GiovannaBassani-ve3wm That was proposed during the time were paleontologists were arguing to saurophaganax being an Allosaurus a few years back but was never valid
With parts of saurophaganax being sauropods and only one possibly of Allosaurus we are talking of a very different animal anyways
I read that this paper was from november so about 3 months now, and they say it was well recieved so unless a future paper contradicts it then this video is accurate
They've been debating this for about a decade so to say it's TO SOON is wrong, and one commenter on this thread is saying the paper was made in November.
Dude, this channel is exactly what I've been looking for. This video was perfect to learn something about paleontology and isn't assuming the only experience I have with dinosaurs is Jurassic Park lol. Even most of the paleo-centric channels I find seem to only skim the surface of the actual science and just want to talk about "big scary teeth". You make it super easy to follow along. Keep up the good work!
Glad you like the content! That's also basically how I felt when we started the channel.
@@RaptorChatterbot
@@RaptorChatterbot
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't there an announcement a few years back of new Saurophagnax material from New Mexico at a different quarry, including some more skeletal remains?
Could be. That could also be Allosaurus anax though. Unless that odd vertebrae that was difficult to classify is in those remains and either articulated with other bones, or from an entirely one taxon bonebed it will be impossible to know though.
@@RaptorChatter I was right. There was a specimen assigned to Saurophagnax that was written about in 2015 from New Mexico that was more complete than the Oklahoma specimen. It consisted of about 5-6 tail vertebrae, a partial hip, an most of the right leg. Enough to be diagnostic enough to be identified as a theropod. I don't know if the chevrons are present in the New Mexico specimen. If so and they match the Oklahoma specimens, then Saurophagnax may very well remain a valid species. What I do know is that while the chevrons from the Oklahoma specimen are very similar to those of a sauropod, they are also quite similar to tyrannosaurids. I don't think I am quite ready to rule Saurophagnax out yet.
Possible, a review of the tonnes of _Allosaurus_ or allosaurid material excavated throughout the entire Morrison is long overdue.
@@stuartwhitehead3167 Because the holotype of Saurophaganax is assigned to sauropod vertebrae, even if this newer specimen turned out to be the same animal as Allosaurus anax, it would be assigned to that species.
"Allosaurus had never seen such bullshit before."
I've always felt the fossil evidence was too fragmentary to justify it being named something other than Allosaurus, if even that.
Watch it turn out like brontosaurus where it ended up being a different creature than thought except even more drastic going from an allosaurid to a sauropod
People: can't belive that saurophaganax is turning into an annoying long necked herbivore!😫😭😫😭
Deinocheirus: first time?
Deinocheirus is an omnivore
@Benglavosaurus ok, i never thought of that, but i simply refer that in older depictions, deinocheirus was also depicted as a carnivorous theropod
I guess you can say _Allosaurus anax_ ... *annexed* the giant allosaurid part of Saurophaganax.
It's a shame that folks are upset about Saurophaganax when it's still somewhat there, just under a new name, _Allosaurus anax_ . This has also been a long time coming, paleonerds have been calling out the discrepencies for over a decade & the science is catching up. It's still in develop At the very least, it's still a species on its own and not a growth stage like Nanotyrannus or even proven to be 100% non-existant. Saurophaganax is still there, they just went through a name change.
There's a blog post with some more info on this: "About that Saurophaganax paper".
Hasn't it been considered an Allosaurus since 1998?
Hell nooooo
By some real paleontologists yes. I have heard chatter about the nature of Saurophaganax being Allosaurus for decades, just nothing official yet. Science moves slowly sometimes, to make sure no mistakes are made. If you don't, you end up with mislabeling some Allosaur and sauropod remains as a nonexistent dinosaur called Saurophaganax.
No, there's been plenty of discussion about this over the past decade at least. Real paleontologist are on both sides of this.
Yes, I remember vividly that it was considered an Allosaurus.
@@wasiuddin9988uhm Yes it has.
Man Oklahoma about to loose its state dinosaur😢
I wonder if Epantherias is actually also a specimen of Allosaurus anax
Allosaurus the real OG
Google translates OG to AND 😂
Imagine it does exist but we just haven’t found it or a juvinile
I’m surprised they didn’t use the already existing synonym of Saurophaganax; Allosaurus maximus?
No one wants to give Greg Paul a win
I think it's because the holotype of Saurophaganax/A. maximus doesn't have any bones that are 100% confirmed to belong to what is now called A. anax.
You asking us if you surprised?
10:35-11:28 Well, if the holotype specimen of Saurophaganax gets identified as a theropod dinosaur (but not a sauropod), I hope they will find more complete speciments (neotypes) in Oklahoma, compare it with the holotype & put the genus back valid next year (2025) or so.
It will be a wonderful discovery, right👍😉🦖🌌
By the way, new information about Edmarka Rex suggests that it was simply a large 11m Torvosaurus. So Saurophaganax was simply a large Allosaurus, over 10 meters long and there was parity between the two species.
Oh good to know if that be the case.
Edmarka rex was Torvosaurus tanneri.
And Saurophaganax was it's own genus but now Saurophaganax is invalid
When they keep retconing your favorite dinosaurs: "They can't keep getting away with this!!!"
What is the current situation of Dakotaraptor, Nanotyrannus, Stygimoloch/Dracorex, Sigilmassasaurus/Oxalaia?
Dakotaraptor is pretty much considered a chimera and currently has no scientific value because the type specimen is in DePalma's private collection, Dracorex is a juvenile Pachycpehalosaurus/Stygimoloch (Stygimoloch could be a stratomorph or possibly a second species within the genus Pachycephalosaurus), Oxalaia has been argued to have more valid diagnostic characters differing from Spinosaurus in at least two papers published after the proposed synonymy in 2020, and Sigilmassasaurus has a newly assigned specimen though that doesn't make the genus less controversial at the moment. For Nanotyrannus, I think more study is required but the majority still disagrees with its validity.
@j2023-w6x thank you so much! Palaeontology is always evolving
@@j2023-w6x I just read about the palaeontologist DePalma. He was accused and then found guilty of "scientific misconduct" about 1 year ago. No wonder he is the one keeping Dakotaraptor in his private collection.
@@j2023-w6x Interesting about the spinosaurids. I'm aware there isn't much fossil evidence for Oxalaia, however I find it very mysterious as South America and Africa were practically one during the Cretaceous period. So I sorta am for the opinion that it's just a different species of Spino. Almost like a cosmopolitan species. As Allosaurus and Torvosaurus were both located in what is now the US and Portugal. Maybe one resided on the eastern side and the other more western as separate genus. Although I'm not certain of the temporal range between the two spinosaurids. I find it an extra fascinating case as Spinosaurus has the weirdest paleo history/story OAT. With Oxalaia most likely being the utmost closest relative to Spinosaurus. They both apparently reached about the same size. Although I've heard the Sigilmassasaurus estimates are off the charts. Haven't read much at all on it.
@@j2023-w6x and probably some will change
He isn't dead, he just became a Sauropod.
No, it did not become a sauropod. We don't know if anything changed. It's still up for debate.
That isn't correct. There's multiple species bones used to describe Saurophaganax, two of which are definitely sauropods, so those can't go with the name. Especially as the other bone is indeterminate, so until that bone is figured out, which likely will take finding more fossils it is not really anything. It's just a name with no real group other than dinosaur.
@@william3100 Sorry for the late reply, but from what I have read of the paper so far, it sounds like the Meat Cleaver Chevrons and Dorsal Vertabrea asigned to Saurophaganax belong to a diplodocid, potentially both being Apatosaurus. However the Dorsal vertabrea are still both diagnostic and nondiagnostic enough to not confidently asign it to anything.
As a layman who isn't knowlegable enough to say anything meaningful. I know that Saurophaganax is probably a nomen dubium. But with the Dorsal vertabrea and chevrons being the way they are, along with some of the dorsal centra being more like those of allosaurus and others more similar to diplodocids. I personally think attributing the Diplodocid material to Saurophaganax makes sense.
Additionally since the abstract says this:
"The name Saurophaganax maximus should refer to a previously undiagnosed diplodocid, instead of the large theropod recovered from the Kenton 1 Quarry"
It makes it sound as though it could still be considered valid to some degree, as if they considered it entirely invalid, why wouldn't they just say in the abstract that said material was insuficient to leave it a valid taxon and that it was also a Nomen Dubium?
@@RaptorChatter but the other material still could, especially considering how they created the possible other species, allosaurus anax, was pretty messy. Multiple bones with two definitely being sauropods. Sounds like there's still enough material to potentially still say it's saurophaganax. We don't know enough to say it's definitely or more likely not.
The big question is how can you prove the species that are described are not just the same animal but in a different growth stage?
Saurophaganax had never seen such bullshit before
The good ending. Allosaurus supremacy.
Torvosaurs just... exists
There is active work being done on it though! So hopefully a large review of its bones soon!
You will be missed saurophaganax
Rip Saurophaganax, You'll be missed
This is just like in Dragon Ball Z how Majin Buu can absorb other fighters and take on their traits as a final trump card when he's losing a fight and/or backed into a corner.
Allosaurus literally just said "You don't exist", pulled out the Uno reverse card, and absorbed all of Saurophaganax's power.
After 30 years, the true Jurassic King has finally regained his his rightful throne. Feels good, man.
#AllosaurusSweep
Giant allosaurus still exists. What is people's problem ?
Yeah, Alllosaurus anax very big btw 💀
And there's still Epanterias, which might be just A. Anax. But it's probably valid.
@@BlackCappedChickadee Monster mansoville and Allosaurus tendagurensis it's big too
People like the name Saurophaganax. They should know better then to let their attachment to a taxon dictate their view on science, but apparently not everyone is mature enough
You’d be surprised by how much people are attached to a name.
RIP the coolest dino name of them all
Can we get a moment to realise that the dinosaur with the coolest name is now dead, rest in peace Lord of the lizard eaters
Oh no!
Anyway
Exactly.
*THE ALLOSAURUS always remains victorious (everyone who says otherwise is wrong)*
Jokes aside, fascinating stuff. Personally I was on the side of _"S. maximus_ is _S. maximus,_ not _A.ma ximus,"_ but it's wild to see that the true answer (as close as we can make it) may in fact be neither. Nonetheless, I for one welcome our new 13 metre Allosaurus king. Great stuff, Allo, knew you had it in you.
Also refreshing to see some Theropod drama that isn't another fucking Spino argument.
Dakotaraptor, troodontids, some dromeosaur, triceratops with quills theory etc.. :
The only thing I took away from this experience is that destiny hates cool names.
Allosaurs be like " where did it bring you back to me "
😢 So I guess it's official we gotta call him Saurofraudanax
Thanks for breaking it down Zeke, appropriate shirt for the occasion
I mean it was so dubious it’s hardly a loss
Saurophaganax final walkout to the sunset as invalid name for goodbye name and hello to Allosaurus Anax
Interesting that the Saurophaganax is actually a new species of allosaurus. Further, could it be that amax is just the adult form of other allosaurus species like fragilis or jimmadesni?
I still think whatever the bigger Allosaurus is should just be called saurophaganax, names need to mean something and if saurophaganax is a sauropod than why not start naming birds sea turtles
Based on bone histology the other Allosaurus species varied a ton in when they reached maturity, but the largest specimens were skeletally mature or near it. So it is likely that A. anax is a new species of very large Allosaurus.
Because names follow their holotype. Each species must be described as a specimen for all other animals to be compared to. The Saurophaganax holotype is not well preserved enough to show that it is one species, or that it is diagnostic enough to say what the animal is. Saurophaganax right now only applies to the damaged and inconclusive neural arch now.
@@RaptorChatter Thanks. Happy holidays!
@@precesionnoreaster1507 just wait untill you hear about basilosaurus
And now we wait until the Iberian Spinosaurid genera described since 2019 become re-evaluated as Baryonyx spp.
I think those would be more likely to end up as Baryonichini indet. But yes I would expect a lot of similar work to be done there.
Rip best named theropod
Meraxes?
I visited the Oklahoma natural history museum in Norman, OK and they have a big Saurophaganax on display. I find it funny that Oklahoma only has a tiny little sliver of the Morrison Formation in its panhandle but significant finds have been made there.
The “Saurophaganax” mounts there and in the museum in New Mexico are both just scaled up Allosaurus casts.
I am an Allosauroid fan, not a fan of any specific genus, and I view the bias/glazing towards these genera whether it's Allosaurus, Saurophaganax, another Metricanthosaurid or Carcharodontosaur Allosauroid-as nonsense. First of all, we know next to nothing about S. maximus, other than it being an exceptionally large Allosaurid with a cool name. Then there are people who get upset because this exceptionally large Allosaurid may no longer use that 'cool' name, as it might not represent a new genus. Do you know how ridiculous these people sound? Even if S. maximus is its own genus, it would still be an Allosauroid.
Omg thank you !! The whole toxic internet dinosaur hype train about this dinosaur in particular was SOOOOO extra and OBNOXIOUS these past couple years. I kept saying it's probably just a bigger Allosaurus, wait till we've found more evidence. 🙄🙄 Lots of large theropods, or dinosaurs in general had 3 different species which varied in size. It's all based off of hype and emotion and not scientific evidence. Everyone is allowed to be passionate and have a favorite dinosaur but not ignorantly so when it comes to the evidence or remains that have been studied. You can't just run away with pipe dream theories that aren't backed by anything real other than; 'you think the dinosaur is super cool and better and badder than T-Rex.' We knew near to nothing, had near to nothing on this animal FOR YEARS. Yet people are like oh it was 8 tons and 'basal' Carcharadontosaurid. When that is not even a real, paleontology term.. I really am convinced they are all actually* children and none of them are above the age of 20. It was all beyond absurd this was the best Christmas present for me really. lmao
Tbh. If dinos were alive, we would probably know so much about them, instead their remains
@@renna4216 we dont know majority of dinosaurs
I love NOT being talked down too. GREAT channel ❤
Well that sucks. Saurophaganax was a badass name and fun to say.
In my opinion it’s too quick to judge since while the original holotype bone was found to be a chimera (multiple different species fossil’s) most other Saurophaganax fossils did belong to a larger species of allosauirdae. So we will have to wait and see
But, since the holotype is invalid, so is the name
Epanterias, my beloved
Jokes aside it's funny how the giant Allosaurus from Ballad of Big Al and my 1990-2000s dinosaur books for kids is back in business
What giant Allosaurus was Ballad of Big Al?
@@Me-yq1fl After they take down the Diplodocus Al is scared away from the carcass by the appearance of a gargantuan Allosaurus female, which many people in recent years would more accurately have been represented by Saurophaganax (or if you're as cool as me, Epanterias). Given that both seem likely to be large Allosaurus individuals or species, it might have been right all along.
@@eddymercan7487 I didn't think of her as particularly gargantuan, only an adult female in a show where female dinosaurs are depicted as larger than males. And Al at the time wasn't sexually mature, so would have been much smaller.
As far as I know, all Allosaurus depicted in that show are Allosaurus jimmedseni (though at the time they would just be Allosaurus fragilis).
@@Me-yq1fl It's more something we're told than shown, the narrator describes her as a massive female or something to that effect.
People have been comparing the "Saurophaganax" holotype to Dakotaraptor, but I have to say this: this feels less like a Dakotaraptor situation (likely a chimera, but has some material that could be a distinct dromeosaurid) and more like an Ultrasauros situation (where we know for a fact that it's a chimera).
Then again, this could change. Maybe Saurophaganax could turn out to be a theropod closely related to Allosaurus, or maybe it was a giant sauropod (potentially the 30 meter long Apatosaurine from Oklahoma).
For now, since Saurophaganax's distinct characteristics are deemed to be undiagnostic, it's safe to call it a nomen dubium, and that it's probably does not exist.
A case study on the errors scientists make - some honestly, others, not.
Whatever it was called it was a big beast whether it was it’s own species or just a giant allosaurus. Mike from Prehistoric Magazine
I called it like a decade ago lol
Does that mean saurophaganax is proof that allosaurus grew to immense size? Why not call it allosaurus saurophaganax if it ends up being a large allosaurus? This way the name can still be used and associated with the fossils.
Cheers 🍻
Is this not the most shocking news of the YEAR in paleontology? Thanks for telling us!
Thank you Saurophaganax, it was fun while it last.
Great channel by the way. Mike
So what are we calling the species now and is it even a valid genus anymore SO CONFUSED same thing with Dakotaraptor everyone says it's no longer valid happened to Miragaia too !?!?!?
The genus was only named from the 3 vertebrae. None of those are diagnostic, so the name shouldn't be used for now. There is Allosaurus material which is diagnostic, which is not part of the Saurophaganax holotype. Therefore the Allosaurus material gets a new name.
Any news about the allosaur that got sold in Paris in 2016? I suspect it's an Allosaurus species after having crawled over the online auction pamplet on it(I mean it is kinda in the seller's interest to SAY that it is a whole new genus), but if it is a new genus, this may support the idea of a greater diversity of allosaurus line therapods from the Morrison.
wasnt there also a huge thumb claw asigned ot Saurophaganax?
RIP Saurophaganax. What about the massive claws
All allosaurus 😎
Or maybe torvosaurus
Usually you’d see the creation of another dinosaur but NOPE here we have the straight deletion of a dinosaur