Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 13. Axis complex and cervical vertebrae 3–4 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 13. Axis complex and cervical vertebrae 3–4 of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov 2003 (AEHM 2/845, holotype), from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), in right lateral (A) and dorsal (B) views. Abbreviatons: ax, axis; cv, cervical vertebra.

Fig. 2 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 2. Holotype (AEHM 2/845) of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003, from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), as discovered in the field (N49°04'57.5", E130°51'34.1"). Abbreviations: L, left; N, North; R, right.

Fig. 7 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 7. Right jugal of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003 (AEHM 2/845, holotype), from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), in lateral (A) and medial (B) views.

Fig. 3 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 3. Reconstruction of the skull of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003, from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), in right lateral view.

Fig. 19 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 19. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003 (AEHM 2/845, holotype), from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia). A. Left humerus, in cranial (A1), caudal (A2), and lateral (A3) views. B. Right ulna, in cranial (B1) and medial (B2) views. C. Right radius, in caudal (C1) and cranial (C2) views.

Fig. 5 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 5. Photographs of the braincase of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003 (AEHM 2/845, holotype), from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), in right lateral (A), left lateral (B), and dorsal (C) views. D. Details of the right lateral view of the braincase.

Fig. 11 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 11. Right dentary teeth of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003 (AEHM 2/845, holotype), from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), in lingual views. A. From the middle part of the dental battery. B. From the caudal part of the dental battery.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2010View details →

Fig. 4 in A new titanosaur sauropod dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous of North Patagonia, Argentina

Fig. 4. Premaxilla−maxilla of the titanosaur sauropod Narambuenatitan palomoi gen. et sp. nov. from the Campanian (Late Cretaceous) Anacleto Formation of Neuquén Province, Argentina; MAU−Pv−N−425 (holotype), in ventral (A) and medial (B) views.

Fig. 10 in Osteology and relationships of Olorotitan arharensis, a hollow-crested hadrosaurid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of Far Eastern Russia

Fig. 10. Left dentary of hadrosaurid dinosaur Olorotitan arharensis Godefroit, Bolotsky, and Alifanov, 2003 (AEHM 2/845, holotype), from the Upper Cretaceous of Kundur (Russia), in medial (A), lateral (B), and dorsal (C) views. Photographs (A1, B1), explanatory drawings (A2, B2, C).

Fig. 2 in Evidence for a Sauropod-Like Metacarpal Configuration in Ankylosaurian Dinosaurs

Fig. 2. Proximal view of left metacarpals of the ankylosaur Peloroplites cedrimontanus from Cedar Mountain Formation, Utah, USA; with digit I to the right, incorrectly configured in a shallow arc (A) and correctly configured in a semicircle (B). Note the presence of gaps (arrows) between the metacarpals in A and their closure in B.

Fig. 4 in Evidence for a Sauropod-Like Metacarpal Configuration in Ankylosaurian Dinosaurs

Fig. 4. Proximal views of the metacarpus in the Dinosauria, showing that a semicircular configuration is present only in the Thyreophora and basal Sauropoda. Sources of drawings are as follows: Saichania, Maryańska (1977); Stegosaurus, Senter (2010); Triceratops, Fujiwara (2009); Camptosaurus, Carpenter and Wilson (2008); Herrerasaurus, Massospondylus, Omeisaurus, Brachiosaurus, and Apatosaurus, Bonnan (2003); Dilophosaurus, modified from photo by author. Roman numerals refer to digit number.

Fig. 3 in Evidence for a Sauropod-Like Metacarpal Configuration in Ankylosaurian Dinosaurs

Fig. 3. Left manual skeleton of the ankylosaur Peloroplites cedrimontanus Carpenter, Bartlett, Bird, and Barrett, 2008 from Cedar Mountain Formation, Utah, USA (CEUM 12187–12193, 12218–12223); articulated correctly and incorrectly. A. Metacarpals in pollucal view, correctly articulated with phalanges: I (A1), II (A2), and III (A3). B. Metacarpals in proximal view, correctly articulated without (B1) and with (B2) available phalanges. C–F. Correctly (C1–F1) and incorrectly (C2–F2) articulated metacarpals shown in four oblique views with (C1–F1) and without (C2–F2) available phalanges. C. Craniodorsal view, centered on digit II. D. Craniodorsal view, centered on digit III. E. Laterodorsal view, centered between digits III and IV. F. Caudodorsal view, centered between digits IV and V. In both configurations the metacarpals are arranged in a tight arc, but they are vertical and parallel to each other in the correct configuration, whereas they are slanted and distally divergent in the incorrect configuration. Roman numerals refer to digit number.

Fig. 1 in Evidence for a Sauropod-Like Metacarpal Configuration in Ankylosaurian Dinosaurs

Fig. 1. The manus in mounted skeletons of ankylosaurs, showing metacarpals incorrectly configured in a shallow arc with their shafts slanted and their distal ends divergent. A. Gastonia burgei Kirkland, 1998 from Cedar Mountain Formation, Utah, USA; College of Eastern Utah Prehistoric Museum, Price, Utah, in oblique dorsolateral view. B. Edmontonia rugosidens Gilmore, 1930 from Dinosaur Park Formation, Alberta, Canada; American Museum of Natural History, New York City, New York, USA, in oblique dorsolateral (B1) and medial (B2) views.

opencc-by-4.0May 2011View details →

Fig. 2 in A monument of inefficiency: The presumed course of the recurrent laryngeal nerve in sauropod dinosaurs

Fig. 2. The longest cells in the bodies of sauropods were sensory neurons that connected receptors in the skin of the extremities with interneurons in the brainstem, a pattern of neural architecture that is present in all extant vertebrates. The nerve cell bodies would have been located in the dorsal root ganglia adjacent to the spinal cord. The diagram of the neuron is based on Butler and Hodos (1996: fig. 2−1B).

opencc-by-4.0May 2011View details →

Fig. 1 in A monument of inefficiency: The presumed course of the recurrent laryngeal nerve in sauropod dinosaurs

Fig. 1. Course of the left vagus nerve and left recurrent laryngeal nerve in a human, a giraffe, and Supersaurus. The right recurrent laryngeal nerve passes caudal to the right subclavian artery rather than the aorta and ductus arteriosus, but otherwise its course is identical to that of the left.

Fig. 3 in Redescription of neoceratopsian dinosaur Archaeoceratops and early evolution of Neoceratopsia

Fig. 3. Right ilium of Archaeoceratops oshimai IVPP V 11115, paratype in dorsal (A), left lateral (B), ventral (C), and medial (D) views. Scale bar 2 cm.

Fig. 2 in Redescription of neoceratopsian dinosaur Archaeoceratops and early evolution of Neoceratopsia

Fig. 2. Sacral vertebrae and ilia of Archaeoceratops oshimai, IVPP V 11114, holotype in dorsal (A), left lateral (B), and ventral (C) views. Scale bar 2 cm.

Fig. 26 in A new ornithomimid dinosaur with gregarious habits from the Late Cretaceous of China

Fig. 26. Histogram of femur lengths of Sinornithomimus dongi gen. et sp. nov. (Table 5). Kurtotic distribution curves are drawn for all samples (dashed line) and for juveniles (solid line).

Fig. 25. A in A new ornithomimid dinosaur with gregarious habits from the Late Cretaceous of China

Fig. 25. A. Gastrolith masses of Sinornithomimus dongi gen. et sp. nov. IVPP−V11797−10 in lateral view. B. IVPP−V11797−9 in lateral (B1) and ventral (B2) views. Italicized letters in A indicate disarticulated and isolated elements not from IVPP−V11797−10. Scale bars 10 cm for A and 5 cm for B.

Fig. 24 in A new ornithomimid dinosaur with gregarious habits from the Late Cretaceous of China

Fig. 24. Left pedal digits of Sinornithomimus dongi gen. et sp. nov. in IVPP−V11797−10 in lateral view. Photograph (A) and explanatory drawing of the same (B). Scale bar 5 cm.