Body mass estimations for Plateosaurus engelhardti using laser scanning and 3D reconstruction methods

Abstract

Both body mass and surface area are factors determining the essence of any living organism. This should also hold true for an extinct organism such as a dinosaur. The present report discusses the use of a new 3D laser scanner method to establish body masses and surface areas of an Asian elephant (Zoological Museum of Copenhagen, Denmark) and of Plateosaurus engelhardti, a prosauropod from the Upper Triassic, exhibited at the Paleontological Museum in Tübingen (Germany). This method was used to study the effect that slight changes in body shape had on body mass for P. engelhardti. It was established that body volumes varied between 0.79 m(3) (slim version) and 1.14 m(3) (robust version), resulting in a presumable body mass of 630 and 912 kg, respectively. The total body surface areas ranged between 8.8 and 10.2 m(2), of which, in both reconstructions of P. engelhardti, approximately 33% account for the thorax area alone. The main difference between the two models is in the tail and hind limb reconstruction. The tail of the slim version has a surface area of 1.98 m(2), whereas that of the robust version has a surface area of 2.73 m(2). The body volumes calculated for the slim version were as follows: head 0.006 m(3), neck 0.016 m(3), fore limbs 0.020 m(3), hind limbs 0.08 m(3), thoracic cavity 0.533 m(3), and tail 0.136 m(3). For the robust model, the following volumes were established: 0.01 m(3) head, neck 0.026 m(3), fore limbs 0.025 m(3), hind limbs 0.18 m(3), thoracic cavity 0.616 m(3), and finally, tail 0.28 m(3). Based on these body volumes, scaling equations were used to assess the size that the organs of this extinct dinosaur have.

Biomechanics of Running Indicates Endothermy in Bipedal Dinosaurs

“…The Gorgosaurus specimen is a juvenile. Hip heights, body masses, and anatomical dimensions are from [40] except Marasuchus , Microraptor , Lesothosaurus , and Heterodontosaurus ; data for these latter species were estimated from whole-body digital models following [69; detailed descriptions of these models are unpublished, in preparation by Allen et al]; and Plateosaurus , “slim model” from [70]. As the specific values have minimal effects on our analyses (Text S1) we do not consider potential error in body mass here.…”

Redescription of a Nearly Complete Skull ofPlateosaurus(Dinosauria: Sauropodomorpha) from the Late Triassic of Trossingen (Germany)

“…This species is represented by abundant material that includes complete skeletons and skulls and is often found as mass accumulations in bonebeds (Sander, 1992;Klein, 2004). This great quality and quantity of material has made P. erlenbergiensis a good model for studies seeking to understand the paleobiology and evolution of early saurischian dinosaurs, including research on the taphonomy (Sander, 1992;Sander and Klein, 2005) anatomy (Galton, 1984;1985;, systematics (Yates, 2003b), and functional morphology (Gunga et al, 2007;Mallison, 2010aMallison, , 2010b of this species.…”

Quantitative Interpretation of Tracks for Determination of Body Mass

“…Modern vertebrate ichnology deals with experiments on living animals e.g., [18], [19], artificial indenters in the laboratory e.g., [20], [21], and computer-aided approaches e.g., [22], [23]. Common methods for calculating body mass based on body volume and density were done with models [24], 3D scanning [25], [26], or numerical methods [27]. Current numerical studies [28]–[31] have as their main objective to qualitatively better understand the kinematics of the foot indenting the subsoil and to relate subsoil properties to footprint quality and preservation.…”