File talk:Dimorphodon mount.jpg

Desmatosuchus and the anachronism

It is very likely that the dorsal osteoderms visible beneath the feet of the Dimorphodon mount belong to the Desmatosuchus mount from the same museum. In this flickr image you can see the Desmatosuchus mount on display at the Rainbow Forest Museum standing next to a Postosuchus mount which, in turn, is next to a white wall. Both mounts are standing on a platform of tan-coloured “rock”. In these images of the same Dimorphodon mount you can clearly see parts of the pelvis and the vertebral column of the Postosuchus mount in front of the white wall in the background. The posture of the hind limbs is the same as in the flickr image. In the image on the back of this talk page the left foot and the tail of the Postosuchus mount, the tan-colored “rock” as well as the white wall are clearly visible in the background. So it is highly likely, that the Dimorphodon mount was arranged together with these two large Late Triassic archosaurs. Apparently, it was added to the exhibition at some point after 2011. --Gretarsson (talk) 17:03, 19 July 2017 (UTC); modified 12:52, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think this is really a problem, though. As you showed, you'd have to do a good deal of research to even figure out what the material under the pterosaur is, and even then, you can't really see what it is. I'd also question whether this is supposed to reflect real-life interaction between the animals, rather than just cramming stuff into a limited space; would this photo[1] be considered anachronstic as well, just because you see a Cretaceous and Jurassic skeleton in the same frame? FunkMonk (talk) 06:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

I actually didn’t say that it is a problem. ;-) If i would consider it a problem, I would have inserted a ‘disputed fact’ box. The purpose of the ‘line of evidence’ given above is only to justify these recent changes done by me. So (almost) everything is fine. Nevertheless, the photograph of the tyrannosaur and the apatosaur is not really comparable because the two are not arranged in a manner that would suggest contemporaneity to the visitor. --Gretarsson (talk) 18:52, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

It appears that the mount is only there to represent the fact that pterosaur remains have been found at the Petrified Forest site:[2] So though there is no question this is a Dimorphodon reconstruction, it is just used as a stand-in for an indeterminate Triassic pterosaur. Perhaps the image description should reflect this. FunkMonk (talk) 21:16, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

OK, done. Btw the pterosaur jaw mentioned at the NPS website then was published in form of an abstract in the 2013 annual meeting issue of the JVP [3]. --Gretarsson (talk) 17:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Nice when detective work bears fruit! FunkMonk (talk) 18:58, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

• Gretarsson, here[4] is the museum sign under that skeleton, with a restoration of Dimorphodon taken from Wikipedia, no less! FunkMonk (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2018 (UTC)