Comments on: Maryland’s Adorable Baby Ankylosaur

By: 220mya

220mya — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:04:15 +0000

Ray – I think the main point Brian is trying to make is that there is no bone present, and in that he is correct. They are afterall impressions that have subsequently been filled to make the natural casts.

Not all writers for Smithsonian Magazine (or the blog) live in the DC area and have a chance to visit the specimen in person.

By: Hadur

Hadur — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 19:20:00 +0000

I happen to work in Washington DC, and on my lunch break today I walked to the museum and saw this guy for myself. He’s even smaller than the picture makes him look!

By: Ray Stanford

Ray Stanford — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:49:48 +0000

Please note: The writer is incorrect in saying the fossil is composed only of natural impressions. Look at the rib cage, a vertebral cap, and various leg, arm, pes (foot) and manus(hand)components which are clearly natural CASTS (not impressions), etc. Anyone who has good eyesight and looks carefully can see that, by visually examining the adorable little fellow in the commendably well-lighted museum case.

The paper’s abstract de facto corrects what the writer said about the fossil’s composition, and it can be read at:

http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1666/10-113.1

Despite the reportorial slip-up, thanks for that article drawing attention to the only dinosaur hatchling of any kind ever reported from the eastern USA.

Kudos for that cute article heading.

Ray Stanford
the little nodosaur’s finder