Q & A

Could You Outrun a Tyrannosaurus Rex?

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Tyrannosaur footprints is giving researchers new insight into the speed of the prehistoric beasts.

Could you outrun a T. rex? Research on the rare Wyoming discovery has determined that the tyrannosaur was traveling roughly 2.8 to 5 miles per hour, slower than an average human runs. But, the researchers warn that these footprints aren’t nearly representative of a T. rex’s peak speed.

  • Fossilized footprints reveal a tyrannosaur traveling between 2.8 to 5 mph

  • This is slower than an average human runs, at 11 mph over short distance

  • Still, researchers assert prints only represent walk through mud, not a run 

  • Decades of debate reveal estimates between 10 and 45 mph for top speed

Graphic by Stephanie Fox


A T. rex could have run faster than an average human at top speed, but there is a chance that a human could outrun a T. rex. We can never fully know how fast the Tyrannosaurus rex ran, but scientists at the University of Manchester in England have come up with animated computer models based on fossils and estimated muscle mass that have helped them compute the probable top speeds of many dinosaurs. The Tyrannosaurus rex is nowhere near the fastest, topping out at around 18 mph. The fastest dinosaur they computed was the Compsognathus, which ran about 40 mph.


Usain Bolt, the fastest man on Earth, set a world record for running 27.79 mph in the 100 meter sprint in 2009. He is not likely to get eaten by a Tyrannosaurus rex in the near future, but let’s look at a more average human. Running a four minute mile is the standard of all male professional middle distance runners, and translates to a speed of 15 mph. That’s perhaps a little faster than some of us would run a mile, but if we were running for our life it’s a pretty decent estimate.

If speed alone was a factor, a T. rex would win. However, it would take time for a dinosaur of that mass to get started, and it would not reach its top speed of 18 mph as soon as it would take a human to reach their top speed. Additionally, a Tyrannosaurus Rex is not as agile as a human and would likely get exhausted quickly. So your chances of outrunning a Tyrannosaurus rex are good if the distance to safety is short, or if you could weave and avoid him until he gets exhausted.

How Scientists Identify Species?

Sunday, December 4, 2016

A T-rex at the Natural History Museum: A new study claims that the biology of dinosaurs was skewed towards big species, with many more mammoth examples than among today's animals

How can scientists tell one species from another?

In biology, a species (abbreviated sp., with the plural form species abbreviated spp.) is the basic unit of biological classification and a taxonomic rank. A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction. While this definition is often adequate, looked at more closely it is problematic. For example, with hybridisation, in a species complex of hundreds of similar microspecies, or in a ring species, the boundaries between closely related species become unclear. Other ways of defining species include similarity of DNA, morphology, or ecological niche.

All species are given a two-part name, a “binomial”. The first part of a binomial is the genus to which the species belongs. The second part is called the specific name or the specific epithet (in botany, also sometimes in zoology). For example, Boa constrictor is one of four species of the Boa genus.

Species were seen from the time of Aristotle until the 18th century as fixed kinds that could be arranged in a hierarchy, the great chain of being. In the 19th century, biologists grasped that species could evolve given sufficient time. Charles Darwin’s 1859 book The Origin of Species explained how species could arise by natural selection. Genes can sometimes be exchanged between species by horizontal gene transfer; and species may become extinct for a variety of reasons.

A collection of skeletons mounted in museums of various dinosaurs

Species description

A species is given a name when a type specimen is described formally by a scientist, in a paper that assigns it a scientific name. The name becomes a validly published name (in botany) or an available name (in zoology) when the paper is accepted for publication. The type material is provided for other scientists to examine, often in the research collection of a major museum. Scientists are asked to choose names that, in the words of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, are “appropriate, compact, euphonious, memorable, and do not cause offence.”


Saturday, December 3, 2016

Some of the most known Carcharodontosaurids

Carcharodontosaurids (from the Greek “shark-toothed lizards”) were a group of carnivorous theropod dinosaurs. In 1931 Ernst Stromer named Carcharodontosauridae as a family, in modern paleontology this name indicates a clade within Carnosauria. Carcharodontosaurids included some of the largest land predators ever known: GiganotosaurusMapusaurusCarcharodontosaurus, and Tyrannotitan all rivaled or slightly exceeded Tyrannosaurus in length. A 2015 paper published in PalArch by paleontologist Christophe Hendrickx and colleagues that focuses on the history of theropod dinosaur research gives a maximum length estimate of 14 meters (46 feet) for the largest carcharodontosaurids, while the smallest carcharodontosaurids were estimated at at least 6 meters (20 feet) long.

Along with the spinosaurids, carcharodontosaurids were the largest predators in the early and middle Cretaceous throughout Gondwana, with species also present in North America (Acrocanthosaurus), and Asia (Shaochilong). Their ages range from the Barremian (127-121 million years ago) to the Turonian (93-89 million years ago). Past the Turonian, they might have been replaced by the smaller abelisaurids in Gondwana and by tyrannosaurids in North America and Asia. According to Fernando Novas and colleagues, the disappearance of not only carcharodontosaurids but also spinosaurids and other fauna in both Gondwana and North America seem to indicate that this faunal replacement occurred on a global scale. However, some theropod teeth discovered in late Maastrichtian Marília Formation in Brazil, as well as a fragment of right maxilla discovered at the Campanian-Maastrichtian boundary of the Presidente Prudente Formation in Brazil, appear to belong to carcharodontosaurids, indicating the survival of this group until the latest Cretaceous, 70 to 66 mya. In December 2011, Oliver W. M. Rauhut described a new genus and species of carcharodontosaurid from the Late Jurassic (late Kimmeridgian to earliest Tithonian faunal stage, about 154-150 million years ago) of Tendaguru Formation, southeastern Tanzania. Veterupristisaurus represents the oldest known carcharodontosaurid.

Common features
Although some carcharodontosaurids genera are noted for their large size,‭ ‬not all of the carcharodontosaurids were giants.‭ ‬They do however seem to have had skulls that were proportionately large relative to their body size.‭ ‬The skulls of the larger carcharodontosaurid genera are amongst the largest dinosaur skulls known with the skull of Acrocanthosaurus being about‭ ‬1.3‭ ‬meters long,‭ ‬the skull of Carcharodontosaurus being about‭ ‬1.6‭ ‬meters long,‭ ‬and the larger estimate of the skull of Giganotosaurus being‭ ‬1.95‭ ‬meters long.‭ ‬These large sizes were possible because carcharodontosaurid had very large fenestra‭ (‬openings‭)‬,‭ ‬which meant that the skulls were not as solid,‭ ‬and therefore quite lightweight given the size.‭ ‬The antorbital fenestra‭ (‬the opening between the eye socket and nasal opening‭) ‬is often particularly large when compared to the skulls of other theropods.‭ ‬When viewed in profile the anterior‭ (‬front‭) ‬end of the lower jaws of carcharodontosaurids also tend to appear squared off.

Some very known carcharodontosaurids




The family Carcharodontosauridae was originally named by Ernst Stromer in 1931 to include the single newly discovered species Carcharodontosaurus saharicus. A close relative of C. saharicusGiganotosaurus, was added to the family when it was described in 1995. Additionally, many paleontologists have included Acrocanthosaurus in this family (Sereno et al. 1996, Harris 1998, Holtz 2000, Rauhut 2003, Eddy & Clarke, 2011, Rauhut 2011), though others place it in the related family Allosauridae (Currie & Carpenter, 2000; Coria & Currie, 2002). Carcharodontosaurids are characterized by the following morphological characters : Dorsoventral depth of anterior maxillary interdental plates more than twice anteroposterior width, squared, sub-rectangular anterior portion of the dentary, teeth with wrinkled enamel surfaces, presence of four premaxillary alveoli and a premaxillary body taller than long in lateral aspect, opisthocoelous cervical vertebrae with neural spines more than 1.9 times the height of the centrum, large, textured rugosities on the lacrimal and postorbital formed by roofing and forming broad orbital shelves, and a proximomedially inclined femoral head. With the discovery of Mapusaurusin 2006, Rodolfo Coria and Phil Currie erected a subfamily of Carcharodontosauridae, the Giganotosaurinae, to contain the most advanced South American species, which they found to be more closely related to each other than to the African and European forms. Coria and Currie did not formally refer Tyrannotitan to this subfamily, pending a more detailed description of that genus, but noted that based on characteristics of the femur, it may be a gigantosaurin as well.

In 1998 Paul Sereno defined Carcharodontosauridae as a clade, consisting of Carcharodontosaurus and all species closer to it than to either AllosaurusSinraptorMonolophosaurus, or Cryolophosaurus. Therefore, this clade is by definition outside of the clade Allosauridae.

Ceratopsia Facts

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Ceratopsia by Mad-Hatter-LCarol on DeviantArt

Ceratopians are also known as ceratopsians, and it means ‘horned eye’. They are very interesting dinosaurs and a lot different than the sauropods and theropods. To identify a ceratopian is not difficult because they had horns, bony frills and curved bony beaks. Ceratopians lived mainly in the Cretaceous period.

One of the most popular type of ceratopian was the Triceratops. The reason why they are called ‘horned eye’ is because they had remarkable horns above their eyes. Triceratops was the largest of this group of family and its brow horns were nearly up to a meter long.

Triceratops, one of the largest ceratopsians (a chasmosaurinae ceratopsid). It had solid frill and long horns.


Most of the ceratopians had an enormous neck frill. The frill was made of solid bone, and covered with their skin. This frill protected the ceratopians neck from being bitten or clawed by the predators. In some dinosaurs like the big Torosaurus, the bony frill grew halfway down the creature’s back. One particular dinosaur, the Psittacosaurus (parrot-lizard), did not have an obvious neck frill, but it did have another feature of the ceratopian group, which was a parrot-like beak. Experts believe this dinosaur should belong to the ceratopians, despite not having a transparent neck frill.

All ceratopians ate were herbivores and ate plants and their parrot-like beaks helped them to chop off tough plant stems. The horned eye dinosaurs included many different types of dinosaur. The group lived mainly towards the end of the Cretaceous period. Like the ornithopods, the ceratopians evolved during their time on Earth. Some of the first ceratopians, like the Protoceratops, did not have have horns, instead they had a thick, bony areas over their snouts and eyes. But eventually in time, the ceratopians developed horns. Pentaceratops was the later dinosaur to appear than Protoceratops. Pentaceratops had the most horns of all the horned dinosaurs, and its name means ‘five horned face’.

Like the rhinoceroses of today, the ceratopians walked on all four legs. The Styracosaurus had strong, muscular legs to support its massive heavy head. Its feet ended in toes which were spread out to help carry the weight of its enormous body. Another dinosaur as mentioned earlier, the Psittacosaurus, usually walked on two legs most of the time, but it may have walked on four legs in certain occasions. The ceratopians lived in North America, Europe and Asia, which are believed to be the only places where their skeleton fossils have been found so far.

Another fact about ceratopians is that some of them had holes in their frills.The neck frills were large and heavy, and to make them lighter, some of them had large holes in them to reduce the weight. Also the skin covering the bony frill stretched over the holes to make them invisible.

Ceratopsian fossil discoveries. The presence of Jurassic ceratopsians only in Asia indicates an Asian origin for the group, while the more derived ceratopsids occur only in North America save for one Asian species. Questionable remains are indicated with question marks. By Sheep81

Source: www.natgeo.com / www.wikipedia.org

How Dinosaur Fossils Were Formed?

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Diagram of How Dinosaur Fossils Were Formed

Was there any real proof that dinosaurs really did exist? To begin with, the fossils are the only source, clue and remains of the prehistoric animals and plants that lived millions of years ago.

Fossils were the only discovery made available to prove and gather evidence that these ancient animals really did exist. Fossils are mainly embedded in rocks which are several million years old. Generally, the hardest parts of the animals are left in the rocks such as the teeth and bones, and the flesh has eventually decayed. However, if nothing remains of an animal, there may be a hollow which the animal left behind. This hollow could be the precise shape in the rock of its body. Or it can even leave a footprint in the mud or soft sand when it was walking.

Diego Pol lying by large femur thigh bone fossil of the new titanosaur find, April 2015

A dinosaur became a fossil after it died. The body may have fallen, or been washed into a river. The perished body may have laid on the bottom of the river floor and slowly the flesh rotted away. After that the skeleton of the dinosaur was gradually buried under the mud, and the minerals from the water seeped into the bones and preserved them. Over millions of years, the mud transformed into layers of rock and the skeleton of the dinosaur became a fossil. The sea level then dropped after millions of years later. The wind and rain then wears away the rock and that reveals the fossils which is substantial evidence that dinosaurs once lived on Earth.

The experts on fossils are called paleontologists, they are known as the scientists who do all the research and the hectic detective work. Paleontologists have discovered fossils in many parts of the world. Their work can be very excruciating due to the fossils being scattered in pieces once they are found. It is very rare that paleontologists will find a whole skeleton preserved in the rock, but it is possible. They first identify the fossil bones, remove them from the ground, assemble the bones like a jigsaw, and then they determine and calculate how old the fossils are. The result of their work can be seen in natural history museums where the dinosaur skeletons are mounted and put on display for the public to view.

Besides fossil bones and teeth, which is not exactly the only clue that these animals of the past left behind, the footprints and the imprint of scaly skin, made in soft mud millions of years ago have also been found. Some of the most astounding fossils found are the droppings (or fossil feces) of the dinosaurs, and they are called coprolites. What scientists do is they grind up the dinosaur droppings, turn them into fine dust and then they find out what the dinosaurs ate to survive.

Did Sex Drive Mammal Evolution?

Sunday, November 20, 2016

How new species are created is at the core of the theory of evolution. Mammals may be a good example of how sex chromosome change drove major groups apart.

How new species are created is at the very core of the theory of evolution. The reigning theory is that physically separated populations of one species drift apart gradually.

But changes in chromosomes, particularly sex chromosomes, can interpose drastic barriers to reproduction. Mammals may be a good example. Comparisons of the sex chromosomes of the three major mammal groups show that there were two upheavals of sex chromosomes during mammal evolution.

The first corresponded to the divergence of monotreme mammals (platypus and echidna) from the rest, and the second to the divergence of marsupials from placental mammals (including humans).

In a paper published in BioEssays, I propose that drastic sex chromosome changes could have played a direct role in separating our lineage (placental mammals), first from the egg-laying monotremes, then from marsupials.

In humans and other placental mammals, such as mice, dogs and elephants, sex is determined by a pair of chromosomes. Females have two copies of the X while males have a single copy of the X and a small Y that contains the male-determining gene SRY.

Other vertebrate animals also have sex chromosomes, but they are different. Birds have an unrelated sex chromosome pair called ZW, and a different sex determining gene called DMRT1.

Snakes also have a ZW system, but again it is a different chromosome with different genes. Lizards and turtles, frogs and fish have all sorts of sex chromosomes that are different from the mammal system and from each other.
The rise and fall of sex chromosomes

Sex chromosomes are really weird because of the way they evolved. They start off as ordinary chromosomes, known as autosomes. A new sex gene arises on one member of the pair, defining either a male-determining Y as in humans or a female-determining W as in birds.

The acquisition of a sex factor on one member of the pair is the kiss of death for that chromosome, and it degrades quickly. This explains why only a few active genes remain on the human Y and the bird W.

When old sex chromosomes self-destruct, a new sex gene and sex chromosomes may take over. This is fraught with peril because the interaction of old and new systems of sex determination is likely to cause severe infertility in hybrids.

Rival sex genes may be at war with each other, causing intersexual development, or at least infertility. For instance, what will be the sex of a hybrid that has both a male-determining Y and a female-determining W?

Added to this are problems with gene dosage because the degenerate Y and the W have few genes. If an XY male mates with a ZW female, most of the progeny will be short of genes. There may also be problems with gene dosage because genes on the X and the Z are used to working harder to compensate for their single dosage.

Rearrangement of sex chromosomes with autosomes also causes severe infertility because half the reproductive cells of a hybrid will have too many, or too few, copies of the fused chromosome.

Such hybrid infertility poses a reproductive barrier between populations with the new and the old sex system. So could such barriers drive apart populations to form distinct species?


Reproductive barriers and new species

The idea that chromosome change could drive the formation of new species was popular 50 years ago.

But it was thoroughly dismissed by evolutionary geneticists in favour of the idea that speciation, the formation of new and distinct species, must occur in populations already separated by a physical barrier such as a river or mountains, or behaviour such as mating time, and occupied different environments.

Small mutations would accumulate slowly and the two populations would be selected for different traits. Eventually they would become so different that they could no longer mate with each other and would form two species. This allopatric speciation relied on external factors.

The alternate view, that sympatric speciation can happen within a population because of intrinsic genome changes, fell out of favour. Partly this was because it is hard to demonstrate speciation of populations sharing the same environment, the argument always being that the environment could be subtly different.

The other problem was imagining how a major chromosome change that occurred in one animal could spread to a whole population. Sex chromosome change is especially drastic because it directly affects reproduction. But our comparisons show that sex chromosomes have undergone dramatic changes throughout vertebrate evolution.

It is important to examine closely examples of evolutionary divergence that were accompanied by drastic sex chromosome change. Strangely, mammals may offer us a window into this evolutionary past. Their sex chromosomes are extremely stable, yet they have undergone rare dramatic changes, each of which lines up near when one lineage became two.
Sex chromosome change and mammal divergence

Placental mammals all share essentially the same XY. Marsupials, too, have XY chromosomes, but they are smaller; genes on the top bit of human X are on autosomes in marsupials.

Comparisons outside mammals shows that this bit was fused to ancient marsupial-like X and Y chromosomes before the different lines of placental mammals separated 105-million years ago.

Monotreme mammals (platypus and echidna) have bizarre multiple X and Y chromosomes. Surprisingly, comparing the genes they bear showed that they are completely unrelated to the XY of humans and marsupials. In fact, platypus sex chromosomes are related to bird sex chromosomes.

The human XY pair is represented by an ordinary chromosome in platypus. So our XY and SRY are quite young because they must have evolved after monotremes diverged from our lineage 190-million years ago.

Sex chromosome change has occurred very rarely in mammals, so it seems significant that each change corresponds to a major divergence. That’s why I propose that sex chromosome turnover separated monotremes from the rest of the mammals, and sex chromosome fusion occurred later to separate our lineage from marsupials.

Strengthening the argument that sex chromosome turnover begets speciation is evidence of a new round of sex chromosome change and speciation.

In Japan and eastern Europe, species in two rodent lineages have completely eliminated the Y chromosome and replaced SRYwith a different gene on a different chromosome. In each lineage the Y-less rodents have recently diverged into three species.

What does this mean for our own lineage? The primate Y seems to be more stable than the rodent Y. But if it continues to degrade at the same rate, it will disappear in about 4.6 million years.

Will it be replaced by some different gene and chromosome? And if so, will this unleash a new round of hominid speciation? We may have to wait another 4.6 million years to find out.

This article was originally published on www.TheConversation.com

Why Giant Dinosaurs Evolved Fancy Headwear?

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Dilophosaurus skull

Bony skull ornaments appeared in most rapidly growing species, new research suggests.

The biggest dinosaurs, including famous Tyrannosaurus rex, often sported crests and horns on their heads – and a new study says this correlation between size and horns may not be a coincidence.

A paper published in Nature Communications connects the evolution of ornamental head structures with an increase in body size across larger theropods – a group of two-legged land-dwelling dinosaurs.

Ornamental bone structures such as crests and horns have several functions in the animal kingdom, including attracting a mate, but the evolution of dinosaur ornaments isn’t well understood.

A US research team led by Terry Gates at North Carolina State University set out to track the enormous increases in body size throughout the evolution of some large dinosaurs, and the presence of these ornaments.

Their findings show that the bodies of dinosaurs with crests and horns increased at a faster rate than those without ornaments on their heads, suggesting a strong genetic link, and possibly shining a light on the habitats of these species.

“Our analysis finds a significantly positive correlation between large body mass and the evolution of osteological cranial ornamentation in theropod dinosaurs,” the researchers state in their paper.

This finding suggests that sexual preference and environment may have something to do with the enormity of these theropod species.

For instance, the researchers hypothesise, larger horned dinosaurs living in open habitats may have been more conspicuous in their environments, and sexually selected over time to increase in size.

This wasn’t the case for all dinosaurs, though.

The findings point to a size threshold for the development of ornamental horns.

Animals below a certain body mass did not develop head gear like their larger counterparts, and possibly stayed small in order to avoid predators in their open habitats.

The researchers acknowledge that their findings should be taken with a grain of salt, given their low sample size of 38 species, but the correlation between these two traits is a first-time find among reptile and bird species.

The research also points to a group of dinosaurs exempt from this rule. Feathered dinosaurs known as Maniraptoriformes, some of which had feathered crests, do not demonstrate this evolutionary link.

The researchers say future theropod discoveries will help to more accurately calculate the body mass threshold that impacts the development of size and horns, as well as any other potential genetic links.

Can we Really Clone Dinosaurs?

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Can we Really Clone Dinosaurs?

Everyone is once again asking, “Can we clone dinosaurs?” The answer is easy: No.

But there’s more to the story than just cloning.

DNA — deoxyribonucleic acid — holds the genetic code of all living things. The Jurassic Park idea is that an ancient mosquito will have dined on dino blood and then perhaps gotten trapped in tree resin, dying.

Millions of years later, we come across the mosquito and dino blood and then geneticists work their magic to extract the DNA from the mosquito’s last meal and rebuild the dinosaur who got annoyed by said mosquito (can you imagine the frustration a T-rex would have trying to swat a mosquito?). The thing is, it’s just that: magic.

Not to say that geneticists haven’t done some amazing things (think: cloning in general). It’s just that getting that dinosaur DNA is proving to be extremely difficult.

Scientists have actually tried to extract DNA from tree resin. A 2013 study by researchers at The University of Manchester found that extracting DNA from insects preserved in copal (tree resin) that was between 60 to 10,600 years old, failed to yield any DNA at all from the insects themselves.

The problem is that the resin is highly porous on a molecular level, allowing gases to travel in and out. Any DNA that once existed would be completely degraded.

As for extracting DNA from fossils, scientists say that that, too, is impossible as DNA doesn’t survive the processes of fossilization. The bones essentially turn to stone with organics being replaced with minerals.

But that doesn’t stop the public fascination with bringing these creatures back from the past.

“Someone summarized it as, they’re big, fierce and extinct,” said Donald Henderson, Curator of Dinosaurs at the Royal Tyrrell Museum in Alberta. “So they’re monsters that really lived, but they’re safely away from us.”

And their sheer size is perhaps another reason.

But should scientists be trying to recreate beasts that went extinct? Could they be playing with fire (have they not seen Jurassic Park?)?

What is Paleontology?

Saturday, November 19, 2016

Because paleontologists are interested in finding out about all life on earth, they study all kinds of fossils, not just dinosaur bones. There are many different types of paleontologists. Some study fossil plants, some study fossil fish, some study fossil mammals, and some study dinosaurs. Pick a type of fossil and there’s bound to be a paleontologist that studies that type of fossil.

Paleontology is a combination of Geology (study of rocks) and Biology (Study of Life). Paleontologists also use many other types of sciences to help them understand the past. For example, they used engineering to figure out how hard a Tyrannosaurus Rex bites.

There are two main types of science: Historical science, and experimental science. In experimental science, scientists come up with a hypothesis (an idea you can test) and conduct experiments to see if they can disprove their idea. If they can’t disprove the hypothesis and other scientists can’t find experiments that disprove the hypothesis, the hypothesis becomes a scientific theory.

In historical science, scientists work a little bit differently. They come up with a hypothesis, but rather than conduct experiments to disprove the hypothesis, they go out and try to find evidence that supports the hypothesis. If enough evidence is found to support the hypothesis, the hypothesis is accepted as a scientific theory. Paleontology is a historical science.

The History Of Paleontology

Saturday, November 19, 2016

The History Of Paleontology

Some of the earliest attempts of using fossils in a scientific way come from China and Ancient Greece. The Chinese naturalist, Shen Kou, used bamboo fossils to show climate changes. He found fossilized bamboo in places that, at his time, were too dry for bamboo to live. An even earlier Greek philosopher, Xenophanes, found fossilized sea shells on dry land, concluding that the dry land must have been covered by water at some time.

In the 1800’s there was a worldwide interest in geology and paleontology. This interest was sparked by two men, Charles Marsh and Edward Cope, who were responsible for discovering 142 species of dinosaurs. Both Marsh and Cope were wealthy, and used their personal wealth and influence to find dinosaur bones. Somehow, the two men got into a personal feud to see who could discover more dinosaurs. They even went as far as stealing the other’s bones, and spying to get ahead. People called Marsh’s and Cope’s feud the Great Bone War. The two men and their assistants would discover enough dinosaur bones to keep paleontologists working for several decades.

They also discovered the Morrison Formation. The Morrison Formation is a layer of rock that holds more Jurassic dinosaur bones than any other formation in North America. Years after the bone wars, people got tired of looking for dinosaurs. It wasn’t until the 1960’s when scientists uncovered new facts about dinosaurs, and people’s interest began to grow again.