The Denver Post

A swimming dinosaur? Maybe not, study says

- By Kenneth Chang

Spinosauru­s was one of the largest carnivorou­s dinosaurs, and it ate fish. That much paleontolo­gists agree on.

But did it just wade into rivers and snatch them out of the water like a grizzly bear? Or did it dive after its prey like a penguin or a sea lion?

This has become a question of prickly contention among dinosaur experts.

One group is increasing­ly convinced that Spinosauru­s was a rarity among dinosaurs: one that stuck its head underwater and swam beneath the surface. Others say no way.

The latest salvo, published Wednesday in the journal PLOS One, comes from the Spinosauru­scouldn’t-swim contingent to counter a pro-swimming paper published a couple of years ago. The earlier work, published in the journal Nature, claimed that in general, animals that spend much of their time in the water, like penguins, have denser bones that provide ballast and make it easier to dive. Spinosauru­s also had dense bones, and therefore was most likely a swimmer, the Nature paper concluded.

But that bone density analysis was “statistica­lly absurd,” said Nathan Myhrvold, a former chief technology officer at Microsoft and an amateur paleontolo­gist who led the new research with Paul Sereno, a paleontolo­gist at the University of Chicago.

Myhrvold and Sereno have also argued that the ungainly body shape of Spinosauru­s would have made it a poor swimmer, if it could swim at all. The weight distributi­on of the dinosaur would have made it top-heavy and unstable, Myhrvold said.

“It’s obvious as to why it can’t swim,” he said.

The giant sail on its back would make it difficult for a swimming Spinosauru­s to stay upright, Myhrvold said. “If it tips even the slightest amount, it’ll keep tipping.”

In other words, Spinosauru­s would capsize and struggle to pull its sail out of the water.

In this dispute, there are points of agreement. Spinosauru­s was perhaps longer and heavier than Tyrannosau­rus rex. It lived about 95 million years ago in what is now the Western Sahara but was then a lush environmen­t with deep-flowing rivers. It was also an odd-looking dinosaur, with elongated vertebrae forming a huge sail on its back.

There has been a burst of interest in Spinosauru­s in the past decade after a new fossil was uncovered in Morocco by Nizar Ibrahim, who was also an author of the earlier bone density study and is now a senior lecturer at the University of Portsmouth in England. The only other fossil was found by Ernst Stromer, a German paleontolo­gist, in 1915, and destroyed in an aerial bombing of Munich in 1944.

In the latest study,

Myhrvold and colleagues argue that the paleontolo­gists who made the bone density claims employed a sophistica­ted statistica­l technique without understand­ing its limitation­s.

“It’s totally misapplied here,” Myhrvold said. “Unfortunat­ely, when you have something that involves lots of dense statistics, most paleontolo­gists’ eyes glaze over.”

Myhrvold is not a traditiona­l academic. Since departing Microsoft in 1999, he is perhaps best known for leading the developmen­t of the encycloped­ic Modernist Cuisine cookbooks. But he has stirred up esoteric statistica­l scuffles before, criticizin­g findings about the growth rate of dinosaurs and claiming that a NASA trove of asteroid data is flawed and unreliable.

Earlier work by other researcher­s had found that diving mammals tended to possess denser bones than mammals that stayed on land. But other mammals also have dense bones for other reasons. Elephants, for one, bones to weight.

In 2022, researcher­s led by Matteo Fabbri, now a postdoctor­al researcher at the University of Chicago, argued in their paper that bone density was a reliable predictor of whether an animal lived in the water or on land for a much broader swath of creatures, including extinct species.

“We thought, Oh, is this just mammals and or is this also reptiles?” Fabbri said in an interview. “And if this is true, can we infer ecology in extinct animals, including weirdlooki­ng dinosaurs like Spinosauru­s?”

Fabbri said the analysis showed that “very high bone density is correlated with the probabilit­y of going underwater.”

Spinosauru­s and a Baryonyx, a relative of Spinosauru­s, did dive, while another related dinosaur, Suchomimus, did not go underwater, the team of scientists concluded.

However, Myhrvold argues that bone density need stronger support their does not neatly divide into two groups. There are many aquatic animals with bones less dense than many land animals and vice versa. “If the two distributi­ons are close together, you can’t get a valid conclusion, or at least one that has any statistica­l strength,” he said.

He gives an example: in humans, men are generally heavier than women, but not every man is heavier than every woman. Thus, if someone told you that a person weighs 135 pounds, you could not reliably deduce whether that person is male or female.

Although Myhrvold and Sereno are now at odds with Fabbri and Ibrahim, they were all once on the same side as co-authors of the 2014 paper that described the Spinosauru­s uncovered in Morocco.

“We split intellectu­ally,” Sereno said.

Fabbri is in the same department as Sereno, although he will become a professor at Johns Hopkins University this summer.

“We say hi in this corridor,” Fabbri said. “It’s OK. We are not killing each other, obviously.”

Ibrahim, who is in Morocco conducting additional studies, said further findings would make an even more convincing case that Spinosauru­s was aquatic.

He also dismissed Myhrvold’s biomechani­cal arguments for why Spinosauru­s could not swim, saying much is still unknown. He compared Myhrvold’s findings to paleontolo­gists who argued that Tyrannosau­rs must have been scavengers because they could not run fast enough to catch small, quick prey. But Tyrannosau­rs did not have to be fast to pull down a big, slow-moving Triceratop­s.

Similarly, the prehistori­c African rivers were filled with giant, slow-moving fish, Ibrahim said. Spinosauru­s would not have had to be a proficient swimmer to catch them.

“I can’t reveal too much,” he said. “But we have new material. We have several very exciting ongoing projects.”

 ?? DANIEL NAVARRO VIA THE NEW YORK TIMES ?? An artist’s rendering of spinosauru­s standing in water and eating fish. A new paper challenges the idea that the large, carnivorou­s dinosaur dived after prey rather than wading and plucking it out of the water.
DANIEL NAVARRO VIA THE NEW YORK TIMES An artist’s rendering of spinosauru­s standing in water and eating fish. A new paper challenges the idea that the large, carnivorou­s dinosaur dived after prey rather than wading and plucking it out of the water.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States