A History of Horror 3: The Phantom of the Opera (1925)

Whilst the Germans were making artistic horror films like Caligari and Nosferatu, an American studio, Universal Pictures, decided they would have a go. And so they made The Phantom of the Opera in 1925, directed by Rupert Julian and based on the 1910 novel of the same name by Gaston Leroux. 

Plot: The Paris Opera House is haunted by a phantom Erik (played by Lon Chaney) who has developed an obsession with new, rising starlet Christine (played by Mary Philbin). Unfortunately for Erik, Christine's boyfriend Raoul (played by Norman Kerry) doesn't want to share her with the undead. What lengths will Erik go to get the girl?

My thoughts: I found the film to be "meh". The story is a good one and the characters are decent but the pacing is much too slow for my liking. However, it proved to be a huge success at the time of its release and it gave Universal the opportunity to make the classic horror movies of the 1930s and 40s like Frankenstein (1931), Dracula (1931), The Mummy (1932) and The Wolf Man (1941).

There have been many other adaptations of The Phantom of the Opera, the most famous of which is Andrew Lloyd Webber's musical version. Next time, we will look at a movie with a split personality.

See also:
More horror

Heads Up 2!

I've got more dino heads for you guys to look at!

First is Ouranosaurus (Monitor Lizard) (Taquet, 1976). As you can see, there is no flamboyant crest or horns, but there is a bump between the eyes. It has a flattened beak, however it is not a duckbill, being closer to more basal hadrosauriformes like Iguanodon (Mantell, 1825). Ouranosaurus possessed cheek pouches which it used to hold food while chewing, similar to modern-day hamsters. The skull measured 55cm from the tip of the snout to the back of the skull.

Next is Corythosaurus (Helmeted Lizard) (Brown, 1914). Unlike Ouranosaurus, Corythosaurus is a hadrosaur or duck-billed dinosaur. The crest on its head was probably used as a mating display. It was also hollow so it probably made loud noises with it as well to communicate over long distances. The skull was 55cm from the tip of the snout to the back of the head.

Thirdly, we have another hadrosaur, Parasaurolophus (Near Saurolophus) (Parks, 1922). The most obvious feature of this dinosaur's skull is the long, hollow crest that was probably used to make sounds. Like Ouranosaurus, Parasaurolophus had large cheek pouches for holding food whilst chewing. The skull measured 1.25 m from the tip of the snout to the end of the crest.

Finally, for a change of pace, we have the ceratopsian Triceratops (Three-Horned Face) (Marsh, 1889). As is very clear, Triceratops had one horn on its nose and two above its eyes, probably used for display rather than defence. The beak was parrot-like and was used to slice up tough vegetation. The neck frill was surrounded by knobs of bone, the frill was probably brightly coloured. The skull was 1.8m from the tip of the snout to the back of the frill.

So, four more dinosaurs, four different skulls. Next time, we will look at what happens to fossils when they get back to the lab.

See also:
More dinosaurs
Dinosaur anatomy
More dinosaur anatomy
Heads Up 1

References
Brown, B. (1914) 'Corythosaurus casuarius, a new crested dinosaur from the Belly River Cretaceous: With Provisional classification of the family Trachodontidae', Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 33 (35)

Mantell, G. (1825) 'Notice on the Iguanodon, a newly discovered fossil reptile, from the sandstone of Tilgate forest, in Sussex', Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 115, pp. 179-186

Marsh, O. (1889) 'Notice of gigantic horned Dinosauria from the Cretaceous', American Journal of Science, 38, pp. 173-175

Parks, W. (1922) 'Parasaurolophus walkeri, a new genus and species of crested trachodont dinosaur', University of Toronto Studies, Geology Series, 13, pp. 1-32

Taquet, P. (1976) Geologie et paleontologie du gisement de Gadoufaoua (Aptien du Niger), Paris: C.N.R.S.

A History of Horror 2: Nosferatu (1922) and Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)

We stick with silent German cinema with Nosferatu from 1922, directed by F. W. Murnau and based on Dracula (1893) by Bram Stoker.

Plot
Thomas Hutter (played by Gustav von Wangenheim) travels to the Carpathian Mountains in Transylvania, Romania, on orders from his employer Knock (played by Alexander Granach), to visit a new client Count Orlok (played by Max Schreck). The locals are uncooperative and fearful and urge Hutter to return home. Hutter, the fool that he is, is undeterred and continues his journey in a black coach that mysterious appears. At Orlok's castle, Hutter meets the count and Orlok signs documents to purchase the house next door to Hutter's. Hutter is pleased that he has made a sale but he's not so sure about Orlok. Why did he try to lick Hutter's blood after he cut his thumb? Where did those bite marks on his neck come from? And why does Orlok like to sleep in coffins?

My thoughts: Good film that like Caligari produces an effective creepy atmosphere. Slower than Caligari, however, so those of you with little patience may want to give this one a miss.

The film producers were not able to obtain the rights to the novel Dracula from Stoker's widow, Florence but they went ahead with the film anyway, changing the characters' names. When Florence found out, she sued the studio, which lost, and the courts demanded that every copy of the film be destroyed, however, one copy did survive and it is from this that all surviving copies have been made from. Some versions keep the original names, whereas others change Orlok to Dracula and Hutter to Harking etc.

An interesting spin-off film was released in 2000 Shadow of the Vampire which is a fictionalised look at the making of Nosferatu, with the twist that Max Schreck was a real vampire. I haven't seen it yet so I'm not going to comment any further. Just like with Caligari, a sound remake was made...

In 1979, a sound remake was produced directed by Werner Herzog. 

Plot

Exactly the same as the original.

My thoughts: Good attempt. Better than the Caligari remake but still not fantastic. It does, however, do a better job of conveying a despairing atmosphere than the original but unfortunately this can make the film bland and expressionless.

Next time, we'll take a trip over the pond and see what Hollywood was up to during the 20s.

See also:
More horror
Universal's Dracula series

Jurassic Park Part 3: Dilophosaurus

Now we come to the final part of the Jurassic Park series, ending with perhaps the most controversial aspect of the movie: the depiction of the Dilophosaurus (Welles, 1970). Namely, this will involve examining Dilophosaurus' size and whether it possessed a frill and venom.

In the movie, Dilophosaurus is depicted as being about 91 cm high and 1.5 m long (Shay and Duncan, 1993). In reality, however, Dilophosaurus was larger, measuring up to 7 m long and perhaps weighing up to a ton (Holtz, 2012). Interesting that, in the movie, Velociraptor was depicted to be larger and Dilophosaurus smaller.

 

(Segisaurus)

In the movie, Dilophosaurus was depicted as having a frill. Whilst there is no evidence that Dilophosaurus possessed such a feature, it has been proposed for one of its relatives, Segisaurus (Camp, 1936). Charles Camp believed Segisaurus had a small frill along each side of its neck to make the animal more aerodynamic as it ran. This later turned out to be an error.

(Sinornithosaurus)

Venom is another aspect of Jurassic Park's Dilophosaurus that the real thing didn't have. Again, however, it has been proposed for a relative, in this case the dromaeosaurid ("raptor") Sinornithosaurus (Xu et al., 1999). This claim was made based on grooves found on the teeth and cavities in the jaws that were interpreted as being venom glands (Gong et al., 2009). However, another study could find no evidence of these supposed venom glands (Gianechini et al., 2011). The debate continues with some agreeing and disagreeing with the two studies. 

So, actually, other than the size of Dilophosaurus, its depiction in Jurassic Park is not entirely unfounded. Fanciful maybe, but still plausible. Next time, we'll look at some more dinosaur heads.

See also:
More dinosaurs
Jurassic Park Part 1

References
Camp, C. 'A new type of small bipedal dinosaur from the Navajo sandstone of Arizona', University of California Publications in Geological Sciences, 24 (2), pp. 39-56

Gianechini, F., Agnolin, F. and Ezcurra, M. (2011) 'A reassessment of the purported venom delivery system of the bird-like raptor Sinornithosaurus', Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 85 (1), pp. 103-107

Gong, E., Martin, L., Burnham, D. and Falk, A. (2009) 'The birdlike raptor Sinornithosaurus was venomous', Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107 (2), pp. 766-768

Holtz, T. (2012) Dinosaurs: The Most Complete Up-to-Date Encyclopedia for Dinosaur Lovers of All Ages, New York City: Random House

Shay, D. and Duncan, J. (1993) The Making of Jurassic Park, London: Boxtree Ltd

Welles, S. (1970) 'Dilophosaurus (Reptilia, Saurischia), a new name for a dinosaur', Journal of Paleontology, 57, p. 407

Xu, X., Wang, X-L, and Wu, X-C. (1999) 'A dromaeosaurid dinosaur with a filamentous integument from the Yixian Formation of China', Nature, 401, pp. 262-266

A History of Horror 1: The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (2005)

Time for something completely different. This will be the first part of a history of horror films from the 1890s to the present day. These will not be reviews as such, though I will be giving my opinions on each. It will examine some of the key horror movies and franchises from the good ones to the....not-so-good ones. There may even be some fantasy and sci-fi included as well. Whilst I will try to keep them spoiler-free, I cannot guarantee it. With that being said, let's move onto some somnambulism...

We start our journey in the silent era in 1920 with the release of the German film The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, directed by Robert Wiene and based on a screenplay by Hans Janowitz and Carl Mayer. 

Plot

The film starts with Francis (played by Friedrich Fehér) telling a story about himself and his fiancé Jane (played by Lil Dagover). Within this story, Francis, Jane and their friend Alan (played by Hans von Twardowski) visit a carnival. There they encounter the mysterious Dr. Caligari (played by Werner Krause) and quiet sleepwalker Cesare (played by Conrad Weidt) who can predict the future. Alan, who thinks it's all a bunch of hoohah, asks Cesare when he will die. Cesare answers tomorrow. Francis and Jane get creeped out by this and want to go back home but Alan, being the blithering idiot that he is, still thinks it's all one big joke...until his dead body is found the following morning. Francis and Jane are convinced Caligari and Cesare are involved and decide to investigate, where they discover that all is not what it seems...

Although this wasn't the earliest horror film, it is often regarded as being the first true, serious horror movie. Horror up to this point wasn't taken very seriously and treated like a pantomime - more to entertain and make people laugh than to scare them. It also introduced the idea of a twist ending to cinema, although this came about by mistake. The producers ordered the filmmakers to change the original ending to make it less scary. The visual style is very expressionist and surreal, with slanted and pointed angles and clever use of shadows and contrasts. The movie is in the public domain meaning anyone can watch it for free, just type it into youtube.

My thoughts: Good film. I like the sinister atmosphere it creates and Werner Krause is brilliant as Caligari.

An apparent sequel was made in 1989 Dr. Caligari but I haven't seen it yet so I won't comment on it. Instead we will fast forward 85 years to...

2005's The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, a sound remake of the original directed by David Lee Fisher.

Plot

The film follows the same story as the original with no major changes except with the addition of dialogue and different actors: Judson Pearce Morgan as Francis, Daamen J. Krall as Caligari, Doug Jones as Cesare, Lauren Birkell as Jane and Neil Hopkins as Allen.

It was initially shown at the Screamfest Film Festival in October 2005 where it won some awards, notably one for special effects because they greenscreened the background from the original behind the actors (personally I don't think that was particularly award-worthy - if anything, I think it's lazy).

My thoughts: I didn't really like this one. It felt empty compared to the original with little emotion being shown by the actors, dialogue taken word-for-word from the original which doesn't work in a talkie, and annoying facial shots. It was too "arty" for me.

Next time we will look at the first Dracula movie...well, sort of...

See also:

More horror

Age of the Dinosaurs

The period of time that the dinosaurs lived in is called the Mesozoic (Middle Life) Era. It started after the great mass extinction at the end of the Permian that wiped out 90% of marine and 70 % of terrestrial life on Earth, 252.2 million years ago (Benton, 2005). The era is split into three periods: the Triassic (252.2-201.3 MYA), the Jurassic (201.3-145 MYA) and the Cretaceous (145-66 MYA). The era ended with the mass extinction that wiped out the non-avian dinosaurs as well as other large prehistoric reptiles like the pterosaurs and the mosasaurs. In this post, we will look at an overview of the three periods.

Dinosaurs appeared towards the end of the Triassic. The world was very different to today. There were forests of conifers, cycads and horsetails that grew near water. Ferns grew over the ground. There was no grass and no flowering plants. Early crocodiles such as Protosuchus (First Crocodile) (Brown, 1934) lived mostly on land. Mammals appeared but they were small and insignificant at this point. Bizarre lizard-like reptiles like Kuehneosaurus (Kuehn's Lizard) (Robinson, 1962) glided from branch to branch chasing insects. Other lizard-like reptiles like Clevosaurus (Gloucestershire Lizard) (Swinton, 1939) scurried along the ground. Dinosaurs of this time were primitive and precursors to the later, more famous descendants, for example, Plateosaurus (Flat Lizard) (Meyer, 1837) was an ancestor of the great sauropods and Procompsognathus (Before Delicate Jaw) (Fraas, 1913) paved the way for the awe-inspiring carnivorous theropods.

The Jurassic is when things really got exciting. The giant sauropod dinosaurs such as Apatosaurus (Deceptive Lizard) (Marsh, 1877) and Brachiosaurus (Arm Lizard) (Riggs, 1903) were the dominant herbivores. The earliest birds, such as Archaeopteryx (Ancient Wing) (Meyer, 1861) evolved. The earliest described dinosaur Megalosaurus (Great Lizard) (Buckland, 1824) attacked the peaceful plant-eaters such as the early stegosaur Dacentrurus (Spiky Tail) (Lucas, 1902). Conifers, cycads, horsetails and tree ferns were some of the plants that grew at the time and were eaten by dinosaurs like Cetiosaurus (Whale Lizard) (Owen, 1842). Pterosaurs such as Rhamphocephalus (Beak Head) (Seeley, 1880) soared overhead. Mammals were still relatively small and insignificant.

The Cretaceous is when the dinosaurs reached their heyday. Whilst ferns, horsetails, conifers and cycads continued to dominate the landscape, the first flowering plants such as magnolias and roses flourished. The giant sauropods declined as bigger, badder predators such as Tyrannosaurus (Tyrant Lizard) (Osborn, 1905) and Albertosaurus (Alberta Lizard) (Osborn, 1905) appeared and were replaced with ornithopods like Iguanodon (Iguana Tooth) (Mantell, 1825). Birds, the only dinosaurs to survive to the present day, diversified during the Cretaceous, sharing the skies with giant toothless pterosaurs. Well-known dinosaurs like Triceratops (Three-Horned Face) (Marsh, 1889) lived alongside large herds of hadrosaurs like Corythosaurus (Helmeted Lizard) (Brown, 1914) and Parasaurolophus (Near Lizard Crest) (Parks, 1922). Fast-running meat-eaters like Troodon (Wounding Tooth) (Leidy, 1856) emerged. Mammals became bigger, about the size of a badger, and became dangerous - with one Repenomamus (Reptile Mammal) (Li et al., 2000) known to have eaten dinosaurs! (Hu et al., 2005)

And that is a very basic outline of the Mesozoic Era. Next time, we'll take a look at the landscape of Earth during this time. However, coming up next will be something completely unrelated to dinosaurs. 

See also:
More dinosaurs
Geochronology
Life before the Dinosaurs

References
Benton, M. (2005) When Life Nearly Died: The Greatest Mass Extinction of all Time, London: Thames and Hudson

Brown, B. (1914) 'Corythosaurus casuarius, a new crested dinosaur from the Belly River Cretaceous, with provisional classification of the family Trachodontidae', Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 33, pp. 559-565

Brown, B. (1934) 'A change of names', Science, 79 (2039), p. 80

Buckland, W. (1824) 'Notice on the Megalosaurus or great Fossil Lizard of Stonesfield', Transactions of the Geological Society of London, 2 (1), pp. 390-396

Fraas, E. (1913) 'Die neuesten Dinosaurierfunde in der schwäbischen Trias [The newest dinosaur finds in the Swabian Trias]', Naturwissenschaften, 1 (45), pp. 1097-1100

Hu, Y., Meng, J., Wang, Y. and Li, C. (2005) 'Large Mesozoic mammals fed on young dinosaurs', Nature, 433 (7022), pp. 149-152

Leidy, J. (1856) 'Notice of remains of extinct reptiles and fishes, discovered by Dr. F. V. Hayden in the badlands of the Judith River, Nebraska Territory', Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 8, pp. 72-73

Li, J., Wang, Y., Wang, Y. and Li, C. (2000) 'A new family of primitive mammal from the Mesozoic of western Liaoning, China', Chinese Science Bulletin, 46 (9), pp. 782-785

Lucas, F. (1902) 'Paleontological notes. The generic name Omosaurus: A new generic name for Stegosaurus marshi', Science, 16 (402), p. 435

Mantell, G. (1825) 'Notice on the Iguanodon, a newly discovered fossil reptile, from the sandstone of Tilgate forest, in Sussex', Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 115, pp. 179-186

Marsh, O. (1877) 'Notice on some new dinosaurian reptiles from the Jurassic Formation', American Journal of Science, 3 (14), pp. 514-516

Marsh, O. (1889) 'Notice of gigantic horned Dinosauria from the Cretaceous', American Journal of Science, 38, pp. 173-175

Meyer, H. (1837) 'Mittheilungen, an Professor Bronn gerichtet [Communications, sent to Professor Bronn], Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geognosie, Geologie und Petrefaktenkunde, 1837, pp. 314-317

Meyer, H. (1861) Archaeopteryx litographica (Vogel-Feder) und Pterodactylus von Solenhofen

Osborn, H. (1905) 'Tyrannosaurus and other Cretaceous carnivorous dinosaurs', Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 21 (14), pp. 259-265

Owen, R. (1842) 'Report on British Fossil reptiles, Pt. II', Reports of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 11, pp. 60-204

Parks, W. (1922) 'Parasaurolophus walkeri, a new genus and species of crested trachodont dinosaur', University of Toronto Studies, Geology Series, 13, pp. 1-12

Riggs, E. (1903) 'Brachiosaurus altithorax, the largest known dinosaur', American Journal of Science, 4 (15), pp. 299-306

Robinson, P. (1962) 'Gliding lizards from the upper Keuper of Great Britain', Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, 1601, pp. 137-146

Seeley, H. (1880) 'On the Rhamphocephalus prestwichi, Seeley, an ornithosaurian from the Stonesfield Slate of Kineton', Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 36, pp. 27-30

Swinton, W. (1939) 'A new Triassic rhynchocephalian from Gloucestershire', Annals and Magazine of Natural History: Zoology, Biology and Geology, 4, pp. 591-594

Tyrannosaurus rex Part 3: Taxonomy

As we already know, Tyrannosaurus rex was described in 1905 by Henry Fairfield Osborn (Osborn, 1905). Since then, Tyrannosaurus rex has gone through a great deal of change. Today we will look at some other dinosaurs that have, at one time or another, been regarded as the same as Tyrannosaurus rex.

1. Dynamosaurus imperiosus
The first of these synonyms is Dynamosaurus imperiosus (Imperial Powerful Lizard). This species was also described by Osborn (1905). Osborn distinguished Dynamosaurus based on the number and shape of the teeth and by the presence of dermal plates (in other words, armour), which would have been very exciting if that were true. However, after finding more material of both Tyrannosaurus and Dynamosaurus, Osborn realised they were the same thing (Osborn, 1906). Because Tyrannosaurus and Dynamosaurus were named at the same time, Osborn had the choice of which name to use and he went with Tyrannosaurus (in some alternate reality somewhere, Dynamosaurus is the most well-known dinosaur and Tyrannosaurus would be an obscure name known only to enthusiasts). The armour plating has subsequently been discovered to have come from an Ankylosaurus (Brown, 1908) by Kenneth Carpenter (2004).

2. Tarbosaurus bataar
The next major synonym is Tarbosaurus bataar (Warrior Alarming Lizard). This species was described by the Russian palaeontologist Evgeny Maleev in 1955 (Maleev, 1955a), who originally named it as a second species of Tyrannosaurus. Maleev distinguished bataar from rex by the number of teeth and the shape of its snout. Then, in 1965, another Russian palaeontologist, Anatoly Rozhdestvensky transferred the species to the genus Tarbosaurus (which was also named by Maleev (1955b)) (Rozhdestvensky, 1965). Since then, bataar has bounced from Tyrannosaurus to Tarbosaurus. Personally, I regard it as being separate from Tyrannosaurus rex but we'll look at this in more detail another day (it gets more complicated because Maleev already had a species within Tarbosaurus, Tarbosaurus efremovi, which is probably the same as bataar but maybe not).

3. Manospondylus gigas
OK, this is where things get complicated. Manospondylus gigas (Giant Porous Vertebra) was described by Edward Cope in 1892, initially as an 'agathaumid', which for our purposes is a ceratopsid (think Triceratops, etc.) (Cope, 1892). It is known only from two backbones. John Hatcher compared the backbones (of which he could only find one) to other dinosaurs from the same time and place. He noticed that the fossil was very similar to the vertebrae found in the theropod Dryptosaurus (Marsh, 1877). This convinced Hatcher that Manospondylus was a type of theropod and not a ceratopsian (Hatcher, 1907). Then, ten years later, Osborn made the observation that Cope's description and drawings of the specimen (which by this point had completely vanished) matched very well with Tyrannosaurus. However, due to the obscure nature of Manospondylus, Osborn refrained from synonymising the two. Then, nothing was heard about it until 2000 when new tyrannosaur material was discovered at Sioux Falls, South Dakota, the apparent locality where the Manospondylus fossils were discovered (the actual location is not known because Cope didn't include that information in his description but he did tell Hatcher about it before he wrote his paper). This new material included not only the dorsal vertebrae (backbones) but also ribs, jaw bones and parts of the skull. This material matched that of Manospondylus and also Tyrannosaurus (Anonymous, 2000). If this is accepted then we have a problem. Manospondylus predates Tyrannosaurus and therefore, technically, is the correct name. However, there is a rule within the ICZN (the list of conventions regarding animal names) that states that if the older name was published before 1899 and has not been regarded as a valid name in the 50 years after its original description in at least 25 publications by at least 10 authors, then the older name can be suppressed in favour of the younger name (Ride, 1999). Since Manospondylus fits this, as the only authors to mention it have been Hatcher and Osborn, Tyrannosaurus is safe for now (so long as the rules don't change).

4. Tyrannosaurus lancensis
Oh this guy. Tyrannosaurus lancensis (Tyrant Lizard from Lance), or Lance as I call him, has been, and continues to be, a headache. No-one can agree on what the specimen constitutes. It was originally described as a species of Gorgosaurus (Lambe, 1914) by Charles Gilmore (Gilmore, 1946). When Dale Russell synonymised Gorgosaurus with Albertosaurus (Osborn, 1905) he transferred lancensis over (Russell, 1970). Then in 1988, Robert Bakker, Michael Williams and Phil Currie gave Lance a new generic name: Nanotyrannus (Dwarf Tyrant) (Bakker et al., 1988). It was then considered a juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex by Thomas Carr (Carr, 1999). However, Currie still maintains lancensis is a distinct species from rex (though he is not sure if should be in a separate genus anymore) (Currie, 2003). So we now have three choices: regard it as being a juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex, a distinct species within Tyrannosaurus as Tyrannosaurus lancensis (which is what I have gone for) or treat it as a separate genus Nanotyrannus lancensis. Bakker, Currie and Greg Larson are supposedly working on a paper that will help to clarify the situation but as nothing has been heard about it since 2005 I suspect they've given up on it. Expect to hear more from Lance in the future.

5. Albertosaurus megagracilis
I don't know much about this one. The skeleton the species is based on, LACM 23845, was discovered in the Hell Creek Formation of Montana in 1967. It was initially believed to be a juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex. Then, in 1980, Ralph Molnar described the specimen as an individual of Albertosaurus lancensis (see above) (Molnar, 1980). Gregory Paul disagreed and named it as new species Albertosaurus "megagracilis" (Great Gracile Alberta Lizard) (Paul, 1988) (He only named it - he provided no description or any reason as to why it should be a distinct species - but palaeontologists still used the name). George Olshevsky placed the species in a new genus Dinotyrannus (Terrible Tyrant) (Olshevsky, 1995), using much of Molnar's original description. Finally, in 2004, Thomas Carr and Thomas Williamson re-examined the specimen and realised that Molnar had got a lot wrong, such as not recognising some features as being the result of damage, other features being entirely absent and misidentifying some bones. In their opinion, Dinotyrannus megagracilis was just a subadult Tyrannosaurus rex (Carr and Williamson, 2004) and everyone has agreed since.

6. Aublysodon molnari
This species has a similar story to megagracilis. The specimen, know as the Jordan Theropod was discovered in 1966 in the Hell Creek Formation of Montana and comprised a partial theropod snout. This was described by Ralph Molnar who thought it was a dromaeosaurid ("raptor") (Molnar, 1978). Next, Phil Currie disagreed and believed it was actually a tyrannosaur, probably within the genus Aublysodon (Backwards-Flowing Tooth) (Leidy, 1868, Currie, 1987). Gregory Paul went one step further and named it as a new species Aublysodon molnari (Molnar's Backwards-Flowing Tooth) (Paul, 1988) (Actually, he initially misspelled it as molnaris but he later corrected it (Paul, 1990)). However, Molnar and Kenneth Carpenter disagreed, instead believing it to be a specimen of Aublysodon mirandus (Leidy, 1868) because the teeth of the two species were identical (Molnar and Carpenter, 1989). Then George Olshevsky gave it its own generic name Stygivenator (Styx Hunter - the Styx was a river in the Greek Underworld and is a reference to the Hell Creek Formation) (Olshevsky, 1995). Stygivenator was said to be unique based on the narrowness of the snout and teeth. And everything was fine and dandy...but not for long! The two Toms (Carr and Williamson) were doubtful about its uniqueness and noted that it was very similar to a number of juvenile tyrannosaurs (Carr and Williamson, 2000). Then, another Tom, Thomas Holtz, regarded Stygivenator as being a close relative of another obscure tyrannosaur Alectrosaurus (Unmarried Lizard) (Gilmore, 1933, Holtz, 2001). Unfortunately, Alectrosaurus at that time was actually a chimaera, being composed of at least two different tyrannosaurs so this should be taken with a pinch of salt. Finally, Carr and Williamson (2004) showed that most of the unique characters of Stygivenator were either wrong or not unique, and that it in fact represented a juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex. Others have since agreed with that except Olshevsky.

7. Aublysodon amplus and Aublysodon cristatus
These two species were both described by Othniel Marsh in 1892 from the Lance Formation of Wyoming. Aublysodon amplus (Ample Backwards-Flowing Tooth) was based on teeth that had small serrations on their edges with narrow ridges at the rear. Aublysodon cristatus (Crested Backwards-Flowing Tooth) is also based on teeth which have no serrations and a sharp ridge at the rear (Marsh, 1892). Their small size and little to no serrations prompted Phil Currie to identify them as being juvenile tyrannosaur teeth (Currie, 2003) but juveniles of which tyrannosaur is the big question. Based on time and place they most likely belong to Tyrannosaurus rex but they are also indistinguishable from Daspletosaurus (Frightful Lizard) (Russell, 1970) and so their identity will remain unresolved.

And those are the all the synonyms of Tyrannosaurus rex. Next time will be the final part (I promise) looking at the biology of rex such as sexual dimorphism, posture, the role of the short arms etc. The next blog post, however, will take a brief look at the Mesozoic Era - the Age of the Dinosaurs.

See also:
More dinosaurs
Tyrannosaurus rex Part 4

References
Anonymous (2000), 'New Discovery may endanger T-Rex's name' [Online], url: http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/technology/new-discovery-may-endanger-t-rex-s-name-1.40212#.UlLJ29KbNHU, Accessed on: 07/09/2013

Bakker, R., Williams, M., and Currie, P. (1988) 'Nanotyrannus, a new genus of pygmy tyrannosaur, from the latest Cretaceous of Montana', Hunteria, 1 (15), pp. 1-30

Brown, B. (1908) 'The Ankylosauridae, a new family of armored dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous', Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 24, pp. 187-201

Carpenter, K. (2004) 'Redescription of Ankylosaurus magniventris Brown 1908 (Ankylosauridae) from the Upper Cretaceous of the Western Interior of North America', Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 41, pp. 961-986

Carr, T. (1999) 'Craniofacial ontogeny in Tyrannosauridae (Dinosauria, Theropoda)', Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 19, pp. 497-520 

Carr, T. and Williamson, T. (2000) 'A review of Trannosauridae (Dinosauria: Coelurosauria) from New Mexico' in Lucas, S. and Heckert, A. (Eds) 'Dinosaurs of New Mexico', Bulletin of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History, 17, pp. 113-146

Carr, T. and Williamson, T. (2004) 'Diversity of late Maastrichtian Tyrannosauridae (Dinosauria: Theropoda) from western North America', Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 142, pp. 479-523

Cope, E. (1892) 'Fourth note on the Dinosauria of the Laramie', American Naturalist, 26, pp. 756-758

Currie, P. (1987) 'Theropods of the Judith River Formation of Dinosaur Provincial Park', in Currie, P. and Koster, E. (Eds) Fourth Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems, Drumheller: Royal Tyrell Museum of Palaeontology

Currie, P. (2003) 'Cranial anatomy of tyrannosaurid dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of Alberta, Canada', Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 48 (2), pp. 191-226

Gilmore, C. (1933) 'On the dinosaurian fauna of the Iren Dabasu Formation' Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 67, pp. 23-78

Gilmore, C. (1946) 'A new carnivorous dinosaur from the Lance Formation of Montana', Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 106, pp. 1-19

Hatcher, J (1907) 'The Ceratopsia', U.S. Geological Society Monograph, 49, pp. 1-300

Holtz, T. (2001) 'Pedigree of the tyrant kings: New information on the origin and evolution of the Tyrannosauridae', Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 21 (3), pp. 62A-63A

Lambe, L. (1914) 'On a new genus and species of carnivorous dinosaur from the Belly River Formation of Alberta, with a description of the skull of Stephanosaurus marginatus from the same horizon', Ottawa Naturalist, 28, pp. 13-20

Leidy, J. (1868) 'Remarks on a jaw fragment of Megalosaurus', Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 20, pp. 197-200

Maleev, E. (1955a) 'Gigantic carnivorous dinosaurs of Mongolia', Doklady, Academy of Sciences, 104 (4), pp. 634-637

Maleev, E. (1955b) 'New carnivorous dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous of Mongolia], 104 (5), pp. 779-782

Marsh, O. (1877) 'Notice of some new dinosaurian reptiles from the Jurassic Formation', American Journal of Science, 3 (14), pp. 514-516

Marsh, O. (1892) 'Notes on Mesozoic vertebrate fossils', American Journal of Science, 44, pp. 756-758

Molnar, R. (1978) 'A new theropod Dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous of Central Montana', Journal of Paleontology, 52 (1), pp. 73-82

Molnar, R. (1980) 'An albertosaur from the Hell Creek Formation of Montana' Journal of Paleontology, 54, pp. 102-108

Molnar, R. and Carpenter, K. (1989) 'The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U.S.A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon', Geobios, 22, pp. 445-454

Olshevsky, G. (1995) 'The origin and evolution of the tyrannosaurids', Dinosaur Frontline, 9, pp. 92-119 and 10, pp. 75-99

Osborn, H. (1905) 'Tyrannosaurus and other Cretaceous carnivorous dinosaurs', Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 21, pp. 259-265

Osborn, H. (1906) 'Tyrannosaurus, Upper Cretaceous carnivorous dinosaur', Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 22, pp. 281-296

Paul, G. (1988) Predatory Dinosaurs of the World: A Complete Illustrated Guide, New York: Simon and Schuster

Paul, G. (1990) 'The many Myths, some old, some new, of Dinosaurology', Modern Geology, 16, pp. 69-99

Ride, W. (1999) 'Article 23.9 - Reversal of Precedence', International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, London: ICZN

Rozhdestvensky, A. (1965) 'Growth changes in Asian dinosaurs and some problems of their taxonomy', Paleontological Journal, 3, pp. 95-109

Russell, D. (1970) 'Tyrannosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of western Canada', National Museum of Natural Science Publications in Palaeontology, 1, pp. 1-34