Age: Early Jurassic (around 200-190 million years ago)
Length: Around 7 meters when full grown.
Weight: 0.5 tons
Notes: Dilophosaurus is one of the most iconic dinosaurs to feature in Jurassic Park. It gets its name from the two thin crests of bone that it sports on the top of its head, which are used as a display for courtship purposes. Dilophosaurus is nocturnal, hunting only at night (and sometimes early in the morning). We have found that Dilophosaurs are mostly ambush predators that live in the most remote parts of the jungle. This elusive predator spends the daylight hours sleeping in the foliage near rivers and streams in the dense jungle, out of sight of larger predators.
They are very inquisitive, likely a characteristic that gave these Jurassic age dinosaurs the edge over other reptiles of the day. As an early predatory dinosaur, Dilophosaurus does not have forward facing eyes, and thus it lacks stereo vision. They hunt in small packs, using scent as an integral part of their hunting techniques. Young Dilophosaurs can be deceptively harmless, but they are just as dangerous as their full grown counterparts. Nicknamed the “Spitter” by InGen staff, it is one of the most difficult dinosaurs to handle.
The connection between the premaxillary and maxillary bones of fossil specimens was very weak. This created a notch behind the first row of teeth. This information led to the early hypothesis that Dilophosaurus scavenged off dead carcasses, with the front teeth being too weak to bring down and hold large prey.
Dr. Wu decided to use frill-necked lizard (Chlamydosaurus kingii) DNA in combination with amphibian DNA to fill in the gaps in the degraded Dilophosaur genome, as he found it to be a particularly good fit with certain gene sequences, and he hoped the frill or at the very least, the aggressiveness of Chlamydosaurus would give the Dilophosaurs an edge in the face of larger predators on Isla Sorna. The frill can be expanded like a cobra's hood when the animal is feeling threatened or about to attack. It was partly expected, and is a means for them to intimidate larger animals that may attempt to steal their food. But the venom was a surprise. This ability to spit venom may have been due to Dr. Wu also using snake DNA (most likely spitting cobra) to fill in other gaps in the Dilophosaur genome.
The venom is a toxic cocktail of seven different enzymes, which cause extreme pain and irritation, resulting in rapid blindness and eventually paralysis. Dilophosaurus is able to spit its venom with great accuracy from quite a distance (in some rare cases as far as fifteen meters). They can also introduce venom to a prey item by biting, but they rarely do so in order to avoid the risk of injury. In this way the animal is still a predator despite its weak teeth and jaws.
Both the frill and the venom glands (under the tongue) are the direct result of InGen scientists splicing the Dilophosaur DNA with that of an Australian frill-necked lizard and some form of venomous snake (such as the spitting cobra).
COPYRIGHT NOTICE ©
This work is covered under copyright law. You may not use my work for layouts, blogs, websites, myspace/facebook pages (or the like), banners, designs, posters, CD, books etc… without receiving permission or a license from me. My work is not stock photography. If I find that my work is being used illegally, then legal action will be taken. If you see my work being used, please E-mail me right away.
Please respect copyrights.
Sorry for not replying sooner. First off let me say that if this is your take on the frill, then that is your opinion and you're entitled to it. But I have to disagree and say that this makes no sense to me.
At the core of your argument, you are basing this idea of a modified set of gills on the fact that InGen scientists spliced amphibian DNA into the genomes of all Jurassic Park dinosaurs.
Here’s the thing though, we know they used West African frog DNA (specifically the common reed frog - Hyperolius viridiflavus) to fill in the gaps in the degraded fossil DNA they recovered from insects stuck in amber. These frogs are known to spontaneously change sex from female to male. This occurs when the population does not have enough males to allow procreation and is accomplished when a chemical trigger activates the sex gene to disintegrate the female organs and develop the male ones.
This ability is transferred to the Jurassic Park dinosaurs. That tells us that the genes being repaired with the amphibian DNA are related to sex not respiration.
Now, I remember reading that one gene can act on more than one trait. For example; when selecting for a certain pelt color in dog breeding, you might also wind up with offspring that have blue eyes (instead of brown like their parents). Or when selecting the more docile foxes for breeding a domesticated fox, you wind up with floppy eared tame-ish foxes. But to me, it seems quite a stretch to associate genes that relate to sex with genes that control the formation of the respiratory organs.
I think it makes more sense that the amphibian DNA was found to be a perfect match for repairing the degraded sex chromosomes in the dinosaurs. Maybe because the genes in the dinosaurs were all similar to each other and to the frogs’, and since they were so similar they all seem to degrade first and thus needed the most repair.
Anyway, the frill has a much simpler explanation. The structure is virtually indistinguishable from that of the frill necked lizard (Chlamydosaurus kingie) – it can open and close, it has the spiky scales around the rim, and it is used to intimidate foes, therefore that is the source.
The other feature present in the JP dilophosaurs but not evident in their fossil counterparts is the venom spitting ability which most fans agree comes from the inclusion of Cobra DNA.
These features combined (the repaired sex chromosomes, the inclusion of cobra and frill neck lizard DNA) indicate that InGen geneticists had an extremely degraded sample of dilophosaur DNA to work with – not surprising considering it is from the early Jurassic period (making it one of the oldest animals to be resurrected at Jurassic Park).
And I don’t remember any reference to InGen using axolotl DNA. A good argument against there being any axolotl DNA in the Spitter is neoteny. If one neotenic feature is expressed (the supposed gill/frill as you suggest), you would expect other such ‘baby traits’ – like a very big head or big eyes etc. But so far, we have only seen juvenile dilophosaurs in Jurassic park (they are meant to grow to 6-7m by adulthood) and we do not see any such traits. The juvenile spitter that killed nedry was proportioned like a small adult – if anything more of a reptilian trait, not an amphibian one.
Your argument doesn’t stand up to Occam’s razor (The principle states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. In the absence of differences in predictive ability—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.)
Do you see how it is simpler/more straightforward to reason that since the frill is structurally identical to that of a frill necked lizards’ and since it functions in the same way and is used for the same purpose, then it is more likely to assume that Chlamydosaurus kingie is the DNA source used by InGen, rather than postulating a convoluted origin – like saying InGen used axolotl DNA (even though no sources suggest this is the case) and the gills of the axolotl remained as a neotenic feature in the dilophosaur (despite it not having any other neotenic features) and some sort of mutation occurred which caused a feature which would otherwise be used for respiration to become covered in skin (in other words; useless), and magically give it the ability to be folded away against the neck and pop up when the animal wants to intimidate another animal…
I hope this helps.
Of course they wanted that! Think about it. If you were in Wu's shoes - working with extremely old/very degraded sample of Dilophosaur DNA, what would you do? Repair it with modern samples.
You work out that by using frog DNA (specifically the genes related to sex) you can effectively repair their sex chromosomes. That was the biggest repair job, but then the rest of the geneome is in tatters. So you scour your data banks for the most suitable matches. Clearly, since the dinosaurs were ultimately designed for exhibition in the park, InGen would have obtained and filled their data banks with DNA samples from rare or exotic birds and reptiles (no point using common Skink DNA)... Your scan is finished and suggests the best matches - Cobra and Frill-neck lizard DNA.
As far as management is concerned, the frills and venom simply make these animals more exotic, more interesting which will in turn be a massive hit with the park visitors and make them more money.
It's that simple. In the novel, the only difference is they had no frill - therefore no frill-necked lizard DNA (only cobra).
I don't see a need for the complex/convoluted story that you came up with, when the current explanation is completely satisfying.
1)There's no official reference to axolotl DNA being used.
2)The juveniles we saw Kill nedry in the movie had no neotenic features - if the frill was what you claim it is, we would expect to see many other such 'baby traits' expressing themselves, but we don't, the Spitters in the movie are basically mini versions of the adults.
And 3) It is just a massive stretch to claim that the frill is actually external gills that somehow mutated to be covered in skin, and then conveniently mutated again to develop the muscles necessary to fold it against the neck and pop it open at will, and mutated one final time to develop spiky scales around the rim identical to those of the frill necked lizard.
I'm sorry, but I just don't find it convincing...
I agree, they should definitely have adult Dilophosaurs in jp4.
Certain genes that influence one thing can be linked to other, unrelated physical traits. For instance; I vaguely recall reading something about how during domestication of wolves into dogs, when breeders selected for changes in behaviour (like tameness) it also resulted in changes in physical appearance or phenotype (like droopy/floppy ears as opposed to pointy ears that stand up). When you select for one trait, you flip the on switch for several other traits as well (so to speakl).
The same could be going on here: InGen scientists could have noticed that the genes from an Australian frill-necked lizard (that related to sex) were a perfect match to repair the damaged sex chromosomes in the Dilophosaurus DNA. Unbeknownst to them, those genes were also linked to the frill in the lizard (which originally evolved to impress a female but is also utilized as a method of frightening off a potential predator). As a result; the JP Dilophosaurs were endowed with an impressive frill. Though the scientists at InGen knew this could only have come from the foreign DNA, they decided to leave it be, as it made for an exotic addition to Jurassic Park.
The phrasing makes no sense. Is he asking for permission to use these things in a movie? Is he telling me he has permission. What the hell does "accurete' mean?! It's been two years and he hasn't bothered to clarify, so meh! It doesn't keep me up at night.
To answer your question; I think yes, the gene splicing of Carnotaurus and chameleon DNA absolutely does explain the JP carnotaurs' colour-changing abilities. There is no evidence for chromatophores in the preserved skin impressions that were found with carnotaurus. Personally I'm a fan of taking it one step further and giving the JP carnotaur swivel eyes like they did in the Lost World SEGA arcade game. When I think of the JP carno, that's how I picture it.
I tried to make what InGen did with their Dilophosaurs as obvious as possible. It basically stemmed from people trying to tell me that the frill was the result of InGen splicing in King Cobra DNA. Though I agree that maybe the spitting abilities of the Dilophosaur could have come from Cobra DNA (And in the future I might add a silhouette of a spitting cobra to show this), I don’t think the frill can be explained by anything other than InGen using Australian Frill-neck Lizard DNA (as the shape/function is nearly identical in both animals).
Stay tuned for more InGen Files soon...
The movie dinosaurs are far more interesting in my opinion.
Also the image feels a bit empty towards the left side of the page. I'm thinking of including something like this [link] in that space...
By the way, I know you hate constantly beeing asked what is next(I know that first hand because I also get constantly asked about my jp expanded sereis) but I wanted to know if you are also going to make a carcharodontosaurus for jurassic park. I would really want to see a jp carcharodontosaurus by you,cause so far i wasnt able to draw one , I tried it now over 4 times and I never got it right.....
Not at all man. The reason I complained about that in the past was because it was the same two people commenting on every new InGen File with the same BS. Basically something along these lines; “Oh hey, cool.” Or “Good job man” essentially just lip service. And then (without fail) ask; “So what’s next?” It just got incredibly annoying...
You’re different. We can converse and critique each others’ work, and inspire each other to do better. I can say with confidence that very rarely do I come across an image like your Troodon that makes me want to draw the animal too. And look at the result!
To answer your question, yes I do intend on making a Carcharadontosaurus InGen File. I plan on making a file for every JP animal seen/implied in the movies (like the Metriacanthosaurus for example) or mentioned in the books. Also any dinosaur to feature in the Operation Genesis game, Telltales game, or the Lost world SEGA arcade Game. It’s a big project, but hopefully it will come in handy for people working on JPIV.
I think you might see an accurate paleo-graphic reconstruction of Carcharadontosaurus before you see an InGen File of this animal though, as I have been working on a re-make of this [link] for a while and I have yet to start work on the Carcharadontosaurus InGen File...