identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
C8710036FFB5AF585229FBB4FAF9787C.text	C8710036FFB5AF585229FBB4FAF9787C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Scelidosaurus Owen 1859	<div><p>SCELIDOSAURUS: HISTORICAL CONTEXT</p><p>The discovery of the earliest remains of  Scelidosaurus occurred in the late 1850s as a result of the fossilcollecting activities of James Harrison (1819–64). Harrison was born in Purley, Surrey and studied medicine at St. George’s Hospital. Unfortunately, his health was too poor to allow him to complete his training (Lang, 1947), so in 1850 he and his two sisters moved to the village of Charmouth, which is situated less than a mile along the coast east of Lyme Regis (Fig. 1). He married a local woman (Miss Ludlam) in 1851 and they had two daughters. Given the recent (1847) death of the renowned local fossil collector Mary Anning (Lang, 1947, Torrens, 1995), it is perhaps not at all surprising that Harrison developed an interest in collecting (or acquiring) fossils from the coast near Charmouth. This pastime seems to have been pursued actively until 1858, at which time Harrison became more seriously ill. He continued to acquire specimens from local quarrymen working the cliffs and maintained an active correspondence about them, but was reportedly bed-ridden from then until his death in 1864 at the comparatively young age of 45. The crumbling cliffs of Lias (see Fig. 2) are a prominent feature along the shoreline around Charmouth. These cliffs were a source of fossils and were also actively quarried in the middle of the 19 th century for the production of a superior quality ‘hydraulic’ cement manufactured at Charmouth. The Charmouth Heritage Coast Centre is built on the foundations of the original John Morcombe &amp; Sons Hydraulic Cement Works.</p><p>Judged by the correspondence of the time, reported by William Dickson Lang (1947), Harrison collected together the initial dinosaur discoveries and sent them directly to London for identification by Richard Owen. The encouragement he received from Owen concerning the scientific importance of these bones prompted Harrison (who was invalid by then) to recruit quarrymen to search for further specimens. This resulted in the discovery of a number of associated marlstone slabs that enclosed the majority of a large skeleton of this animal (Owen, 1863: 1; see Fig. 3). The Earl of Enniskillen (another avid fossil-collector and frequent visitor to the area) organized the transportation of the additional slabs to London for Owen’s attention. In 1861, negotiations between Owen and Mrs Harrison resulted in the large skeleton being bought by the British Museum for £50. However, additional portions of this animal were still being collected and sent to London until as late as August 1863 (Lang, 1947). No further specimens were sold to the British Museum during James Harrison’s lifetime, but after his death in 1864, Mrs Harrison sold several additional fossils (listed in: Lang, 1947). Although most of these were invertebrate fossils, one notable specimen was the scelidosaur ‘type’ knee joint (NHMUK OR39496: see Norman (2020a)).</p><p>As eventually reported (Owen, 1863: 1–2):</p><p>‘Following in the track opened out by the discovery of the skull described in the preceding Monograph [Owen, 1861], about twelve successive blocks of Lias were secured, with more or less evident indications of included bones, all of which, together with the skull, have been purchased by the British Museum [Fig. 3].… In the operation of clearing off the matrix, scattered dermal bones first presented themselves, and these were removed, with a note of their position, when it became plain that they did not touch or rest upon any part of the endo-skeleton. This being reached, the dermal bones in contact with it were left, save where they concealed some joint, process or other light-giving or characteristic part of the framework.’</p><p>The most distinctive feature of this dinosaur is its covering of bony dermal armour. Owen (1863: 20–26) described the portions that were preserved with the lectotype skeleton, but concentrated most of his effort upon the osteoderms attached to the tail because they were, overall, better preserved and more naturally positioned than elsewhere on the body. It is also clear from Owen’s descriptive account that mechanical preparation and removal of several osteoderms had been undertaken in order that the underlying skeletal bones could be described and illustrated. In summary, Owen (1863: 25) was able to observe that…</p><p>‘… the surface of the Scelidosaur was defended by several longitudinal series of massive dermal bones, those occupying the medial and upper surface being arranged in pairs [Fig. 4] upon the nape and singly along the tail [Fig. 5]. External to these were flattened, ovate scutes along the lower lateral series, at least two in number but probably more, on each side of the trunk, having the same wedged and ridged shape as the dermo-neurals [dorsally positioned median osteoderms seen in the tail]. Beneath these were flattened, ovate scutes along the lower lateral part of the thoracic-abdominal region. In the tail we have more decisive evidence of a single medial row of large, asymmetrical, cuneiform, hollow-based, superiorly ridged dermoneurals, with dimensions making three occupy the space of five vertebrae along the base of the tail, and nearly seven vertebrae along the hinder half of the tail. There was a corresponding median series of smaller and less vertically extended dermo-haemal [ventrally positioned median osteoderms] bones, and also a single series of dermo-laterals, of more depressed and fuller ovate form, on each side.’</p><p>On the basis of the trimmed and damaged array of osteoderms exhibited on the torso of the lectotype skeleton, Owen (1863: tabs III, VIII, IX; see Figs 4, 5) was able to determine that the pattern of osteoderm rows seen on the neck and torso (paired on either side of the midline) differs from that seen on the tail (median dorsals, ventrals and paired laterals). He also observed that the tail osteoderms do not diminish in size distally in proportion to the reduction in size of their underlying vertebrae. It is unfortunate that Owen made no attempt to reconstruct the skeleton of this dinosaur with its osteoderm covering. However, this accords with the general style of palaeontological description at the time. It was not until the work of O. C. Marsh (1881, et seq) that skeletal reconstructions became more commonplace.</p><p>Several caudal vertebrae that have been (largely) freed of matrix, following acid immersion, retain adherent osteoderms that display their general morphology (compare Figs 5 and 6). The larger carbonate-rich mudstone with thin, occasionally lenticular, marly limestone beds. The beds that have been reported to yield scelidosaur remains are Bed 83 – Stonebarrow Flatstones (Ian West; http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~imw/Lyme-Regis-to- Charmouth.htm) and Bed 85 – Topstones (David Sole, pers. comm. As also reported by Lang, 1947)</p><p>Sedimentary log conventions: pale even tone – carbonate-rich mudstone, fine horizontal shading – shale/mudstone, blocky and lenticular layers – marlstone/limestone.</p><p>osteoderms, which Owen described as being organized in longitudinal rows (Fig. 3), have an oval base and the dorsal (external) surface has been seemingly pinched on either side and drawn upwards to form a raised, oblique, longitudinal ridge. Overall, their shape is reminiscent of a pup-tent (Scheyer &amp; Sander, 2004). The underside of these isolated, large, ridged osteoderms is excavated (Owen, 1863: tab. VII, 3) and the inner surface mimics the general contours of the outer surface such that these osteoderms are thin-walled and cap-like.</p><p>It is unfortunate (but understandable, given the circumstances pertaining to the original excavation) that substantial portions of the dermal skeleton of the lectotype are either missing or represented by isolated specimens.  Some were deliberately cut away during the preparation of the skeleton (under the supervision of  Owen), and it is likely that others were lost because they were not enclosed within the boundaries of the carbonate-cemented marlstone slabs that enveloped the majority of the buried skeleton.  Nevertheless, it is clear from the appearance of some of the individual or fused arrays of scelidosaur osteoderms collected from  Charmouth in subsequent years (and preserved among the collection of referred material at the  Natural History Museum, London) – see inventory in Norman (2020a) — that their form and arrangement is more varied and complicated than originally described by Owen. Recent discoveries have added materially to our understanding of the morphological variation, distribution and growth of scelidosaur osteoderms  .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C8710036FFB5AF585229FBB4FAF9787C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Norman, David B	Norman, David B (2020): REVIEW Scelidosaurus harrisonii from the Early Jurassic of Dorset, England: the dermal skeleton. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190 (1): 1-53, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz078, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/189/1/47/5679623
C8710036FFB0AF5252D4FAEAFB767F88.text	C8710036FFB0AF5252D4FAEAFB767F88.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Scelidosaurus harrisonii Owen 1861	<div><p>SCELIDOSAURUS HARRISONII OWEN, 1861</p><p>Lectotype: NHMUK R1111 (Charig &amp; Newman, 1992; BZN, 1994). The remains of a medium-sized (5–6-m long) armoured ornithischian dinosaur. Comprising the skull, lower jaws (missing the rostral portion of the snout parts of the skull roof and occiput) and the majority of the articulated postcranial skeleton (missing a major part of the cervical region, some caudal vertebrae and the distal halves of both forelimbs).</p><p>Etymology: From the Greek skelos (σκέλος) = limb or leg and sauros (σαυρος) = lizard/reptile. The epithet  harrisonii refers to belonging to James Harrison, the collector. The generic name was probably chosen to distinguish this taxon from the paddle-limbed reptiles that predominate in the Liassic beds of the Charmouth/ Lyme Regis area.</p><p>Stratigraphic range: Charmouth Mudstone Formation (Upper Sinemurian), Black Ven Marl Member,  Asteroceras obtusum Zone, Obtusum Subzone (Hesselbo &amp; Jenkyns, 1995) . Nodule-bearing beds that occasionally reveal these remains are locally referred to as the Topstones Bed (David Sole pers. comm., 2018) and (perhaps) the Stonebarrow Flatstones Bed (Fig. 2).</p><p>There is an unverified report (Ensom, 1987) of scelidosaur remains having been recovered from the base of the Pliensbachian (Belemnite Marl Member,  Uptonia jamesoni Zone). Precise details concerning the provenance of scelidosaur specimens has always been particularly problematic in this area, because fossils are often recovered from the shoreline below the cliffs or on the scree slopes. The degradation of the cliffs at Charmouth [landslides (=cliff collapses) is a consequence of the poorly consolidated Liassic sediments and is enhanced by spring-line induced rotational slips] and the inherent cyclicity of the ‘Lias’ shale and marly limestone bands, are confounding factors. Longshore drift may account for specimens washing up at Seatown where the Pliensbachian is exposed.</p><p>Locality:   Cliff exposures on The Spittles–Black Ven between  Charmouth and Lyme Regis, Dorset. Weathered nodules containing bones or eroded individual bones are occasionally found along the foreshore beneath these cliffs (Fig. 1)  .</p><p>Diagnosis: Synthesis based on diagnoses in Norman (2020a,b) with the addition of features associated with the dermal skeleton. Premaxilla has a mound-shaped rugose exostosis on its tip; facet for the posteromedial process of the premaxilla positioned on the laterodorsal surface of the nasal; the sagittal crest on the parietals comprises two parallel crests separated by a smooth, narrow midline trough; the angular covered by an exostosis; epivomer bones contribute to the roof of the nasal chambers; epipterygoid bone forms a vertical, conical structure sutured to the dorsolateral surface of the pterygoid; large, oblique (epistyloid), articular facets on the ventrolateral wall of the basioccipital; facetted pedicle on the opisthotic; elongate, distally bladed, epistyloid bones project obliquely from the posterior of the skull; spur-shaped structure on the dorsal edge of the paroccipital partly encloses the posttemporal fenestra; a pair of subconical osteoderms project from the posterodorsal surface of the occiput; a pair of tricorn cervical osteoderm arrays lie immediately behind the occipital region; four partial, collar-like arrays of osteoderms in the cervical region. Caudal 1 has a convex posterior articular surface on its centrum and caudal 2 is correspondingly procoelous (in one skeleton only – this may prove to be either a sexual dimorphism or a character that defines a new taxon). Small, fusiform clavicles present. A convex, ovoid ‘antitrochanteric’ pad is present on the lateral surface of the ischiadic peduncle of the ilium. The prepubic process twists laterally. The proximal end of metatarsal 5 appears to have been sutured to the lateral margin of distal tarsal 4. Pedal digits 2–4 curve medially along their lengths. Pedal unguals of digits 2–4 are curved medially. Pedal ungual of digit 1 is short, more nearly symmetrical, mildly arched and bluntly pointed.</p><p>Inventory of the key osteoderm-bearing material referred to this in monograph</p><p>A full listing of presently known scelidosaur material can be found in Norman.</p><p>1.  NHMUK R1111 (lectotype). The articulated skeleton of a large scelidosaur (4.4 m long). The skull is largely complete and preserves exostoses and osteoderms. Missing parts of the postcranial endoskeleton include some cervical vertebrae and their ribs, portions of the dorsal ribcage, a few caudal vertebrae, parts of the pectoral girdle, the right forelimb, the left forearm and manus. Most of the craniocervical osteoderms are missing and only isolated elements from the osteoderm rows that covered the dorsal and lateral surfaces of the torso are preserved. Some of the caudal osteoderms are still associated with caudal vertebrae, but the majority were removed during preparation and are now stored separately in the collections .</p><p>2. NHMUK R12019. A broken marlstone block containing a fragment of the occiput linked to an articulated series of six (visible) cervical vertebrae of a large-sized scelidosaur (~ 4 m long). The vertebrae are flanked by several eroded subconical osteoderms and their attached base-plate.</p><p>3. CAMSM X39256. Associated skeleton of a small scelidosaur (2.1 m long). This specimen includes a collection of fully prepared, but disassociated, cervical osteoderms. These include isolated base-plates (a few of which have adhering osteoderms) and a variety of isolated ridged osteoderms.</p><p>4. BRSMG LEGL 0004. Articulated skeleton of a scelidosaur of large size (3.9 m long) comprises a skull, the presacral vertebral column, the shoulder girdle and proximal portions of the left forelimb, most of the pelvic girdle and most of both hind limbs (except for the distal halves of the metatarsals and phalanges of both feet) and the proximal part of the tail (the first 13 caudals). A substantial portion of the dermal skeleton is preserved close to its natural layout. This specimen was partly recovered and later assembled by David Sole; it is now on permanent display (and available for research) at Bristol City Museum. A good-quality cast of this specimen is also held in the collections of the St. George Discovery Site (Utah) and is accessioned as SGDS 1311. A similar cast is also on display at the Charmouth Heritage Coast Centre, Dorset UK.</p><p>5. BRSMG LEGL 0005. Partly articulated specimen of an intermediate-sized scelidosaur (3.1 m long). Major parts of the appendicular skeleton have been fully prepared, while the axial skeleton remains partly embedded in marlstone. The specimen includes a small portion of the braincase and a fully articulated cervical series that has been partprepared, but remains embedded in an ellipsoid bed of marlstone. Associated with this cervical series is a well-preserved and little disturbed group of cervical osteoderms. This specimen, discovered by David Sole, is also on permanent display (and available for research) at Bristol City Museum.</p><p>ANATOMICAL INTRODUCTION</p><p>The skull: The structure of the skull and mandible (Norman (2020a)) reveals that the external surface of many of the endochondral bones of the skull exhibit a range of textures and surface features that indicate the existence of both exostoses and genuine dermal bones.</p><p>The neck: In 1986, an interesting (but as yet unprepared) marlstone slab was recovered from Charmouth (NHMUK R12019; Fig. 7). The block is broken into two pieces along the midline and includes a small portion of the occiput (Fig. 7, pro, paro) and, slightly disconnected from the latter, an articulated series of longitudinally sectioned cervical vertebrae. On either side of the latter lie the remnants of a bilateral arrangement of eroded osteoderms. Unlike the osteoderms of the tail that Owen had described (1863), these neck osteoderms exhibit a different morphology. The osteoderms per se can be differentiated into two distinct regions. The most superficial part of each osteoderm comprises an elongate, conical and slightly curved structure – termed herein the osteoderm. The uneroded surfaces of these roughly cone-shaped osteoderms are moderately roughened, being covered by a network of fine grooves and small, vascular foramina. The base of each osteoderm is girdled by a rounded rim, beneath which the surface is slightly constricted, creating a waist-like zone (w). Below this waist, the bone surface re-expands and its texture is noticeably coarser and spongier in appearance (Fig. 7, ba). This portion is termed the base-plate. In some examples, the base-plate has an irregular ‘torn’ edge (Fig. 7, re), whereas other examples are tilted to reveal an innermost surface to the base-plate that is smoother and shallowly arched (Fig. 7, arc).</p><p>The neck, torso and tail: The discovery and collection, during the winter/spring of 1999/2000, of substantial portions of another large but subadult specimen (3.9 m long), led to the assembly of a scelidosaur skeleton by a consortium of private collectors led by David Sole (Lyme Regis). This specimen supplements our understanding of the variation in structure and distribution of osteoderms across the body of a scelidosaur. The presence of portions of the dermal skeleton was recognized early on, during the removal of the marlstone matrix in which the skeleton was embedded, and considerable effort was expended to ensure that this component of the skeleton was recovered in its post-mortem arrangement. As can be appreciated from the shape of the reassembled skeleton (Figs 8, 9), the body of this animal was subjected to oblique, lateral compression and displacement during the time that elapsed between the settling of its carcass on the sea-floor and its subsequent decay, burial, compaction and the cementation (lithification) of the surrounding sediment. As a result of these taphonomic processes, the left side of the body of the scelidosaur (Fig. 8), upon which the carcass appears to have lain, has not been greatly disturbed.</p><p>The right side of the same skeleton (Fig. 9) has suffered more disruption owing to a combination of scavenging, decay and compaction.</p><p>NB: Because this referred specimen remains in private ownership, to describe it would appear to some to violate the ethical guidelines adopted by the  Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology. To clarify matters as they stand, the original specimen is on permanent loan to the Bristol City Museum. It is provided with the reference number BRSMG LEGL 0004 and is freely available to researchers (and has been so for the past decade).  In addition, good-quality casts of this specimen are exhibited at  Charmouth Heritage Coast Centre, Dorset, England and at the  St. George Discovery Site, Utah, USA (SGDS 1311). The osteoderm arrangement in the cast specimens (Figs 8, 9) faithfully represents that seen in the original specimen. All observations provided in this description are the same for the original specimen and its replicates  .</p><p>Intermediate-sized neck osteoderms: A second, partly articulated, incomplete and intermediate-sized skeleton (BRSMG LEGL 0005: 3.1 m long) includes an articulated cervical series embedded in a marlstone slab. Preparation has exposed the dorsal halves of the cervical vertebrae and their associated osteoderms (Fig. 10).</p><p>Juvenile neck osteoderms: Another fully prepared but disassociated partial skeleton of a small individual (CAMSM X39256: 2.1 m long) includes an articulated cervical and dorsal series of vertebrae and ribs. Associated with this vertebral column is a collection of osteoderms. The osteoderms comprise a series of base-plates and osteoderms from the cervical region and these represent an early stage in the growth of the dermal skeleton (Fig. 11)</p><p>CRANIAL ORNAMENT AND OSTEODERMS: INTRODUCTION</p><p>Vickaryous et al. (2001) reviewed the anatomical evidence concerning the origin of cephalic ornament in ankylosaurs using a combination of evidence from fossil specimens and those of recent lizards that exhibit bony cranial ornament and osteoderms. Their study reviewed the understanding that there are alternative developmental pathways that may account for the bony ornamentation seen in ankylosaurs. These pathways were considered to involve either exostotic elaboration through surface deposition of bone minerals on endochondrally-derived cranial bones (as advocated by Coombs, 1971), or the attachment of overlying, dermally derived osteoderms that are at first anchored to underlying cranial bones by connective tissue before becoming fused in position (Brown, 1908; Sternberg, 1928; Romer, 1956). Coombs &amp; Maryańska (1990) later moderated the views of Coombs (1971) by allowing that cranial ornamentation might be the result of either elaboration of the chondrocranium (exostoses) or the co-ossification of dermally derived bones. Both phenomena are present on the skull of  Scelidosaurus, although the former pattern is more widespread.</p><p>CRANIAL ORNAMENTATION</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C8710036FFB0AF5252D4FAEAFB767F88	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Norman, David B	Norman, David B (2020): REVIEW Scelidosaurus harrisonii from the Early Jurassic of Dorset, England: the dermal skeleton. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190 (1): 1-53, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz078, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/189/1/47/5679623
C8710036FFAFAF44527FFD5FFE98792D.text	C8710036FFAFAF44527FFD5FFE98792D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ankylosaurus parascapular subsp. osteoderm	<div><p>A parascapular osteoderm ?</p><p>Owen (1863: tab. III; see Fig. 4, Sc.ost) was the first to report the presence of an oval-based, ridged osteoderm located on the posterodistal external surface of the left scapular blade of the lectotype. An identically positioned oval-based and ridged osteoderm is also present on the blade of the left scapula in the referred specimen (Fig. 23). This coincident placement on the scapula reflects the fact that this osteoderm is just part of the mid-lateral row of medium-sized osteoderms and lay in the skin adjacent to the scapular blade before death, decay and compression pressed it on to the scapular blade (Figs 23, 24).</p><p>Comment: Among basal thyreophorans, such as  Scutellosaurus and  Emausaurus, there is as yet no skeletal evidence concerning the presence or absence of ‘scapular osteoderms’. Among more derived eurypodans, comparisons are more variable. In the nodosaurid ankylosaur  Borealopelta a large, recurved and sharply pointed osteoderm, described as a  ‘parascapular spine’ (Brown et al., 2017: 19), is positioned adjacent to the scapular blade. Of the articulated ankylosaur skeletons known to date, this is the only one that preserves what might reasonably be described as a scapular osteoderm, although the dorsal osteoderm shield of the nodosaurid  Edmontonia (see Fig. 41) has large, spine-shaped osteoderms in the vicinity of the scapula. After checking with Caleb Brown, the‘parascapular spine’ of  Borealopelta is actually regarded as an osteoderm that lay in the dermis adjacent to the scapular blade (as in  Scelidosaurus) rather than being directly attached thereto (C. M. Brown pers. comm., May 2018). The term  ‘parascapular spine’ was being used as a positional metaphor and was not intended to imply homology with the parascapular spines reported in stegosaurian eurypodans.</p><p>Parascapular spines have been reported in a number of stegosaurs, e.g.  Chialingosaurus,  Gigantspinosaurus,  Huayangosaurus,  Kentrosaurus,  Lexovisaurus and  Tuojiangosaurus (e.g. Galton &amp; Upchurch, 2004). Morphologically, stegosaur parascapular spines are distinct from the ridged scapular osteoderm seen in  Scelidosaurus . The stegosaur parascapular spine is prominent and has a bulbous ovoid base that is flattened medially so that it can adhere to the scapular blade. The distal portion of the parascapular osteoderm tapers to form a posterodorsally oriented elongate, conical spine. Parascapular spines have not been reported in stegosaurids viz. ‘Hesperosaurus’,  Miragaia, Stegosaurus and  Wuerhosaurus; their absence/loss has been interpreted as a familial apomorphy (Maidment et al., 2008).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C8710036FFAFAF44527FFD5FFE98792D	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Norman, David B	Norman, David B (2020): REVIEW Scelidosaurus harrisonii from the Early Jurassic of Dorset, England: the dermal skeleton. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190 (1): 1-53, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz078, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/189/1/47/5679623
C8710036FF9BAF725260FB12FB0B7A94.text	C8710036FF9BAF725260FB12FB0B7A94.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Scelidosaurus Owen 1859	<div><p>SCELIDOSAURUS DERMAL ARMOUR RECONSTRUCTED</p><p>(FIG. 42)</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C8710036FF9BAF725260FB12FB0B7A94	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Norman, David B	Norman, David B (2020): REVIEW Scelidosaurus harrisonii from the Early Jurassic of Dorset, England: the dermal skeleton. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190 (1): 1-53, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz078, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/189/1/47/5679623
