Earliest Australian dinosaur track from Triassic of Queensland (free pdf)

[Ben Creisler]

Ben Creisler

bcre...@gmail.com

A new paper:

Free pdf:

Anthony Romilio & Bruce Runnegar (2026)
Earliest Australian dinosaur: ichnofossils from the Carnian Aspley Formation of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Alcheringa (advance online publication)
doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03115518.2025.2607630
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03115518.2025.2607630

Free pdf:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/03115518.2025.2607630


A single dinosaur footprint and an associated tail trace from the Upper Triassic (Carnian) Aspley Formation of Brisbane, Queensland, represent Australia’s earliest known dinosaur fossils. The two specimens, collected in 1958 from Petrie’s Quarry at Albion, have remained unstudied and are formally described here for the first time. The footprint is preserved as a natural impression on a slab of fine-grained shale and exhibits a fan-shaped outline, weak mesaxony, and impressions of three digits, one of which appears to represent a composite trace of digits I and II. Its morphology closely resembles the ichnogenus Evazoum, particularly Evazoum sirigui, although the Albion footprint is nearly twice the length of the holotype. A foot-to-hip height multiplier of 4.216, derived from a digital reconstruction of the basal sauropodomorph Bagualosaurus, yields an estimated hip height of 78 cm. A volumetric reconstruction scaled to this height suggests a body mass of 144 kg, and a theoretical maximum speed of ∼60 km/hour based on allometric scaling. While the footprint was recovered from a newly exposed short trackway, no photographs or measurements were made at the time. However, its size, morphology, and stratigraphic position within the Carnian-aged Aspley Formation identify it as a bipedal dinosaurian trace. This ichnofossil provides the first definitive evidence for dinosaurs in the Carnian of Queensland (and Australia), predating early Norian records from the Ipswich area and expanding the known temporal and morphological range of Evazoum in Gondwana.

======

[Ben Creisler]

A news story:

Fossilised dinosaur footprint identified after more than 60 years in palaeontologist's collection

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-02/fossil-footprint-identified-sauropodomorph-brisbane/106284466

[Stephen Poropat]

The authors of this paper acknowledge my review, which I find curious given that (in my opinion) none of the major revisions I suggested were adequately addressed (read: evidently, not addressed at all). 

From a scholarly perspective, I felt that the late Tony Thulborn's 1986 work was inadequately acknowledged. For anyone interested in seeing and appraising it for themselves, it can be downloaded here: https://www.gsa.org.au/Public/Public/Divisions/QLD_subpages/GSAQ_Publications/Conference_Guides/Sediments_and_fossils_of_the_Ipswich_Basin.aspx

From a scientific perspective, I was unconvinced by:

a) The justification for calling these the oldest Australian dinosaur tracks, when there is every chance the host rocks are Norian rather than Carnian (possibly rendering them age-equivalent to, or younger than, the dinosaur track-hosting Blackstone Formation [also in SE Queensland; Thulborn, 2000, 2003; Romilio et al., 2022],which is not mentioned in-text by name [unless my PDF search function is not picking it up]);

b) The ichnotaxonomic conclusion arrived at by the authors, given that the deepest part of this track is the heel (not evident in any other Evazoum) and given the superficial similarity of the track described therein to 'temnospondyl' tracks from the same site;

c) The estimation of body mass and maximum speed of the track maker from a single track, which required (what I perceived to be) several logical leaps beyond the evidence at hand, and (in my opinion) added precious little to the paper; and

d) The interpretation of the 'tail trace'.

Since Alcheringa does not do transparent peer review, I feel this is one way to put my thoughts on record. Another way would be to write a rebuttal... might not be until July that I have time for that though!

References

Romilio, A., Klein, H., Jannel, A., Salisbury, S.W., 2022. Saurischian dinosaur tracks from the Upper Triassic of southern Queensland: possible evidence for Australia’s earliest sauropodomorph trackmaker. Historical Biology 34, 1834–1843.

Thulborn, R.A., 1986. Triassic amphibian and reptile tracks of the Brisbane–Ipswich area, In: Fordham, B.G. (Ed.), A field guide to sediments and fossils of the Ipswich Basin. Geological Society of Australia, Queensland Division, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 20–24.

Thulborn, T., 2000. Australia’s earliest theropods: footprint evidence in the Ipswich Coal Measures (Upper Triassic) of Queensland, In: Pérez-Moreno, B.P., Holtz, T.R., Jr., Sanz, J.L., Moratalla, J.J. (Eds.), Aspects of Theropod Paleobiology; Gaia, 15, pp. 301–311.

Thulborn, T., 2003. Comment on “Ascent of dinosaurs linked to an iridium anomaly at the Triassic-Jurassic boundary”. Science 301, 169b.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dinosaur Mailing Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to DinosaurMailingG...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/CAMR9O1JZf0MPbp80sQ9A%3DQXYh1YRmXzy7RuoM%3DX1EVEZiwVJkw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Dr Stephen F. Poropat

Deputy Director

Western Australian Organic and Isotope Geochemistry Centre

School of Earth and Planetary Sciences

Curtin University

Bentley, Western Australia

Australia 6102

https://stephenporopat.weebly.com/

[Jerry Harris]

It is my repeated experience with exactly this phenomenon—my review suggestions and comments being completely ignored and papers being published that are identical to the submitted, pre-review versions—that have led me to turn down reviewing papers from all but a very few colleagues. I don't know whether the authors or handling editors (or both) are to blame for this phenomenon, but it's abhorrent and anti-scientific.

I'm not saying that my review comments and suggestions are of such high quality that they necessarily must be accepted, of course, but I would think they'd warrant some consideration and accommodation, even if it's not in a way I suggest. Honestly, I have always tried to address virtually every single reviewer comment on my own papers, even if I disagree, and my papers are better for having "patched holes" I didn't know were there until fresh, thoughtful eyes found them and brought them to my attention.