during this time. Additionally, the study further indicates synonymy between Spinosaurus and Sigilmassasaurus. Description Size Since its discovery, Spinosaurus has been a contender for the longest and largest theropod dinosaur. Both Friedrich von Huene in 1926 and Donald F. Glut in 1982 listed it as among the most massive theropods in their surveys, at in length and upwards of in weight. In 1988, Gregory S. Paul also listed it as the longest theropod at , but gave a lower mass estimate of . In 2005, Dal Sasso and colleagues assumed that Spinosaurus and the spinosaurid Suchomimus had the same body proportions in relation to their skull lengths, and thereby calculated that Spinosaurus was in length and in weight. The estimates were criticized because the skull length estimate was uncertain, and (assuming that body mass increases as the cube of body length) scaling Suchomimus, which was long and in mass, to the range of estimated lengths of Spinosaurus would produce an estimated body mass of . François Therrien and Donald Henderson, in a 2007 paper using scaling based on skull length, challenged previous estimates of the size of Spinosaurus, finding the length too great and the weight too small. Based on estimated skull lengths of , their estimates include a body length of and a body mass of . The lower estimates for Spinosaurus would imply that the animal was shorter and lighter than Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus. The Therrien and Henderson study has been criticized for the choice of theropods used for comparison (e.g., most of the theropods used to set the initial equations were tyrannosaurids and carnosaurs, which have a different build than spinosaurids), and for the assumption that the Spinosaurus skull could be as little as in length. In 2014, Ibrahim and his colleagues suggested that Spinosaurus aegyptiacus could reach over in length. In 2022, however, Paul Sereno and his colleagues suggested that Spinosaurus aegyptiacus reached a maximum body length of and a maximum body mass of by constructing a CT-based 3D skeletal model "with the axial column in neutral pose." They argued that the 2D graphical reconstruction of the aquatic hypothesis by Ibrahim and his colleagues in 2020 overestimated the presacral column length by 10%, ribcage depth by 25%, and forelimb length by 30% over dimensions based on CT-scanned fossils; these proportional overestimates shift the center of mass anteriorly when translated to a flesh model, and thus the