Today I published a revision of the North American ankylosaurid genus Euoplocephalus. I'd like to take some time to go through some of the
major points of the paper over the next few days here, but today I will give a
brief introduction to the motivation behind this study.
Euoplocephalus is one of those 'classic' dinosaurs. Named in
1902 (as Stereocephalus, which was preoccupied by...a beetle! of course), it
wasn't known from very much material. All that Lambe had was a chunk of the
snout/forehead region, and an unusual structure called a cervical half ring.
Cervical half rings are totally bizarre structures that seem to be unique to
ankylosaurids. They're made of an underlying yoke of fused bone segments, and
topped by fused osteoderms like you see on the rest of an ankylosaur's body.
Canadian Museum of Nature 0210, holotype of Euoplocephalus tutus. On the left, the skull chunk. On the right, the first cervical half ring. Images modified from Arbour and Currie (2013).
Over the next couple of decades, three more ankylosaurid species would be
identified from Alberta (besides Ankylosaurus): Anodontosaurus, Dyoplosaurus,
and Scolosaurus. Anodontosaurus is known from a complete but somewhat squished
skull and a half ring, Dyoplosaurus is known from an articulated pelvis and
tail, plus hindlimb and other assorted bits, and Scolosaurus is known from an
exquisitely preserved skeleton with in situ osteoderms and skin impressions, but
without a skull or tail club.
In the 1970s, Walter Coombs, Jr. undertook a large and
important study of the ankylosaurian dinosaurs, which formed the foundation for
many subsequent studies of ankylosaur anatomy and systematics. More specimens
had been collected by that point, and subtle variations in the skull
ornamentation among these specimens led Coombs to conclude that either every
specimen must be its own distinct species, or they all represented the same
species: Euoplocephalus (because it was named first). That's a pretty
reasonable conclusion to have drawn with the available evidence at the time.
For my MSc thesis at the University of Alberta, I studied
the biomechanics of tail clubbing in ankylosaurids, and specimens referred to
Euoplocephalus formed an important part of that research. This is where I
became interested in the variation that I saw in tail clubs referred to
Euoplocephalus – some were small, some were large, some were skinny, some were
round, some were pointy. What did it all mean? Were all of these the same
species? Was I looking at ontogenetic changes? Were tail clubs just really
variable in Euoplocephalus? What would this mean for how the tail clubs were
used?
Wow, 2007 was a long time ago. Anyway, here's me at the Royal Ontario Museum holding the smallest tail club referred to Euoplocephalus, ROM 7761, and standing next to the largest, ROM 788. I CT scanned ROM 788 for my finite element analysis research, and you can now see it on display in the ROM's dinosaur gallery.
This was ultimately what led me to pursue my current line of
research into ankylosaur systematics and evolution. I hoped that by
understanding variation within Euoplocephalus, I would be better able to assess
the validity of other ankylosaurid species, and perhaps identify new species.
Over the next couple of posts, I'll talk about how I did this study, and what
makes a Euoplocephalus a Euoplocephalus. Stay tuned!
The title for this post was shamelessly stolen from Collin Vanburen, because it is hilarious and perfect.
(But you don't have to take my word for it...: Arbour VM, Currie PJ. 2013. Euoplocephalus tutus and the diversity of ankylosaurid dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of Alberta, Canada, and Montana, USA. PLOS ONE 8: e62421.)
No comments:
Post a Comment