Deviation Actions

EWilloughby's avatar



Kulindadromeus was a basal neornithischian dinosaur from the middle to late Jurassic of Russia. Its several specimens exhibit beautifully-preserved feather-like integument, indicating that in life, this animal was covered in several types of shaggy, filamentous feathers, including a branching type not unlike the stage 3 feathers known from theropods. This beautiful little animal was a meter-and-a-half long bipedal runner that was probably on the menu of other, larger feathered dinosaurs.

Kulindadromeus is important to our understanding of the evolution of feathers in dinosaurs because it's the clearest evidence we have yet that feather-like structures in non-theropod archosaurs are most probably homologous to those found in theropods, including birds, and that this means the origin of feathers may have been much further back in deep time than previously thought.

Along with Zanabazar and the standoff between Archaeopteryx and Aurornis, this illustration was recently published in the 7 December 2014 issue of Nature.

Gouache on artboard, approximately 8" by 12". Original is for sale on my Etsy shop!

Image details
Image size
1800x1093px 484.75 KB
© 2014 - 2021 EWilloughby
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Batterymaster's avatar
Interestingly, the filaments also grow off scale-like base plates. It's very bizarre.
Charlott-A's avatar
It’s both beautiful and cute at the same time, I absolutely love your work
tigris115's avatar
On average, how long does one of these take?
Thatdude450AU's avatar
perfect i wish these were still here today the just look so birdlike which is understandable due to bird evolving from avian dinosaurs
diebruder's avatar
que extraño y curioso animal
Terizinosaurus's avatar
it is fantastic job !:)
grisador's avatar
İts tail looks so similiar to Rats; very similiar
Gogosardina's avatar
Gaaa.. this is so much more pleasing that the reconstruction in the actual paper.
Nazrindi's avatar
Actually Emily, nevermind my previous critique on the fluffiness of the limbs. I had a discussion with Tomozaurus about this, and even though the authors consider the possibility that the ones on the humerus could be feathers arising out of scales, it doesn't seem very likely IMO anymore considering that they'd just be on the humerus and nowhere else. Probably just an artifact of preservation:…

It looks adorable and I love how you've depicted it. :D
ProcyonNoumer's avatar
I for one am very glad the specimen had most of it tail base preserved decently
vagariraven's avatar
That tail is super cool :o
herofan135's avatar
Love the feathers here, looks cool!
asazieagle's avatar
This dino got me to research dinosaurs more than I have in over a decade trying to figure out where it fits in. I have to say I have been out of the loop for soooooooo long, I was very confused at first.
ImpirrenRyRy's avatar
I'm sure you some ideas about feathered raptors XD
DinoBirdMan's avatar
I'm really like that feathered critter.:)
Traheripteryx's avatar
Finally here on dA! :D
As I already said: Very floofey and cute and nice to see an Ornithischian from you! :)
Tarturus's avatar
Good portrayal. :thumbsup:
LeviBernardo13's avatar
wow expecting a picture of this kind of you. very perfect. thank you
ProcrastinatingStill's avatar
I think it's a bit too early to conclude that the structures on Kulindadromeus are protofeathers. Multiple filaments emerging from a single base plate are not found in any hypothetical feather morphology. 

On an interesting sidenote there were actually two teams working at Kulinda Valley.  Their descriptions of Kulindadromeus' filaments aren't consistent with each other.

Anyway, this is another lovely drawing from you.
You mean the team that stole research and tried to pass it as their own? Yeah, utterly trustworthy scientific practice...

Also, denial is not just a river in Egypt.
ProcrastinatingStill's avatar
Oh and don't accuse me of denial. You're jumping on a bandwagon uncritically. 

Science is about questioning data, not appealing to authority. Questioning data is not denial. It's SCIENCE.
Durbed's avatar
Well. Questioning data without any kind of contrasted evidence in hand isn't really science at all.
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In