Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
About Traditional Art / Hobbyist JustinMale/Canada Groups :iconyoungestpaleoartists: YoungestPaleoartists
The Future of Paleoart..
Recent Activity
Deviant for 3 Years
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 65 Deviations 1,816 Comments 20,153 Pageviews

Newest Deviations

Litargosuchus schematic by Megalotitan Litargosuchus schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 15 1 Pulanesaura schematic by Megalotitan Pulanesaura schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 37 1 Lower Elliot 'rauisuchian' schematic by Megalotitan Lower Elliot 'rauisuchian' schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 60 7 Tritylodon schematic by Megalotitan Tritylodon schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 50 6 Ledumahadi schematic by Megalotitan Ledumahadi schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 41 31 Lower Elliot anchisaur by Megalotitan Lower Elliot anchisaur :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 49 32 Aardonyx schematic by Megalotitan Aardonyx schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 45 3 Mamenchisaurus sinocanadorum schematic by Megalotitan Mamenchisaurus sinocanadorum schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 53 8 Paleopsephurus by Megalotitan Paleopsephurus :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 34 3 Aegyptosaurus schematic by Megalotitan Aegyptosaurus schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 49 1 Antetonitrus chart by Megalotitan Antetonitrus chart :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 51 7 Saurosuchus schematic by Megalotitan Saurosuchus schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 59 7 Paludititan MK. III by Megalotitan Paludititan MK. III :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 54 4 Sibirotitan revisited by Megalotitan Sibirotitan revisited :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 36 7 Kem Kem chart by Megalotitan Kem Kem chart :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 204 76 Rebbachisaurus schematic by Megalotitan Rebbachisaurus schematic :iconmegalotitan:Megalotitan 56 3

Random Favourites

Brontosaurus louisae by bricksmashtv Brontosaurus louisae :iconbricksmashtv:bricksmashtv 72 18 Dreams of Eemian 1 by Eurwentala Dreams of Eemian 1 :iconeurwentala:Eurwentala 297 20 Dreams of Eemian 2 by Eurwentala Dreams of Eemian 2 :iconeurwentala:Eurwentala 356 15 PDP-037 Phobosuchus Decoded by PhilipDecoded PDP-037 Phobosuchus Decoded :iconphilipdecoded:PhilipDecoded 11 3 Arctodus by AnonymousLlama428 Arctodus :iconanonymousllama428:AnonymousLlama428 69 50 Thorndrake by DemonML Thorndrake :icondemonml:DemonML 564 26 D'orca by SpinozillaRex D'orca :iconspinozillarex:SpinozillaRex 12 3 Giant Southern Lizard: Giganotosaurus carolinii by Paleonerd01 Giant Southern Lizard: Giganotosaurus carolinii :iconpaleonerd01:Paleonerd01 103 31 Nigersaurus by cisiopurple Nigersaurus :iconcisiopurple:cisiopurple 48 6 Death's Head Hawkmoth by kingrexy Death's Head Hawkmoth :iconkingrexy:kingrexy 23 12 Pac-Man by satsume-shi Pac-Man :iconsatsume-shi:satsume-shi 119 25 Glamorous runner by GetAwayTrike Glamorous runner :icongetawaytrike:GetAwayTrike 68 1 Plateosaurus Progress 2017 by PrehistoryByLiam Plateosaurus Progress 2017 :iconprehistorybyliam:PrehistoryByLiam 75 9 Infernal by Ahrkeath Infernal :iconahrkeath:Ahrkeath 26 0 Protoceratops by leptoceratops Protoceratops :iconleptoceratops:leptoceratops 11 0 the extermination of Tyrannosaurus by DinosaurDJ the extermination of Tyrannosaurus :icondinosaurdj:DinosaurDJ 27 5


Litargosuchus schematic
another one from a while ago, but i suppose it doesn't hurt to post it here?

thing is a juvenile, so keep that in mind i guess

Qilong's Terrestrisuchus skeletal was used as the main base here, and the manus, pes, and tail are directly modified from it
Tracy Ford's skull reconstruction was used here, because the actual skull is in a pretty miserable state
Gow, C. E., and J. W. Kitching. 1988. Early Jurassic crocodilomorphs from the Stormberg of South Africa. Neues Jahrbuch fur Geologie und Palaontologie, Monatshefte 1988:517–536. (many thanks to Kathleen Dollman for kindly lending a PDF copy, this schematic would've been near impossible to do without it)
A figure showing the entirety of the Litargosuchus holotype from Irmis et al. 2013 was initially used to scale the bones from, although in the end I only used the femur and partial pes from it
Crush 1984 for some Terrestrisuchus bones used to reconstruct part of the schematic
Pulanesaura schematic
One of the few very recent additions to the Elliot Formation fauna, Pulanesaura is the most derived sauropodomorph present in the formation, being the sister taxon to Sauropoda (or a sauropod itself, depending on the definition used). It takes on a more upright bauplan more akin to the sauropods that would come later than basal quadrupedal sauropodiforms like Melanorosaurus and lessemsaurids. It is also one of the largest inhabitants of the upper Elliot, only surpassed by Ledumahadi and perhaps Antetonitrus.

Ecologically Pulanesaura appears to have been more of a low-browsing herbivore than its (facultatively biped) quadrupedal sauropodiform neighbors, as unlike them it was probably incapable of rearing, and thus was an obligate quadruped. This niche partitioning was likely to avoid competition, as its capable feeding height was lower than the lessemsaurids it coexisted with, but higher than almost all the other sauropodomorph species in the upper Elliot; however, Aardonyx seems to occupy a similar feeding height as Pulanesaura.

*As the genus is known from at least two individuals of similar size (although one is slightly smaller than the other), there may be some proportional errors.

McPhee, B. W. et al. 2015. A new basal sauropod from the pre-Toarcian Jurassic of South Africa: evidence of niche-partitioning at the sauropodomorph–sauropod boundary? Sci. Rep. 5, 13224;
McPhee. B. W., and J. N. Choiniere. 2018. The osteology of Pulanesaura eocollum: implications for the inclusivity of Sauropoda (Dinosauria). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 182(4):830–861. doi:10.1093/zoolinnean/zlx074.
Allain R, Aquesbi N. 2008. Anatomy and phylogenetic relationships of Tazoudasaurus naimi (Dinosauria, Sauropoda) from the late Early Jurassic of Morocco. Geodiversitas. 30(2):345–424.
Remes, K. 2008. Evolution of the Pectoral Girdle and Forelimb in Sauropodomorpha (Dinosauria, Saurischia): osteology, myology and function. PhD thesis, Ludwigs Maximilians Universität, München.
Gregory S. Paul's Gongxianosaurus and Tazoudasaurus skeletals
ScottHartman's Melanorosaurus skeletal for the skull
My unreleased lessemsaurid composite schematic for the manus
Rebbachisaurus schematic
i forgot what dA is
randomdinos shoulda done this himself smh, mine's hella shitty
oh yeah dark grey's for those not figured in lateral view
Update: this is very shitty and old so don't use it
Lower Elliot 'rauisuchian' schematic
This is one of those things I've made a while ago; since I've posted this in basically every social media circle now, I suppose it doesn't hurt to post this here as well.

Shown here is NHMUK R3301, a large skull fragment consisting of the partial left premaxilla and maxilla; it was also known as BMNH R3301 in older papers. Hailing from the lower Elliot Formation, it was originally described as a specimen of "Euskelosaurus browni" (now a nomen dubium) by Harry G. Seeley in 1894; over a century later, it was ascribed to "Aliwalia rex" by Peter Galton, which was previously only known from a femur. As it turns out, Adam Yates determined in 2007 that "Aliwalia" (the holotype femur, that is) actually belonged to Eucnemesaurus fortis, a long-ignored sauropodomorph that is close to Riojasaurus in relation. Considering the dissimilarity to sauropodomorph skulls, NHMUK R3301 was assigned to an intermediate predatory archosaur in the same paper.

However, I don't find it too unlikely that it may belong to a 'rauisuchian', since we've been finding remains from the lower Elliot since long ago that likely belong to large 'rauisuchians'. Basutodon ferox is one of these, which despite being only known from teeth, appears to have closer affinities to loricatans like Prestosuchus and Fasolasuchus than to theropods of the same geological age from other formations. There are also a few accounts of undescribed 'rauisuchian' material scattered across several papers, including a fragmentary lower jaw. Yates was preparing a paper describing Elliot 'rauisuchians' that apparently have diagnostic characters... but a decade later and still nothing. Considering that he moved to Australia, it's probably not coming out any time soon either. In any case, it seems that 'rauisuchians' may be pretty common in the lower Elliot Formation, and based on NHMUK R3301 appear to be Fasolasuchus-like taxa.

There's more, however. As stated in the image text, there are two possible 'rauisuchian' fossils from the upper Elliot Formation, meaning that they somehow persisted into the Early Jurassic in Southern Africa. One of these is SAM 383, a posterior maxilla fragment with teeth; although no pictures are shown, it was estimated to have a metre-long skull - not too far from the ~92 cm NHMUK R3301 yielded (which is basically Fasolasuchus size anyway, with a ~91 cm skull based on bLAZZE92's reconstruction), showing that the Elliot 'rauisuchians' stayed at a consistent size through the Triassic-Jurassic boundary. Of course, this is assuming that SAM 383 is actually a 'rauisuchian'-grade loricatan, which appears to be quite the unstable position, and Sterling Nesbitt and colleagues suggest that it alternatively might be a basal crocodylomorph (although there appear to be no taxa in the same formation that reach the described size so ???). The other specimen, an articulated sacrum with an ilium, appears to be a definite 'rauisuchian', and apparently has similar ilium morphology to Postosuchus. Being from the same locality as Early Jurassic Aardonyx, Arcusaurus, and Pulanesaura, this would mean that 'rauisuchians' either actually made it into the Early Jurassic, or we have to reconsider the age of these deposits. Hopefully the former turns out to be the case to avoid confusion, and also because Early Jurassic 'rauisuchians' would be pretty cool.

If the aforementioned material really belongs to 'rauisuchian'-grade loricatans from the Early Jurassic, then it raises a question: why'd they survive in Southern Africa when other taxa had died out basically everywhere else? I shouldn't be given much merit on this, but I would think that it was due to how Melanorosaurus-like taxa plus lessemsaurids also made it through into the Jurassic in the same place. In the Late Triassic portion of the Elliot Formation, there were lessemsaurids and Pentasaurus, a fairly large dicynodont, coexisting, which were likely hunted by the putative 'rauisuchians'. In the Los Colorados Formation of Argentina, Fasolasuchus had a wide range of possible large prey, with in addition to Lessemsaurus, there were other large sauropodiforms like Riojasaurus, PULR 56 (previously referred to Riojasaurus, but unlikely to be the same genus), and PULR 136 (a Blikanasaurus-like form) plus the dicynodont Jachaleria; in the Chinle, Postosuchus might've been after Placerias plus other prey; and in Germany, Teratosaurus was coexisting with Plateosaurus but no dicynodonts (to my knowledge?). All of these fauna seemed to have died out by the Triassic-Jurassic boundary, if not earlier; however, some of the Triassic Southern African sauropodiforms seemed to have pulled through into the Early Jurassic in the form of NMQR 3314 and Antetonitrus + Ledumahadi. So 'rauisuchians' might've survived into the Early Jurassic in the Elliot Formation because part of its possible food sources, the Triassic sauropodiforms that it coexisted with, also made it over the boundary, even though dicynodonts didn't make it; moreover, there were more sauropodmorphs present, like some massospondylids, Aardonyx, and Pulanesaura, granting a wider set of prey to choose from. But I'm just rambling here, so shoot it down if you'd like.

The silhouette is taken from :iconrandomdinos:' unreleased Fasolasuchus schematic, with the skull being :iconblazze92:'s reconstruction
Skull fragment is taken from Galton & van Heerden 1998
SAM 383 is mentioned in Nesbitt et al. 2013
'Rauisuchian' sacral skeleton is mentioned in the 2018 Palaeontological Society of Southern Africa conference abstracts
Adam M. Yates (2007) Solving a dinosaurian puzzle: the identity of Aliwalia rex Galton, Historical Biology,19:1, 93-123, DOI: 10.1080/08912960600866953
Tritylodon schematic
finished this a while ago but i guess it's not too late to post it here

Tritylodon is one of the earlier-named non-mammaliform cynodonts, being described by Richard Owen in 1884 based on an incomplete, yet unique (at the time) snout. It was noted to have remarkably rodent-like dentition, a trait that would be found to be commonplace among tritylodontids found later. 

Tritylodon is one of the largest tritylodontids known, only surpassed by Tritylodontoideus, known from younger deposits in the Clarens Formation; however, most individuals would have been smaller than the size shown here. It sports a fairly large body that appears to be intermediate in form between Oligokyphus and more derived tritylodontids, sporting a long tail like the former, but more robust axial and appendicular elements like Kayentatherium and kin, congruent with recent phylogenetic placements of the genus. As the skull anatomy shows, it is clear that Tritylodon and tritylodontids as a whole had feeding habits akin to rodents, going as far as ditching canines and replacing them with incisors. 

Tritylodon is the most commonly preserved animal in the Upper Elliot Formation, with well over a hundred preserved specimens collected. It may have been frequent prey for the predatory archosaurs from the formation, although the size of larger individuals definitely meant they were off the hook for Megapnosaurus and basal crocodylomorphs present.

I've never been fond of synapsids, but I can't say that this wasn't a fun one to make, and surprisingly fast for a lot of bones and cross scaling, taking two weeks. Now only if I had this speed for other stuff...

Gaetano et al. 2017. The Postcranial Skeleton of the Lower Jurassic Tritylodon longaevus from Southern Africa. Ameghiniana. 54. 1-35.
Undescribed Tritylodon skull in the BPI collections
Kühne 1956 for the Oligokyphus skeletal, which was used as a main base here
+ a bunch of other papers that I will not bother to dig up because am lazy 
Big thanks to Diloraptor for the silhouette
Antetonitrus chart
One of the larger dinosaur species from the upper Elliot Formation, Antetonitrus has a pretty complicated history; James Kitching found the remains of this lessemsaurid in 1982, and had assigned it to the wastebasket taxon "Euskelosaurus". It wasn't until 2003 that it was revoked out of this status and given a new name by Yates and Kitching, although was described in a fashion that would not hold up well to today's standards. It wasn't until 2014 that the genus got a well-deserved osteology, figuring the bones in extensive detail and assigning the material to separate individuals. Antetonitrus was generally called the earliest sauropod (which is funny, because its affinities with Lessemsaurus were more or less clear since the 2003 paper, so why not call the latter a sauropod too?) because it was considered to be from the lower Elliot Formation, thus making it around the Norian of the Late Triassic; this is also why its genus name means "before thunder", in reference to Brontosaurus. But this changed when Blair W. McPhee and colleagues published their paper in 2017, a comprehensive analysis of the sauropodomorph biostratigraphy in the Elliot Formation. They showed that the locality Antetonitrus was found actually corresponded to the lower part of the upper Elliot, making it around Hettangian to Sinemurian age of the Early Jurassic. However, there is a Late Triassic monotypic bonebed collected in the 1950s from Maphusteng in Lesotho that make up the multi-individual assemblage labelled under NMQR 1705 that is supposedly referable to Antetonitrus, although this assignment was before McPhee et al.'s paper came out, so it probably is not the same species nor genus. Still, this shows that lessemsaurids are present in the lower Elliot as well, and could indicate an anagenetic lineage is present within the whole formation. 

Antetonitrus shows the general bauplan of lessemsaurids: a mostly Melanorosaurus-like body, with the difference lying in massive arms, tall neural spines, robust feet (although not on the level of Blikanasaurus), and a proportionally larger pelvis, just to name a few. Lessemsaurus and Ingentia also have these characteristics, although the proportions are slightly different between the genera, as is to be expected; really, Ledumahadi is the oddball, with its massive hands and legs, creating a less sloping posture due to the legs leveling things out with the arms.

Ecologically, Antetonitrus, along with Ledumahadi, are considered to be high-browsing herbivores, moving about quadrupedally but gaining a bipedal posture to reach up into the conifers that are present in the formation; this ability may have also served an extra purpose in inter- and intraspecific interactions. Don't want to get hit by those arms, do we?

Blair W. McPhee, Adam M. Yates, Jonah N. Choiniere, Fernando Abdala; The complete anatomy and phylogenetic relationships of Antetonitrus ingenipes (Sauropodiformes, Dinosauria): implications for the origins of Sauropoda, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, Volume 171, Issue 1, 1 May 2014, Pages 151–205,
Yates AM, Kitching JW. The earliest known sauropod dinosaur and the first steps towards sauropod locomotion. Proc Biol Sci. 2003;270(1525):1753-8.…
Blair W. Mcphee; Emese M. Bordy; Lara Sciscio; Jonah N. Choiniere (2017). "The sauropodomorph biostratigraphy of the Elliot Formation of southern Africa: Tracking the evolution of Sauropodomorpha across the Triassic–Jurassic boundary". Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 62 (3): 441–465. doi:10.4202/app.00377.2017.
Unreleased lessemsaurid composite schematic made by myself, which in turn is heavily modified from :iconscotthartman:'s Melanorosaurus skeletal.
Greg Paul's Melanorosaurus skeletal for like two of the fingers.
:iconijreid:'s Blikanasaurus skeletal, which was used for some minor bits in the foot.
Human silhouette is from Andrew Farke as always.

Previous version for comparison
Ledumahadi schematic
lefu, the evolution of lefa
If you see a sauropod classification for this lad get chucked around (after all, lessemsaurids were considered to be sauropods in the Ingentia description), don't let it throw you off; Ledumahadi (and lessemsaurids as a whole) have more similar anatomy to the more basal Melanorosaurus, Blikanasaurus, and the like, instead of more derived taxa like Gongxianosaurus and Vulcanodon. Kinda ties in with my opinion about how inclusive Sauropoda should be: if lessemsaurids are to be considered true sauropods (do note that "if", I'm on the fence for Lessemsauridae + Saltasaurus = Sauropoda), then I think Melanorosaurus (or for you fancy folk, NMQR 3314 and NMQR 1551) and more derived taxa should be included as well, with the line being drawn at Yizhousaurus or Aardonyx (using recent published phylogenies at least, heard that there was a big shakeup presented at this year's SVP). Also no, I think 12 tonnes isn't doing it, more 4 to 5 tonnes, maybe 6 (6.63 tonnes is an alternative estimate the authors calculated when assuming Ledumahadi was a biped, which is obviously a more reasonable ballpark). Anyhow, it still is at an impressive size for an Early Jurassic sauropodiform, easily the largest animal in the upper Elliot Formation (maybe Pulanesaura can rival it but shhh).
McPhee et al. (2018). A Giant Dinosaur from the Earliest Jurassic of South Africa and the Transition to Quadrupedality in Early Sauropodomorphs
Unreleased lessemsaurid composite made by myself (if you're on the same servers as me on Discord you probably have seen it already)
ScottHartman's Melanorosaurus skeletal
Human silhouette is from Andrew Farke
Ledumahadi schematic (hopefully) coming out this weekend bois
also give me suggestions on what to draw (not gonna upload though, probably)
just gonna dump my Twitter here, since i've posted stuff there (at an infrequent rate) that aren't on here:
Lower Elliot anchisaur
Yes you can use it now (hopefully without much margin of error), yes it's still big, yes it is still bigger than Tyrannosaurus, no it is not Ledumahadi nor the Highland Giant.

Update: i guess i'll dump the reference here because a lot of people seem to be confused by this 
actually Ledumahadi schematic will be on hold for a bit, gonna make a lessemsaurid composite first
Aardonyx schematic
Long time no see.

I thought Adam Yate's skeletal of this guy could use a overhaul, so here we are. That being said, I was forced to extrapolate a lot of bones from his skeletal, as there's basically no material shown in the description. Thankfully, there were a lot of suitable measurements to be used, so I at least managed to make a decent hackjob out of it. Definitely got that pubis wrong tho rip

Update: made the femur too big, oops
Update #1: turns out i made the human too big as well...

Yates et al., 2010. A new transitional sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Early Jurassic of South Africa and the evolution of sauropod feeding and quadrupedalism
ScottHartman's Melanorosaurus
ijreid's Blikanasaurus and Aardonyx skull reconstruction
Gregory S. Paul's Jingshanosaurus
Human silhouette is from Andrew Farke.
Kem Kem chart
Someone had to do it. I guess.

The Kem Kem Beds is actually not a formation itself; rather, it composes the Ifezouane Formation in the lower parts and the Aoufous Formation in the upper parts. Most of the animals here appear to be from the Ifezouane, although some might be from the Aoufous, but in most papers it is not specifically said which formation said specimen was found, only referring to the Kem Kem Beds. It appears to have been a coastal lagoon (apparently can be also called paralic sebkhas, which supposedly are evaporitic tidal flats close to the ocean) based on sedimentological and micropaleontological data, although the fauna appears to indicate a freshwater or brackish water environment. But who cares about this shizzazledoodles? Read it up in papers or something.
oh yeah no size estimates for this one too
and the order is left to right, top to bottom (excluding those flying pterosaurs)

Jeddaherdan aleadonta: Just your good ol' lizard that is everywhere - except it's from a damn dentary fragment. Close to extant Uromastyx, otherwise known as spiny tailed lizards, and Gueragama from Brazil, it appears to be omnivorous with plants taking up the majority of that diet.

Lavocatchampsa sigogneaurusselae: A (presumably) basal ziphosuchian, it appears to be closely related to Candidodon, Malawisuchus, and Pakasuchus. The morphology and wear of the teeth suggest that it was crushing tough material.

Araripesuchus rattoides: A small notosuchian, it is very widespread in the southern hemisphere, being found in Brazil, Argentina, Niger, Madagascar, and Morocco. Based on A. wegeneri, it may have had a primarily herbivorous diet.

Hamadasuchus rebouli: A peirosaurid notosuchian, it appears to have been carnivorous like its other relatives from neighboring South America and Africa. Has a set of nasty teeth.

Notosuchia indet. (Ibc 119): Only known from an isolated quadrate, it was first referred to Libycosuchus by Buffetaut (1976), then to Hamadasuchus by Larsson and Sues (2007). Most recently in 2018, a revision of "Trematochampsa" (it's dubious now rip) found this quadrate to compare well with A. wegeneri, although it appears to have been approximately three times the size.

Laganosuchus maghrebensis: A stomatosuchid, the genus is also present in Niger in the form of L. thaumastos. This genus is closely related to Stomatosuchus of Egypt, and both appear to have been sit-and-wait predators, capturing any small fish that happened to be within snapping range.

Rebbachisaurus garbasae: One of the largest definite rebbachisaurids (Limaysaurus comes close), it's weird. Too weird.

Aegisuchus witmeri: Named after Lawrence Witmer, the size of this neosuchian has been greatly overestimated in the original description, getting a bare minimum of 15 meters. bLAZZE92 happened to remake the formulas used in the paper and got a length of approximately 3.9 meters.

Tapejaridae indet. (BSP 1997 I 67): Only known from a jaw fragment, perhaps from the mandible, it appears to have been quite large, perhaps reaching the size of Tupandactylus.

Siroccopteryx/Coloborhynchus moroccensis: An ornithocheirid, it most likely was piscivorous like its other relatives: a suiting niche when there are a bit too much fish in the waters.

Chaoyangopteridae indet. (MN 7054-V): Originally considered as a putative pteranodontid, Zhejiangopterus has noted more similarities with chaoyangopterids (like Lacusovagus) than pteranodontids; perhaps something like Shenzhoupterus, although with a proportionally shorter snout. 

Xericeps curvirostris: A rather peculiar azhdarchid, it appears to be analogous to jabirus, with the curved beak and all. It and Alanqa happen to have raised ridges near the back of their jaws, which may have helped in consuming the shellfish that they would've been likely to eat. The different jaw shape compared to Alanqa implies niche partitioning within the same ecosystem; nonetheless, both appear to be related, and might be claded with Argentinodraco from the Portezuelo Formation of South America.

Alanqa saharicus: A more normal looking azhdarchid, it appears to be be akin to openbill storks or oystercatchers in terms of lifestyle.

Somphospondyli indet. (NMHUK R36635): Only known from a dorsal neural arch, Mannion & Barrett 2013 chose to interpret it as a basal somphospondylian, although I've chosen to scale it after Andesaurus.

Ornithopoda indet. (UCRC I 5S4): Just gotta have a relevant ichnotaxon in any formation :P The particular maker of this footprint is quite large, with a 52.5 cm long foot that yields an approximately 9.4 meter long, ~3 tonne ornithopod using Ouranosaurus as a base - roughly on par with Iguanodon.

Unenlagiinae? indet. (CMN 50852): First described as an avialan vertebra by Riff et al. 2004, a resemblance to Rahonavis has been noted in the paper. It was considered a basal avialan at the time, but now... it just jumps in and out of Unenlagiinae and basal Avialae as it likes, unfortunately. It also looks quite like the dorsals of Buitreraptor, and that is the base for it here.

Noasauridae? indet. (ROM 65779, CMN 50811, CMN 50810): These are probably the same general thing in different sizes so I'll just describe them in the same paragraph. These lads 'n lasses are only known from fragmentary remains; the first is known from a partial femur, second is known from a posterior cervical centrum, and third is known from an axis. All could pertain to noasaurids, and are scaled as such here. They perhaps had a lifestyle like that of Masiakasaurus; whatever that is.

Titanosauria indet. (FSACK-KK 7000): A surprisingly derived titanosaur for its time, it appears to be close to Baurutitan and Alamosaurus, taxa that would not come until approximately 30+ millions years later. Personally I think it would help to find the origin of those titanosaurs and the ones in Eurasia, which also appear to be closely related, and Mansourasaurus also helps.

Abelisauridae indet. (NS153/01, NS153/02, UCPC 01): These also are probably similar in general anatomy, so they'll also be described in the same paragraph here. All are known from maxilla fragments; NS153/01 appears to be something similar to Skorpiovenator, while NS153 and UCPC 01 seem to be more like Ekrixinatosaurus.

Titanosauria indet. (FSACK-KK 01): Only known from a partial humerus, it appears to be closely related to Paralititan of Bahariya, as well as being approximately the same size; this adds another addition of the shared terrestrial fauna between the two geological formations. 

Elaphrosaurinae? indet. (not shown): Originally described from a tibia by Lavocat, he noted a striking similarity between it and an Egyptian tibia described by Stromer and referred to as cf. Elaphrosaurus, as well as Elaphrosaurus itself. However, Rauhut & Carrano 2016 made a case that the former was not so related to Elaphrosaurus, instead showing characters more similar to that of tetanurans. Although I am not sure if this also applies to the Kem Kem tibia, I would not be surprised if it was, and I decided to remove it from this chart for now.

Sauroniops pachytholus: Is this even worth mentioning? I guess. Only known from a shit but pretty nice frontal, it appears to be close to Eocarcharia of Early Cretaceous Niger, and to a lesser extent Acrocanthosaurus

Titanosauria indet. (GMNH-PV 2314): A large titanosaur (although not as large as FSACK-KK 01 or Paralititan) that is perhaps also related to Paralititan, tooth marks are etched into the material represented, an ischium.

Deltadromeus agilis: The hella enigmatic thing. A close relative of South American Gualicho, it might be a noasaurid of some kind, although which we really don't know. Oh, and it has those teeny arms.

"Osteoporosia gigantea": A taxon that got a bit too overhyped originally, it is not a megaraptoran of extraordinary size, comparing quite well with Aerosteon. I guess it has unique implications for megaraptoran paleobiogeography?

Titanosauria indet. (GMNH-PV 2399): Another relatively large titanosaur, the known dorsal appears to show affinities with Epachthosaurus and Paralititan, and could be congeneric with GMNH-PV 2314, although it would be suggested to not lump them for the time being.

Abelisauridae indet. (OLPH 025): The large-o abelisaurid described by Andrea Cau and colleagues in 2016, Grillo & Delcourt 2016 estimated it at a similar size to Ekrixinatosaurus.

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus: This theropod appears to be the largest terrestrial predator present in the Kem Kem. Although there were enough terrestrial prey, I wouldn't be surprised if it also relied on the freshwater fauna for prey.

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus: The largest aquatic predator in the Kem Kem Beds, it is quite capable of eating a lot of the ichthyofauna, and would also be more than likely to be able to cram a crocodilyform or two in its mouth. For a more comprehensive chart of Spinosaurus sizes (or at least presumably the same morphotype), randomdinos has a very nice one here. It appears to be the more aquatic one out of the two Kem Kem spinosaurins, having a raised eye placement on the skull, not unlike that of hippos and crocodiles.

Sigilmassasaurus brevicollis: The other spinosaurin from the Kem Kem Beds, it has a complicated taxonomic history, having been in its own family (Sigilmassasauridae), a synonym of Carcharodontosaurus (goddammit Sereno), an intermediate tetanuran, and a synonym of Spinosaurus in Ibrahim et al. 2014. It was recently re-described as a valid spinosaurid in Evers et al. 2015, and considered to be one by Hendrickx et al. 2016 and Arden et al. 2018. The latter paper has assigned this genus to Spinosaurini along with Spinosaurus and other intermediate North African spinosaur material, and also suggested that it was less aquatic than Spinosaurus, based on the referred frontal morphology (although this referral was solely based on size, so that's pretty dumb). Scaled to the largest specimen here; for more sizes, see the spinosaurin chart I linked above.

Dirqadim schaefferi: Starting with the turtles, Dirqadim is up first. An euraxemyid turtle, its sister taxon Euraxemys is from the Albian Santana Formation. Nothing special, honestly.

Galianemys spp. (G. whitei, G. emringeri, AMNH 30550, AMNH 30551): Easily the most common turtle in the Kem Kem Beds, there are large shells from the same deposits that may belong to this genus, based on their placement within the same tribe, Cearachelyini, which the Santana genus Cearachelys is also a part of.

Hamadachelys escuilliei: A sister taxon of podocnemidids, it is described from a mere skull, although there appears to be a presumably undescribed specimen that is mostly complete.

Araripemys sp.: Usually present in the Santana Formation, Cavin et al. 2010 mention collecting Araripemys specimens of intermediate species within the Kem Kem Beds, although the material was not figured, so the size here is based on the Santana specimens.

Norisophis begaa: A basal snake, around Najash-grade, it appears to have been terrestrial, although not fossorial.

Madtsoiidae indet. (UCRC PV132-138): Briefly described but not shown in Rage & Dutheil 2008, this is a very rough size approximation loosely based off a Madtsoia madagascariensis size estimate in LaDuke et al. 2010 and should not be taken as a solid size.

Simoliophis cf. libycus: A simoliophiid (which also contains Pachyophis and Haasiophis), it appears to have been mainly aquatic. Also has those teensy legs.

Elosuchus cherifiensis: A large pholidosaurid/elosuchid/whatever the fuck you call it, it appears to have a relatively strong bite compared to other longirostrine crocodyliforms, based on modifications of the skull.

Notosuchia? indet. (Sereno's longirostrine crocodyliform): The large crocodyliform that Sereno is evilly keeping in his Chicago lab, it is supposedly related to Stolokrosuchus, which jumps in and out of Notosuchia. The Razanandrongobe redescription paper phylogeny puts it at a basal position within Notosuchia, which is tentatively followed here. It has a skull that is around 1.55 metres long (contrary to the earlier reports of a 2 metre skull), most of the length we can expect to be the rostrum, based on its supposed relative. Efficient if you have a piscivorous diet.

Asteracanthus aegyptiacus: Now onto the fish (i'm using this in the traditional sense so don't give me a fucking lecture, i know very well about the extent of this definition). This presumably durophagous hybodont is one of the many Kem Kem fish that is also present in the Bahariya Formation.

Tribodus sp.: Another durophagous hybodont, the genus is known from very well preserved specimens from the Santana Formation and from fin spines and teeth from Bahariya, although it is only known from teeth in the Kem Kem Beds.

Aidachar pankowskii: A ichthyodectid, this genus is also present in Uzbekistan during the same time. It appears to be close to Cladocyclus of Brazil and Italy, and was described as a species of it during its original description. Like other ichthyodectiforms, it most likely was a voracious predator, dealing with proportionally large prey.

Lavocatodus humei: A small lungfish, it was referred to as Ceratodus humei for over a century; it was not until 2014 that it was referred to Lavocatodus, which appears to be closer to South American and African lungfishes. Like all modern lungfish, it probably was an opportunistic omnivore, eating plant material, invertebrates, and small vertebrates.

Arganodus tiguidiensis: A tiny, irrelevant lungfish. They're just everywhere.

Oniichthys falipoui: A small gar, it appears to be very close to Atractosteus, even considered to be lumpable by some; thus, it is likely that it also had a similar diet on a smaller scale, like smaller fish and invertebrates.

Obaichthyidae spp. (Obaichthys africanus, ?Dentilepisosteus kemkemensis): Two gars that are not within Lepisosteidae (modern gars), the genera are known from fairly well preserved specimens from the Santana Formation. The specialized jaw anatomy indicates that these gars were not after proportionally large prey, and perhaps were feeding on invertebrates.

Steinbachodus bartheli: A small steinbachodontid hybodont, the family appears to be close to lonchidiids.

Haimirichia amonensis: This small basal lamniform was for a long time under the genus Odontaspis, then into Serratolamna, until it was erected as a new genus by Vullo et al. 2016 following the description of a new specimen with preserved tissue from later deposits (Akrabou Formation). It appears to be similar to shovelheads and whitetip reef sharks in terms of lifestyle and diet, although it most likely wasn't suited for hard-shelled prey that shovelheads go for, narrowing the scope of what it could eat. It does not appear to be common in Kem Kem, although very abundant in other places; it might have been gregarious based on mass accumulations of teeth at some sites, gathering around in shallow warm waters like shallow bays and estuaries.

Efroudichthys rosae: A possible stem-chanid (which includes milkfish), it also may have had a similar diet, eating cyanobacteria, algae, and invertebrates.

cf. Axelrodichthys sp.: A mawsoniid coelacanth, it is known from relatively well preserved specimens from the Santana Formation. Based on comparisons with living coelacanths (Latimera), mawsoniids as a whole, which appear to be edentulous, may have eaten prey through suction - and there was a lot to choose from.

Calamopleurus africanus: A calamopleurin, its sister taxon C. cylindricus is known from very well preserved specimens from the Santana Formation, while C. africanus is known from a disarticulated distorced skull and a separate braincase. Based on specimens from Brazil, it most likely was a voracious predator, eating prey of proportionally large sizes.

Neoceratodus africanus: This one's pretty relevant, being big and all. Although most specimens appear to be in the 70~100 cm range based on 3~5 cm tooth plates, Stromer described tooth plates from Bahariya that were around 10 cm, indicating individuals that could've grown at least over 2 meters.

Distobatus nutiae: An apparent ray related to cownose rays, it also may have been durophagous based on the similar dentition.

Palaeonotopterus greenwoodi: A osteoglossiform that is perhaps related to Petrocephalus, it appears to have been durophagous based on the jaw anatomy and dentition.

Adrianaichthys pankowskii: A large semionotid and the youngest one known, the species was originally described as Lepidotes pankowskii, although it was determined that it did not belong in Lepidotes proper according to López-Arbarello 2012, and the new genus Adrianaichthys was erected in 2016. It appears to have had a similar diet to lungfish.

Axelrodichthys lavocati: Known as Mawsonia lavocati for a long time, it has only been recently (this year, in fact) moved within the previously Brazil-endemic genus. Although there are numerous specimens referred to it, it is not possible to determine whether most, if not all of this material is actually referable to the same species as the holotype - an angular.

Mawsoniidae indet. (MDE F36): why the fuck are there so many mawsoniids

Mawsonia cf. gigas: One of the largest fish in the Kem Kem Beds, the sizes here are tentatively based off specimens from the similar-aged Alcântara Formation of Brazil, as there is no figured material, and it has only been mentioned in a mawsoniid paleobiogeography study by Miguel et al. in 2014. This material might not even belong to M. gigas according to Lionel Cavin, but a consensus has yet to be reached.

Mawsoniidae indet. (UMI-1): it's a dentary fragment shoo

Concavotectum moroccensis: A relatively large tselfatiiform, it appears to have been a filter feeder based on the anatomy of the jaws and gill rakers. This is one of the many Kem Kem taxa showing relations to the Bahariya fauna, as it is closely related, perhaps even synonymous with Paranogmius.

cf. Bawitius sp.: A massive bichir, a maxilla from the beds appear to be from an individual as big as the holotype from Egypt, and shows that it had a similar diet as bichirs of today, like fish, amphibians, and aquatic invertebrates, although perhaps the scope of suitable prey would've been bigger, so it could have eaten other aquatic vertebrates like turtles, snakes, and small spinosaurids. This maxilla was first referred to Stromerichthys by Cavin et al. 2010, but was shown to belong to a bichir in Cavin et al. 2015, which also rebuked Stromerichthys status as a valid genus, suggesting that the holotype was a chimera.

piece of shits (Bartschichthys sp. & Sudania sp.): these fuckers are only known from shitty ass fin spines

Peyeria lybica: A pristid sawfish, it is the earliest known; another pristid would not appear until 45 million years later. It is possible that pristids happened to take over the niche that sclerorhynchids have left behind after the K-T mass extinction.

Marckgrafia lybica: A small sclerorhynchid, there's really nothing special about it... besides the fact that it's easy fodder, I guess.

Onchopristis numidus: Our last animal on the chart also happens to be one of the more famous fish, usually depicted as Spinosaurus chow. A sclerorhynchid sawfish, the rostral teeth are among the most common teeth in the Kem Kem Beds. It is actually known from quite more than teeth: at least two partial rostrums have made it into science's hands and been described to some extent; one is none other than the holotype of the genus, which Stromer happened to describe, and a more recent find in the Kem Kem Beds, although it is less complete than the holotype. There apparently is also a specimen with a two meter long rostrum, although it is yet to be described.

And that marks it, I guess. I haven't added some animals in here, two due to the fact that these taxa are much too small to be in this chart, turning into a mass of undiscernible pixels when scaled to its size; these would happen to be Kababisha (a siren) and Oumtkoutia (a pipid frog). I may make a separate chart for these amphibians. A nigerophiid snake has also been omitted due to no measurements or figures provided. Kemkemia has not been added due to uncertain affinities within Crocodyliforms. A collection of animals I haven't added are the fish of the OT1 assemblage from the Djbel Oum Tkout locality. This locality is technically within the Kem Kem Beds (Aoufous Formation, specifically), but the fauna associated with this locality is considered endemic and is not considered to be part of the Kem Kem compound assemblage, which is what is shown here. 
Something I've noticed between Kem Kem and Bahariya is that the ichthyofauna from the latter appears to be much more diverse, but the former happens to have more terrestrial taxa, most prominent on the amount of herbivores. This is surprising, as the Kem Kem Beds supposedly has less vegetation than Bahariya, according to 
Ijouiher 2016. The Kem Kem also (understandably) appears to share more ichthyofauna with Brazil's from the Albian to Cenomanian than the Bahariya.
All in all, the Kem Kem Beds have a more diverse fauna than most seem to know, and hopefully there will be more discoveries from this series of formations that help us understand this ecosystem better in the future.

Thanks to:

:iconscotthartman: for the AlamosaurusBuitreraptorOuranosaurusMasiakasaurus, Nigersaurus, and Tupandactylus skeletals, which was used in one way or another during the making of this chart.
:iconfranoys: for the Acrocanthosaurus (which was the base for Sauroniops), Carcharodontosaurus, and Spinosaurus skeletals.
:iconpwnz3r-dragon: for the Deltadromeus and composite megaraptorid skeletals.
:iconrandomdinos: for the (unreleased) Paralititan, Epachthosaurus, and Andesaurus schematics, as well as providing the scalings for Stomatosuchus, Aegisuchus, Sarcosuchus, and UCRC I 5S4 scalings, which were used in some way for this chart.
:iconpaleojoe: for the Ekrixinatosaurus skeletal.
:iconzhejiangopterus: for the chaoyangopterid and Xericeps skull reconstructions. Go check out his cool blog as well!
:iconqilong: for the composite chaoyangopterid skeletal.
:iconhyrotrioskjan: for the Simoliophis and Paranogmius reconstructions, as well as providing commentary on Discord.
Mark Witton for the Zhejiangopterus skeletal.
Gregory S. Paul for the Elaphrosaurus skeletal.
Karen Carr for the Malawisuchus reconstruction.
Tracy Ford for the Stolokrosuchus skull drawing.
Pepi for the Montealtosuchus reconstruction.
Flower 1898 for the Queensland lungfish illustration.
Lydekker et al. 1909 for the South American lungfish illustration.
Whoever made this nice African helmeted turtle illustration.
This photo of a false coral snake.
The MNHN for this Magdalena River turtle illustration.
Poll Mertens for this Petrocephalus simus illustration.
Jeffery T. Williams for this milkfish photo.
Cervigón et al. 1992 for this cownose ray illustration.
Marc Dando for this knifetooth sawfish illustration.
The FCIT for this Nile bichir illustration.
Duane Raver for this alligator gar illustration.
Farinoza for this Uromastyx geyri photo.
Deposits Magazine for this Callipurbeckia skeletal.
Pinheiro & Rodrigues 2017 for the anhanguerid skeletal.
Krause et al. 2006 for the Araripesuchus and Mahajungasuchus skeletals.
Lane & Maisey 2009 for the diagram of the Tribodus anterior body.
Maisey 1986 for the Hybodus skeletal.
Meylan 1996 for the Araripemys skeletal.
Gaffney et al. 2006 for the images used for Dirqadim, Galianemys, and Hamadachelys; this paper had some, er, peculiar comments...
Leal & Brito 2004 for the Cladocyclus skeleton image.
Fischer 2012 for the Lissodus reconstruction.
Grande & Bermis 1998 for the Calamopleurus skeleton image(s).
Maisey 1986 for the Axelrodichthys skeletal.
Medeiros et al. 2011 for the Mawsonia gigas schematic.
Wueiringer et al. 2009 for the Libanopristis lineart.
Stromer 1925 for the Onchopristis rostrum.
Grillo & Delcourt 2016 for the Skorpiovenator skeletal.
A enormous thanks to Lionel Cavin for the otherwise inaccessible papers he was kind enough to provide; without them, scaling a bunch of the fish would have been impossible.
Update #1: Added some sources; still need to add a lot more.
Update #2: Added all the references for the silhouettes for this chart; gonna work on the referenced papers soon.
Update #3: I know I said I would add the referenced papers to here, but honestly I don't think I will ever get around to do that. Ah well. Downsized Sereno's longirostrine crocodyliform (based on a tweet by Tom Holtz stating that the skull was around 155 cm long, as opposed to the original 200 cm estimate), added the holotype of A. lavocati, changed the silhouette for the somphospondylian, and quite obviously made the aquatic side of creatures more packed together.
Update #4: Edited the Onchopristis rostrums after learning that the rostrum was somewhat incomplete.
Update #5: Removed the elaphrosaurine; see its description for reasons.
Update #6: Renamed Lepidotes pankowskii to Adrianaichthys pankowskii; thanks to Hyrotrioskjan for bringing this up to me.
Update #7: Changed the Sigilmassasaurus silhouette based on randomdinos's newly updated spinosaurin chart (yes i know it's basically a Spinosaurus). Also updated descriptions here and there.
thank you all for the birthday wishes!
Aegyptosaurus schematic
So ijreid suggested the other day that Aegyptosaurus might be close to Rapetosaurus and alike based on some morphological shit (i guess), so I quickly whipped this up. Proportions matched up surprisingly well; the only difference happened to be the leg being somewhat longer.

Stromer 1936 for the humerus, radii, ulnae, and femur.
Stromer 1932 for the caudals, scapula, tibia, and pedal claw.
Jain & Bandyopadhyay 1997 for the scapula placeholder.
:iconscotthartman:'s juvenile Rapetosaurus skeletal
give MrWeaselMan a watch if you haven't already, he does amazing shit
please take my Shishugou chart with a bucketful of salt, it's really old and the sizes are bound to be wrong; i might remake it at some point, but not in the immediate future
Green algae
Golden brown algae
Brown algae
Red algae
Club mosses 
Horsetails (Equisetum sylvaticum & E. arvense-like)
Mosquito ferns (Azollopis)
Water spangles (Dorfiella)
Water clovers
Cinnamon ferns (Osmunda)
Curly grass (Anemia mexicana-like form, Microlepiopsis (also Anemia mexicana-like), Schizaea-like, Lygodium-like)
Blechnaceae - Midlandia (Woodwardia-like) and Wessiea (Onoclea-like)
Gleicheniacae (Gleichenia-like?)
Tree ferns (still not completely confirmed)
Bennettitales (Nilsonia-like)
Pines (Picea, Pinus)
Parataxodium (giant redwood basically)
Taxodium wallisii
Athrotaxis-like (only found at one site, so consider with caution)
Ceratophyllum (hornworts)
Haloragacae (Myriophyllum-like)
Witch hazels
Wheel trees (Nordenskiodia-like)
Elms Birches (Alnus-like and Carpinus-like)
Water chestnut (Nymphaeities)
Nyssa (Nyssa and Amersinia-like)
Dove trees (Davidia)
Holly (Ilex-like)
Cashew trees
Toricelliacae (Toricellia-like)
i could add a few things here and there, but i'm like super-tired atm so i'll do it later or something


Megalotitan's Profile Picture
Artist | Hobbyist | Traditional Art


Add a Comment:
mixtix-freeman Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2018  Hobbyist
Thank you for the :+fav: ! :)
Evodolka Featured By Owner Oct 13, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
thank you so much about the watch :aww:
Majestic-Colossus Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2018
Thank you very much for watching! I hope I'll be more active soon!
TheShinAlex Featured By Owner Sep 8, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thanks for the fave!
Megalotitan Featured By Owner Sep 8, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
np; good to see that you're still around btw :p
unofficial-pro Featured By Owner Aug 24, 2018  Hobbyist Artist
Thanks for watching
kingrexy Featured By Owner Aug 21, 2018  Student Digital Artist
Thanks for the watch!
deinocheirusmaster Featured By Owner Jul 28, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thanks for the fav, I really appreciate it!
hypo-potamus Featured By Owner Edited Jul 8, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks for watching me!
Willy276 Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2018
Happy birthday!

Add a Comment: