Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
Frozen Crested Elvisaurus by ScottHartman Frozen Crested Elvisaurus by ScottHartman
Cryolophosaurus, the primitive antarctic theropod with a cool hair cut.

Notes: I had originally planned to go with a combination of Dilophosaurus and "D." sinensis parts to reconstruct Cryolophosaurus as a coelophysoid-grade theropod, but the massive Carrano et al study came out on the second day I spent on this critter, so it's been rejiggered a bit to reflect it's possible status as a basal tetanuran (along with "D". sinensis).

Update: Altered the anterior caudals and the cervical ribs based on Michael's observations. Also updated the soft tissue silhouette to bring make it current.
Add a Comment:
 
:icony87arrow:
y87arrow Featured By Owner Sep 30, 2016
That's right. Elvi-saurus, not ElviS-saurus, as many other people call it.
Reply
:iconijreid:
ijreid Featured By Owner Dec 30, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Fantastic :D This is one of few images that show Cryolophosaurus with a long and narrow snout, and therefore, one of few great images out there.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015  Professional Digital Artist
Thanks :)
Reply
:icondjake:
Djake Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks…  Now I'll be calling this thing Elvisaurus for eternity…  >.>
:giggle:
Reply
:iconcynder-man:
Cynder-Man Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2014  Student Digital Artist
I love this dinosaur.... that's all I have to say.
Reply
:iconpedrosalas:
PedroSalas Featured By Owner May 1, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
Reply
:iconlatigidgals:
latigidgals Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2013
Hey Scott any idea where i can find a front on shot of this wee beasty as I would like to attempt to sculpt him? I have only recently rekindled my fascination for everything prehistoric and would be very grateful for any links to good books sites etc. Already following your site and thanks in advance

Glenn
Reply
:iconcommonhousegecko:
CommonHouseGecko Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2013
He was The King way before T. rex!
Reply
:iconrobosawrus:
robosawrus Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013
do you have reprints?
Reply
:iconmarmot-of-doom:
Marmot-of-Doom Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
what show the dark grey parts of the silhouette?
Reply
:iconmarmot-of-doom:
Marmot-of-Doom Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
ouh wait, it's just the watermark XD
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Feb 28, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Yup :)
Reply
:iconmaxterandkiwiking:
MaxterandKiwiKing Featured By Owner Feb 27, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Awesome!!! I've always wanted to see a skeletal of this beast,ever since it was re-classified as a proto-tetanuran.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Feb 27, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
This is definitely the "proto-tetanuran" version. With any luck that will even hold up! ;)
Reply
:icondeinonychusempire:
DeinonychusEmpire Featured By Owner Feb 27, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
So Cryolophosaurus probably wasn't a dilophosaurid, or...?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Feb 27, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Well, I wouldn't get too attached to any particular phylogenetic hypotheses regarding the base of theropoda just yet, but the most recent studies seem to indicate that at the least it should be closer to more derived theropods than is Dilophosaurus. I hope to get time to restore Dilophosaurus at some point (and Coelophysis as well) to get a better feel for them.
Reply
:iconzewqt:
ZeWqt Featured By Owner Feb 23, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Elvisaurus, I hate this nickname!! I love the skull that you gave it!
Reply
:iconsanderkools:
SanderKools Featured By Owner Feb 27, 2013
Indeed, they should have nicked it Tintinsaurus!
Reply
:iconarchosaurian:
Archosaurian Featured By Owner May 24, 2012
A few comments here, as someone who sees the original material on a rather regular basis. First off, the postorbital process of the jugal and associated bones are preserved, and they are illustrated in figure 8 of Smith et al. 2007, yes, the jugal does contact the squamosal. The reconstruction of the snout is interesting, along with the more 'tetanuran' aspects, but having discussed the animal at length with some of its primary researchers, I think that teven if it does turn out to be a basal tetanuran, it still probably had a lot of 'dilophosaur features' though I don't think I can disucss a lot about this at the moment in detail. As for other things that I can't exactly discuss in detail, but are 'out there' already; the cervical ribs of Cryolophosaurus are... interesting. Take a close look at figure 11 of Smith et al, if you start thinking something is off, no it isn't, that really is what they look like. The 'proximal tibia' in figure 8 is not a tibia, but the appendicular skeleton here overall looks quite good, so I don't think any dramatic changes must be made. Finally, with the caudal vertebrae, the transverse processes should be much more inclined dorsally.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 24, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Thanks for the comments Mike-

I have to say that I really don't believe the jugal contacts the squamosal in life - I think it's displaced in the fossil, sorry. Feel free to prove me wrong, but the figures in the paper sure didn't convince me.

The snout as restored here is about as Dilophosaurus-like as "D." sinensis (which it more commonly groups with) and it even has a larger premax/max notch than sinensis. I do agree that in general it's likely to feel like a Dilophosaurus-grade theropod, but that wouldn't lead me to make any changes to the snout shape at this time.

On the other hand you are definitely right about the cervical ribs, I'll have to update that for sure. As for the transverse processes, do you mean there are more anterior caudals prepped out? Because one of the caudals on my skeletal is based very explicitly on figure 13E, and that's what I based the degree of dorsal inclination on for the rest of them.

Anyhow, thanks for the feedback :)
Reply
:iconarchosaurian:
Archosaurian Featured By Owner May 24, 2012
The best I can say right now is that having seen the specimen the contact between the jugal and squamosal looks quite well defined and the bones appear to be in their natural position, if I could I would take some photos of the suture, but I'm camera-less at the moment.

I think anything called D. sinensis these days is a bit of a problem, to say the least, someone really needs to redescribe the things, my interpretation relied more on Dracovenator and D. wetherilli, but that's just my take on the situation.

And yes, there are lots of anterior caudals, a few have been completely prepped and they have some nice big transverse processes that rise at a 30–40 degree angle, rather different from the more posterior 13e caudal.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 24, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Sweet, I'll update the anterior caudals too the!.

While I agree that "D." sinensis is very problematic taxonomically, I've looked over (one of) the specimen(s) and I don't have a problem with the phylogenetic association with Cryolophosaurus at this point, plus the snout shape goes with the left side nasals. Obviously I can easily change the snout if need be (and/or the jugal), but I'm gonna have to wait till I'm convinced first.

Good to know that work on Cryolophosaurus is continuing apace, it's a bitch of a prep job but it's a really important specimen. :)
Reply
:iconbabbletrish:
babbletrish Featured By Owner May 20, 2012  Professional Traditional Artist
So amazing!
Reply
:icondr-xiii:
Dr-XIII Featured By Owner May 20, 2012   Digital Artist
I don't mean to bash you work, but I think the name “Elvisaurus” is really bad joke to use. Just ask THIS dude..
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 20, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Haha, I love that cartoon. I was just maintaining the historical name that was applied before the official name. In particular, young (or not so young) viewers of Dinosaur Train will be familiar with the term, since it's not only used on the show, but is also the basis of the personality of the Cryolophosaurus character.
Reply
:iconpilsator:
pilsator Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Whey, I can't see why the basalmost tetanurans wouldn't look very dilophosaur-grade-coelophysish - seeing that Coelophysoidea has a good chance of being paraphyletic to Averostra, we should expect dilophosaur-like animals at the roots of both Ceratosauria and Tetanurae.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Agreed.
Reply
:iconcommonhousegecko:
CommonHouseGecko Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2013
Sorry if the question is stupid but are Megapnosaurus' and Dilophosaurus' double crests homologous? and if they are, would not that have severe implications for Coelophysidae's monophyly?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
I don't know what Megapnosaurus is, did you mean Coelophysis? ;) Anyhow, all of those basal theropods seem to have double ridges (which are sometimes elaborated into crests), so in that sense they are all homologous structures, although whether that enlargement happened once or several times isn't clear.
Reply
:iconcommonhousegecko:
CommonHouseGecko Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2013
I meant "Syntarsus" kayentaka. 
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
I know. My answer still stands, I just won't acknowledge that stupid name.
Reply
:iconsupergoji18:
supergoji18 Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
i'd love to see a video of a Cryolophosaurus singing Jailhouse Rock.
Reply
:iconroflo-felorez:
RoFlo-Felorez Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Student Digital Artist
so there's two versions of the cryolophosaurus? i saw a model similar to this one in Dinosaur Revolution where it had a body build more like a dilophosaurus as opposed to the big thick carnosaur body, and i couldnt find anything that said there was another version of teh cryolophosaurus
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
There's only one specimen of Cryolophosaurus, and as best I can tell it looks like what I've drawn here. But Cryolophosaurus was found in very hard rock, so it took a long time before enough was prepared for the data to be published. That said, it was clear form the crest that it was a new dinosaur, so basically what happened is that a new dinosaur was named based on a partially preserved skull, and that lead to a lot of more carnosaur-like reconstructions - indeed, the authors originally thought it might be very advanced for how old it was.

Anyhow, the more dilophosaur-like build is correct, so be happy you didn't find the older ones.
Reply
:iconroflo-felorez:
RoFlo-Felorez Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Student Digital Artist
so the reason we have reconstructions like this one [link] is cus we werent fully able to see the fullview of the body yet?

also where would they have gotten the material for something like that one?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Right - that cast was made before most of the bones were prepped and described. Museums end up paying something of an "innovator's tax" when they rush to get the first mount up of a new dinosaur, as frequently they don't wait for all the data that will be available and therefore go off of early speculation rather than hard facts.

In the case of Cryolophosaurus the animal was named in 1994 (and mounts went up in the mid to late '90s) but it wasn't until 2007 that a monograph was published with all of the bones (and even that isn't "all", as they report getting more anterior dorsals out the season before that they couldn't get prepped in time for the paper).
Reply
:iconroflo-felorez:
RoFlo-Felorez Featured By Owner May 20, 2012  Student Digital Artist
well its good that now we finally have a better understanding of cryolophosaurus, i always hear about dilophosaurus being the first "large" predator of the early jurassic but it was weird seeing it compared to the big "allosaur-like" cryolophosaurus for the past few years :P
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 20, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Agreed - now the phylogeny and the timeline match up much more intuitively.
Reply
:iconroflo-felorez:
RoFlo-Felorez Featured By Owner May 20, 2012  Student Digital Artist
hopefully, looking forward to seeing more updates from the dinosaur world :)
Reply
:iconmalevouvenator:
malevouvenator Featured By Owner May 19, 2012
I dont know why, but the skull reminds me a lot to Herrerasaurus
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
In the general shape,yes.
Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional General Artist
No Coelophysoid huh? That comes unexpected. The skull in yours look much more robust than in the 2011-version of Hanson [link]
Did he interpret the smushed parts wrong?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Well, I wouldn't say it's a done deal that Cryolophosaurus isn't a coelophysoid, but it's an open question again.

As for Hansen's version, the main difference in robustness is actually in the postorbital process of the jugal, which isn't preserved. I do think he used some of the more squished side to delimit the shape of the orbit and the fenestrae, but those are pretty minor differences all in all, and the main change (the snout shape) stems from the different phylogenetic position of the animal at the time.
Reply
:iconeriorguez:
Eriorguez Featured By Owner May 19, 2012
"Dilophosaurus" sinensis really needs a rename among other things...
Reply
:iconthediremoose:
thediremoose Featured By Owner May 19, 2012
I agree; it's been way too long since it was recognized as separate.

That said, there is still a major difference between "It's not Dilophosaurus" and "It's a completely new genus." The big question at this point is whether the specimens (yes, plural, which makes things worse) should be given their own genus or referred to Sinosaurus, a fragmentary taxon from the same formation.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Desperately.
Reply
:icontyrannosaurusprime:
TyrannosaurusPrime Featured By Owner May 19, 2012
Cool!:) The skull looks elongated as depicted in Dinosaur Revolution, instead of the more "robust" skull as depicted in many casts.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 19, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
One side of the skull (the one that is more commonly shown) has crushed nasals that curve down - that's what's lead a lot of people to create a deeper skull. The other side shows that the nasals actually are fairly straight (at least as much as is preserved).
Reply
:icontyrannosaurusprime:
TyrannosaurusPrime Featured By Owner May 19, 2012
I did not know that.... :O Thanks! :)
Reply
:iconspongebobfossilpants:
SpongeBobFossilPants Featured By Owner May 19, 2012
Oh, so it might be a tetanuran after all?
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
May 19, 2012
Image Size
985 KB
Resolution
7000×2274
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
11,830 (3 today)
Favourites
200 (who?)
Comments
58