Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
Spiked 'do reptile by ScottHartman Spiked 'do reptile by ScottHartman
A reconstruction of CMN 344, the type specimen of Styracosaurus. The outrageous hairdo clearly stems from the ceratopsians' experimental college days...

...erm, were most likely for intraspecies display and mate attraction.

Edit: Minor soft-tissue adjustments to the silhouette.
Add a Comment:
 

The Artist has requested Critique on this Artwork

Please sign up or login to post a critique.

:iconarchanubis:
Archanubis Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2016
So how common are the skeletons for this dinosaur?  And are there any indications of sexual dimorphism in the species (i.e. females having smaller horns and frill spikes)?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2016  Professional Digital Artist
Not common at all unfortunately. With the current sample size we really can't say anything about dimorphism.
Reply
:icondinodanthetrainman:
dinodanthetrainman Featured By Owner May 18, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Reply
:iconpedrosalas:
PedroSalas Featured By Owner May 1, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
Reply
:icondinobirdman:
DinoBirdMan Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2013  Student Artist
Styracosaurus or "Spike" is the nice looking horned dinosaur of da.
Reply
:iconaction-figure-opera:
action-figure-opera Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2013
You should upload, if at least in your Scrap folder, a version of this with the nose horn curving up toward the head, rather than away.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
But that's not the specimen I'm using.
Reply
:iconaction-figure-opera:
action-figure-opera Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2013
I know, which is why I suggested putting in Scraps, for my personal admiration, while avoiding the attention of people who might feel mislead.
Reply
:iconkazuma27:
Kazuma27 Featured By Owner Aug 3, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I definitely have to try drawing Styra, someday...
Reply
:iconwonton2:
wonton2 Featured By Owner May 7, 2012
my favorite Dinosour. this guy seems to be right out of a sci fi novel but he actually existed.
Reply
:iconaction-figure-opera:
action-figure-opera Featured By Owner Mar 8, 2013
I feel that way about every dinosaur. They blow me away.
Reply
:iconspuderific:
Spuderific Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2012
Cheap kid's toys really mess things up.
I say a (supposed) toy version of this dino, and it gave it the fancy frill and the tri-horns from Triceratops.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Yikes, that IS bad. You are right, most toys (and even most kids books) don't get basic dinosaur anatomy right. Sigh...
Reply
:iconspuderific:
Spuderific Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2012
The Deinonychus was worse. It was more like a daschund-raptor
Reply
:iconchrismasna:
ChrisMasna Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
I love this one! Used here [link] . ;)
Reply
:iconaction-figure-opera:
action-figure-opera Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011
Very interesting. Another inconsistency between depictions. Most examples depict the central horn curving toward the frill, while you've depicted it curving away from the face.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
There are skulls that do both. Most restorations outside of this one are based on the excellent specimen at the AMNH (which Greg Paul has done a skeletal reconstruction of), but there are specimens with horns that bend even further forward than the type specimen that I illustrate here.
Reply
:iconaction-figure-opera:
action-figure-opera Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011
I see.
Reply
:iconthediremoose:
thediremoose Featured By Owner Oct 6, 2011
This has long been one of my favorite ceratopsians. Those spikes are pretty impressive-looking.
Reply
:iconmustardofdoom:
mustardofdoom Featured By Owner Jul 23, 2011  Student Traditional Artist
Your description really takes the cake =P
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jul 24, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Lol, thanks!
Reply
:iconalgoroth:
Algoroth Featured By Owner Jul 7, 2011  Professional General Artist
WOW! :chew:
Reply
:icondeinonychusempire:
DeinonychusEmpire Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
Awesome work! Styracosaurus is my favorite ceratopsian.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Medusaceratops is mine, but that's just for vanities sake. Styracosaurus is really cool though.
Reply
:iconswordsaint001:
SwordSaint001 Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011
I've always loved the ceratopsians and Styracosaurus in particular. What are your feeling on these theories that they were omnivores? the family more than just Styracosaurus...
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Honestly, almost all organisms will eat meat if they get a chance (driving along in Wyoming I frequently saw deer and ground squirrels eating road kill); the calorie-dense proteins and fats are both calorically-dense and they provide some nutrients that are harder to come by.

So I see it more as a spectrum, from animals that eat mostly meat, to those who eat meat only a little (and only when the opportunity presents itself). Ceratopsians, with their hooked beaks and teeth that sliced more than ground up food certainly seem better able to process meat then say hadrosaurs, so I wouldn't be surprised if they say purposely took advantage of carcasses when they found them. Horned dinosaurs would have even been able to camp a carcass if they wanted to (and ability that hadrosaurs would have lacked).
Reply
:iconswordsaint001:
SwordSaint001 Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011
that is true I grew up in Colorado till I moved to Georgia to marry my wife so I have see the same myself.Heck I've seen goats do it here on the farm we have. So you have a good point. I guess from what I had heard the idea was that they were like Dion-pigs eating what they could find animal, vegetable, whatever. Interesting nonetheless!
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
I think pigs are a pretty good model actually. Of course then we have to imagine a rhino or elephant-sized suid with giant horns...so the comparison is still a bit limited.
Reply
:iconarchanubis:
Archanubis Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2016
Isn't that essentially what an entelodont is? ;)
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2016  Professional Digital Artist
Sort of. Entelodonts aren't actually that closely related to pigs (despite the "killer pig" nickname). Also, with a couple of exceptions entelodonts were closer to wolf-size than horse size (and none were rhino sized).
Reply
:iconswordsaint001:
SwordSaint001 Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2011
I could see it, it's a very interesting idea to me. I mean think of said Styracosaurus or a Pachyrihinosaurus rushing in to a kill site of some smaller predators. Brandishing their horns and wagging their huge heads with the colorful frills a gleaming. Snorting and the like.... it make me run away from my kill. :-)
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Yeah, I could definitely see herds of ceratopsians driving predators from carcasses, although I'd expect that sort of behavior to be more common during lean seasons, as it does entail some risk.
Reply
:iconswordsaint001:
SwordSaint001 Featured By Owner Jun 16, 2011
Indeed, I don't see it being an everyday affair myself, Hogs don't even do that. it causes an interesting thought of if they had not bit it in the end if a few species could have gone the predator root... doubtful, but an interesting possibility...
Reply
:icondinohunter000:
DinoHunter000 Featured By Owner Jun 13, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I'm a sucker for the weird and wonderful, and this nicely fits into both of them :) It really is a breath of fresh air to see some more of variation within the species than seeing the one ''classic'' example!
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Yeah - I sometimes shy away from skeletals when I know that someone has done it well already (thought not always, sometimes surprises await), but when another really good specimen is available it always feels like a more useful public service.
Reply
:iconpilsator:
pilsator Featured By Owner Jun 13, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Very cool stuff as usual. Are the cranial differences between this and the AMNH specimen really that big (or is the classic GSP recontruction of the latter just plain inaccurate)? If memory serves well, the AMNH skull shows a strongly upturned frill and a less deflected, hook-shaped predentary.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 13, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
I'd like to visit them both in person again to see how much more could be attributed to post-mortem distortion, but I think they're fairly different. Some of it can apparently be attributed to ontogenetic stages though.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Traditional Artist
Or perhaps Styracosaurus albertensis and Styracosaurus parksi really are separate species :XD:
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Quite possibly. I'm not sure how the stratigraphy works out for those two specimens; it could be another example of an anagenetic lineage as well.
Reply
:iconqilong:
Qilong Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011
As if that means anything. If a population becomes distinct from a preceding one in time, and attains some consistent morphological distinction from the one preceding it, then it could be reasonable to recognize this with nomenclature. Anagenesis be damned. This is how you can have a clinal trajectory of distinction from a "origin" to a "result" where the end points are drastically distinct from one another, but the mid points less so. If there is no recovery of the mid points in this trajectory, then we can hedge our bets and argue for nomenclatural distinction. This is different from arguing genetic distinction, much as we continue to argue about using paratoxonomy when we shouldn't on a genetic basis. We are cataloguing two distinct types, potentially. If parksi and albertensis do not necessarily co-occur, but are still each others closest sister taxa, we can approximate this genetic argument with nomenclature and retain the nomenclature applied to it in the past. We merely re-align what we're calling what.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Yes...but at higher resolutions we'll have more trouble drawing the line between species. I'm not disagreeing Jaimie, but it IS different from cladogenesis (especially if you're a punk eeker, in which case cladogenesis would actually proceed the sort of changes seen in anagenesis), in that cladogenesis leaves two populations at the same time that cannot interbreed, while apply that definition in anagenesis is very, very difficult without the Back to the Future time machine (built into a semi trailer rather than a sports car) to see what happens when a T. horridus and a T. prorsus get to spend some quality time together.
Reply
:iconqilong:
Qilong Featured By Owner Jun 24, 2011
I agree, then. I just don't like hearing or seeing, especially from some quarters, that it's anagensis NOT cladogensis, when it is clearly the one and the other, just scaling out our perspective and taking the environmental overlap (rather than isolation) of new "species" into account. Using this series of arguments to support or deride nomenclature kinda burns my biscuits, if you know what I mean.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Traditional Artist
Anagenetic? Sorry, I'm embarrassingly unfamiliar with that term, what does it mean?

I think this version is amazing, but I have a few questions. Is the lower beak really that long and recurved? I don't even recall this skull having been found with the lower jaw. The nose horn is a bit forward-curved, is that speculative or proven? Also I had thought the frill was a bit longer and more vertically-oriented relative to the snout. All the same, great skeletal, remarkably different from any other. I'm tempted to do my own version of this specimen :D
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Anagenesis is when a population evolves over time without splitting into two new species (i.e., no cladogenic event occurs). For example, stratigraphic correlation is showing that Triceratops prorsus and T. horridus aren't two species that co-existed, but rather that T. horridus is what Triceritops looked like earlier in the Maastrichtian, and T. prorsus is what it looked like late in the Maastrichtian.

As for the skull here: both the rostral and predentary are unknown in this specimen, so they are based on the AMNH specimen. The nose horn definitely curves forward, although only about 60% of it is known. As for the shield, the specimen is somewhat squished, so it's possible that the frill oculd be more upright (I may still alter that at some point), but it's apparently not as upright as the AMNH one (which I presume is what you're thinking of, since I actually illustrated the frill as more upright then in the actual specimen as restored during prep).
Reply
:iconqilong:
Qilong Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011
Anagensis is indistinguishable from a speciation event, merely at high resolution (a referent to time, rather). That's a potentially genetic argument, though. Change occurs, though, and is population-wide. The argument for anagensis is replacement with change, and that occurs identical to speciation, competition, and replacement. It should look virtually the same as anagesis at lower resolution.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2011  Professional Traditional Artist
Thanks for the info! I suspect S. albertensis is the later form and S. parksi is the early one since it looks more like Centrosaurus nasicornis in horn, snout, and frill shape. Is anyone doing a paper on the stratigraphy of these specimens?

I also suspect Triceratops had a third, basal form ancestral to T. horridus: T. eurycephalus. It's a pretty old specimen, with skull proportions somewhere between T. horridus and Torosaurus. Assuming Triceratops and Torosaurus shared a recent common ancestor, T. eurycephalus appears to be close to that node.
Reply
:iconblazze92:
bLAZZE92 Featured By Owner Feb 19, 2013
Done in 2007, Ryan et al. (2007) A Revision of the Late Campanian Centrosaurine Ceratopsid Genus Styracosaurus from the Western Interior of North America.

"The synonymy of S. parksi with S. albertensis by Dodson and Currie (1990) was also followed by Dodson et al. (2004). Although neither group of authors provided a justification of their synonymy it is now known that the differences in the squamosal that Brown and Schlaikjer (1937) used to support S. parksi fall within the normal range of variation seen in S. albertensis. Of note is that the quarry of AMNH 7372, long lost, was relocated by Darren Tanke of the Royal Tyrrell Museum in 2006 in the upper portion of the Dinosaur Park Formation (Tanke, pers. com., 2006)."

Though they seem to have a typo, AMNH 7372 instead of AMNH 5372.
Reply
:icongorgosaurus:
Gorgosaurus Featured By Owner Jun 13, 2011
Very nice work, Scott.
Although nowhere near the biggest ceratopsian this must have been an impressive and magnificent animal.

Spike.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 13, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
It's big enough that you wouldn't want it to step on your toes ;)

Mostly I was just excited to work on the type since everyone ignores it in favor of the AMNH specimen with the prettier skull. I'm pretty sure there's an off-color joke in there somewhere if someone were to try.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
June 13, 2011
Image Size
8.4 MB
Resolution
12900×6900
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
12,670 (2 today)
Favourites
197 (who?)
Comments
49