search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
282


Journal of Paleontology 92(2):272–288


chasmosaurines (Currie et al., 2016; Lehman et al., 2016) and Zuniceratops (Wolfe et al., 2010). ROM 73834 (Fig. 6.3, 6.4, 6.13).—This specimen only


preserves the horncore portion of a right postorbital. The palpebral contact is completely open (Fig. 6.4). The frontal suture is only open anterior to the horncore and the frontal is indistinguishably fused posteriorly. The supracranial sinus system is represented by two depressions on the medioventral surface of the specimen (Fig. 6.4) that do not invade the shaft of the horncore, as is the typical condition for Centrosaurini (Farke, 2010). The length of the horncore (139.7mm) is ~20% longer than that of TMP 2002.069.0010 (Fig. 6.12). The cross section of the horncore is more flattened and triangular than that of TMP 2002.069.0010, with its flat surface projecting poster- olaterally rather than laterally as for juvenile Centrosaurus apertus (Ryan et al., 2001, figs. 10C–10F) and Coronosaurus brinkmani (Ryan and Russell, 2005). WDC-DJR-003 (Fig. 6.9–6.11).—This specimen preserves


the supraorbital region (fused lacrimals, palpebrals, postorbitals, and frontals) with the almost complete right (the tip is reconstructed in the figure) and incomplete left horncores. The preserved horncore length is 296mmwith a basal circumference of 383mm. Unlike TMP 2002.069.0010 and ROM 73834, the cross-section of these horncores is circular (although they have been slightly distorted taphonomically). The horncore is strongly laterally oriented, but this is exaggerated due to the deformation (Fig. 6.9, 6.10). The basal overgrowth of the contact surface for the keratinous sheath, which is prominent on ROM 73831, is only poorly developed on the dorsoposterior two-thirds of the basal circumference of this specimen.Aunique shallow, broad depression occurs on the anterior and ventral side of the horncore base, which is different from small round deep pit on the ROM 73831 (Fig. 6.11). The frontal fontanelle margin is intact anteriorly, and it


seems to have been open at the time of death. The supracranial sinus system is restricted to the base of the horncores. The antorbital buttress is swollen, making an oval-shaped eminence in lateral view (Fig. 6.10). ROM 73831 (Fig. 6.5–6.8, 6.14).—ROM 73831 is a large


(the basal circumference is 500mm) left postorbital fused with its complementary lacrimal, palpebral, and frontal. The massive horncore is similar to those of Albertaceratops. The anterior region of the orbital rim is thickened, creating a prominent antorbital buttress (Fig. 6.7). The medial margin of the frontal does not reach the midline, indicating an open frontal fontanelle. The supracranial sinus (Fig. 6.8) partially invades the horncore at its base, similar to that seen in WDC-DJR-003. The tip of the horncore is broken and missing, and therefore the total length of the horncore is unknown, but the circumference of the horncore at its base is large (500mm) and comparable to the largest horncore size of the non-Triceratopsini chasmosaurines (510mm in Pentaceratops sternbergii,Wiman, 1930; Fig. 7; Table S2). The cross-section of the horncore is circular throughout the entirety of its preserved length. The horncore has a strong lateral inclination (~80˚ from the sagittal plane in the dorsal and ventral view),with only a limited projection dorsally (~20˚ from the horizontal plane in the anterior and posterior view). The horncore also has a slight curvature in dorsal and ventral views, but far less than that of Nasutoceratops (Sampson et al., 2013; Lund et al., 2016b).


500


300


100


non-Triceratopsini chasmosaurine


Triceratopsini


Figure 7. Comparison of postorbital horncore basal circumference between Medusaceratops, Centrosaurinae, non-Triceratopsini Chasmosaurinae, and Triceratopsini. In the box plots, mean values are represented by lines in the boxes, lower and upper bounds of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles, and the ends of the dashed lines indicate minimum and maximum values of the data. Data used for this plot are provided in Table S2.


The horncore has an unusual overgrowth that creates the


step at the base of the horncore (Fig. 6.5, 6.6), which is also seen in the postorbital horncores of Albertaceratops nesmoi Ryan, 2007. Spiclypeus shipporum Mallon et al., 2016 also has a step at the base of the right postorbital horncore, but the step is restricted to the posterior side of the horncore, and it appears to be formed by extensive pitting rather than overgrowth. The holotype horncores of ‘Ceratops montanus’ (Marsh, 1888) from the Judith River Formation (Mallon et al., 2016) do not have this overgrowth. On the ventral side of the horncore, there is a round foramen that is suggestive of resorption (Fig. 6.5), which is known to occur in postorbital horncores of various eucentro- sauran centrosaurines, such as Coronosaurus (Ryan and Russell, 2005), Spinops (Farke et al., 2011), Centrosaurus (Ryan et al., 2001; Tanke and Farke, 2006), Styracosaurus (Ryan et al., 2007), and Einiosaurus (Sampson, 1995), but not in non-Eucentrosaura centrosaurines.


Nasal.—The nasals of Medusaceratops lack a distinct vertical horncore but instead have ornamentation that is in the form of a low, elongate, rugose ridge.No newnasalmaterial can be added to the sample described by Ryan (2007). We re-examined the available nasals from the bonebed, but have no significant mor- phological observations beyond those in Ryan (2007); we there- fore direct the reader to the appropriate section of that publication.


Osteohistological ontogenetic assessment


In order to assess the potential that thematerial fromtheMansfield bonebed represents the full ontogenetic sequence of this taxon, the distal end of a left tibia from the bonebed (ROM 67873) was histologically sampled at its minimum diaphyseal circumference. This specimen represents one of the largest individuals among the bonebed material (minimum circumference=300mm). The mid- diaphysis is very robust and the lateral half of the distal end,where the calcaneum articulated, is extended distally compared to the medial half, which is characteristic of ceratopsids. Although it cannot be unequivocally referred to Medusaceratops,itis


horncore circumference (mm)


centrosaurine


Medusaceratops


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204