The best figure of every species, according to Halichoeres

[Concavenator]

Nice acquisitions! Also looking forward to see the WWD Tropeognathus here as well.

[Gwangi]

My oscars certainly did enjoy the occasional crayfish.

[Halichoeres]

Also looking forward to see the WWD Tropeognathus here as well.

Soon. For now, trilobites of the Ordovician! All of these are from Oumcraft, released in painted versions in early 2022.


Asaphus kowaleskii (=Neoasaphus)
Scale: 1:4
Early - Middle Ordovician
Asaphus is a fairly normal-looking trilobite, except for this one species, A. kowaleskii, whose eyestalks are so distinctive that the species used to be in its own genus, Neoasaphus. These eyes would be very useful for attending a crowded concert.


Metopolichas
Scale: 1:4 - 1:5
Early Ordovician
There seem to be a lot of fossils of Metopolichas, but it was a little challenging finding information on them. Near as I can figure, they lived in shallow, mostly calm water near reefs. Not especially unusual for a trilobite, but look at that schnoz! Trilobites with appendages, what were you doing?


Most of my Ordovician animals are from Oumcraft, so when I'm looking for a scale reference for a photo, other Oumcraft figures are the most obvious candidates. But I'm guessing most people viewing these photos don't have a lot of Oumcraft figures, so this very anachronistic but more familiar Bothriolepis might be more useful.


Onnia
Scale: 1:3 - 1:4
Middle - Late Ordovician
Onnia was widespread, long-ranging, and tiny. The long, backswept genal spines give it a distinctive silhouette. Lots of prehistoric invertebrates look like Star Trek ships, but this one more than most.


With the much larger, much earlier Redlichia.


Bumastus
Scale: 1:8
Early Ordovician - Late Silurian
The trilobite that looks like a caricature of a trilobite, all rounded edges and big eyes. It takes well to the game miniature treatment.


It was a big trilobite! This Stethacanthus has decided it will try for easier prey. While Bumastus lasted a long time, it didn't last long enough to meet Stethacanthus.

[Halichoeres]

Although nobody else seems to be into trilobites, I'm doubling down: here's a batch from the Cambrian. These are all from Oumcraft's Life... game, released in 2022.


Acadagnostus
Scale: 8× life size
Early - Middle Cambrian
Near as I can figure, Acadagnostus means something like "North American unknown," because the first agnostid fossils were difficult to interpret for their discoverers. The only one of these that might not be a trilobite, depending on how exactly they're related to other trilobites and how you circumscribe the clade. Trilobite phylogeny is very unsettled, so for now I'll just think of agnostids as simple trilobites. Simple, and tiny!


Friend or foe?


Bristolia
Scale: 1:4
Early Cambrian
This one was significantly remodeled from the original digital prototype (was that your doing, @Flaffy?). It's now a very good representation of the genus. The name comes from Bristol Lake, a dry lakebed in the Mojave desert that briefly fills up after heavy rains. I haven't been to this particular lake, but I've camped nearby elsewhere in the Mojave (for work, not recreation).


Elrathia
Scale: 1:3
Early - Middle Cambrian
The type species is from Utah, but the genus is named after a place in northeastern Alabama. The Utah species, E. kingi, is extremely abundant and can be bought for cheap anywhere fossils are sold, so it's become sort of the public face of trilobites--when you picture a generic trilobite, you might be picturing this little fella. See below for who "King" is.


Kingaspis
Scale: 1:3
Early Cambrian
Originally named Anomocare campbelli by a certain Wm B R King, the genus was later split, with A. campbelli moved to the new genus Kingaspis ("King's shield"). The move resulted in an embarrassing situation where the taxonomic authority citation looks like: "Kingaspis campbelli (King 1923)" so that it appears that he named it after himself. Also, I learned while reading up on this genus that both Jordan and Spain have Cambrian fossils--they are more widespread than I had suspected. Anyway, look at those funky forward-facing spines!


Peachella
Scale: 1:2 - 1:3
Early Cambrian
Not a music festival in Georgia, it's just small (-"ella") and named after someone with the surname "Peach." Large thoracic spines, and genal spines that are rounded and bulbous, make this a pretty distinctive little trilobite. What is going on with those face blobs? If I didn't know they were calcified, I might be tempted to try to pop 'em.


Quite a variety of Cambrian trilobites to keep CollectA's company now.


Paradoxides
Scale: 1:20
Middle Cambrian
A big bruiser of a trilobite, which has sometimes been found with pieces of other trilobites where its gut would have been. Whether they were preyed upon or scavenged, who knows. I haven't been able to learn how it got its name, but hopefully whatever mystery inspired it has been resolved. This nice 3D version replaces my more 2D Schmalkalder version, which I think makes this the first time I've ever replaced an arthropod in my collection.


It's a bug-eat-bug world.

[Flaffy]

Thanks for your continued efforts at documenting these guys!

And yes I did offer better references of the Bristolia for Oammararak to remodel.

[ceratopsian]

Re the name of Paradoxides, Fortey suggests that it "surely" arose from the very early pioneers being puzzled as to how to interpret their finds and puts Agnostus in the same boat.  (P. 30, Trilobite!  Witness to Evolution)  As far as I can work out, Paradoxides was coined by Brongniart in 1822, so that is plausible.  Given that he says "surely", it sounds like he too had no firm evidence for this suggestion.

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for your continued efforts at documenting these guys!

And yes I did offer better references of the Bristolia for Oammararak to remodel.

A) My pleasure!

B) Thank you, you've done us all a service!

Re the name of Paradoxides, Fortey suggests that it "surely" arose from the very early pioneers being puzzled as to how to interpret their finds and puts Agnostus in the same boat.  (P. 30, Trilobite!  Witness to Evolution)  As far as I can work out, Paradoxides was coined by Brongniart in 1822, so that is plausible.  Given that he says "surely", it sounds like he too had no firm evidence for this suggestion.

Thanks, that definitely sounds plausible! It sounds like Fortey found it as impossible as I did to locate an actual copy of Brongniart 1822.

[Faelrin]

I am enjoying seeing more of the trilobites. The fact they lasted an entire era and had so much diversity makes them a very interesting group. I'd dare say they rival the non-avian dinosaurs in that regard. 

So glad most of my favorites made it in such as Walliserops and many others. Only wish my state's trilobite did. I forgot what it was renamed to but it used to be considered Phacops back in the day.

[Concavenator]

As someone who has no idea about trilobites, it's interesting to see the morphological variance among the different taxa. Far more than in dinosaurs from what I can see! 

[Halichoeres]

Thanks, everyone! @Faelrin I believe it is now Greenops.

Normally, I don't like to post for just one figure--with a collection as large as mine, it would feel spammy. But this figure will so overshadow any other figure I present alongside it that I think it had better debut on its own.


Toyway Tropoegnathus (=Ornithocheirus mesembrinus, Walking with Dinosaurs)
Scale: 1:25 - 1:30
Released: 2000, according to DTC, although the rest of the line was 1998
Albian of South America
I am not the sort of collector who seeks things out just because they are rare. I do have some rare pieces, but in most cases I don't feel sentimental about them. For example, I would sell or trade the Chialu Brachauchenius, the painted Marx Sphenacodon and Cynognathus, or most of the Dawn of the Dinosaurs figures in a heartbeat if someone made updated versions of those taxa (I know that's an objectionable opinion to many collectors, but hey, it would just mean there was suddenly one more copy of those available to vintage collectors). Anyway, since rarity as such means little to me, I thought pretty hard about whether to add this to my wish list, given that there are other figures of both Tropeognathus and Ornithocheirus in the world. But the truth is they are all worse than the WWD version, even two decades after its release.


It's called Ornithocheirus, but after this arrived I rewatched a clip from WWD and it very clearly depicts the South American species, which used to be known as O. mesembrinus but is now in its own genus as Tropeognathus mesembrinus.


"Page 158 of the book" refers to Walking with Dinosaurs: A Natural History, which will also tell you animal facts more consistent with Tropeognathus than Ornithocheirus. This is the only text stamped on the figure, and a little odd to see a serif typeface!


In profile the shape of the crests is a pretty good match for Tropeognathus, and a bad match for Ornithocheirus.


Although in dorsal view it actually fits Ornithocheirus a bit better, with its vertically oriented teeth; Tropeognathus would have some teeth visibly splayed to the sides. But they didn't supply it with teeth, so based on its profile and the 'canon' established by WWD's narration, this is my collection's Tropeognathus.


I had planned initially to replace the Happy Kin Ornithocheirus/Criorhynchus, but for now that one is hanging on. I think somebody could make an Ornithocheirus to surpass Happy Kin's, though. If you'd asked a year ago, I'd say CollectA would probably revisit their 2011 version, but with the loss of Anthony Beeson, their strongest connection to the UK that I know of, I'm not sure how much they'll emphasize British taxa in the future.


Anyway, this TS Toys unofficial WWD figure is out instead. All hail the new Tropeognathus. To my knowledge these two have not been photographed together before. If anyone has other comparison requests, let me know and I'll do my best to accommodate.

[ceratopsian]

It deserved a presentation all to itself, especially such an informative one. I was amazed to see the page reference on the model! Many, many congratulations. And good you leapt when you did, as sterling has now risen against the dollar!  It's a handsome figure and looks in very good nick.

[Gwangi]

PLEASE write a review for it on the DTB.

[Crackington]

Wow, completely agree with @ceratopsian and @Gwangi .

Excellent write-up @Halichoeres and great to see some new photos of it. It really is a lovely figure.

Interesting to hear how it has been re-classified since the TV series, but am I reading it correctly that Ornithocheirus is still valid? It's just this particular sub-species from WWD that has been included in Tropeognathus?

If that's the case I wonder if you could keep the TS Toys one as your Ornithocheirus instead? It's pose is quite reminiscent of the TV show, but not sure about those teeth!

[Stegotyranno420]

Congratulations on the Ornithocheirus

[Flaffy]

Big congrats on acquriring such a holy grail! Despite the lack of pycnofibres, it's still a legendary piece that stands the test of time.

How do you plan do display him in your collection? Surely he deserves a dedicated pedastal or throne of his own!

[triceratops83]

You must feel as though you belong to some esoteric club now, with this acquisition. Were you on the lookout for the Ornithocheirus or did you just happen upon it?

[Faelrin]

Incredible to see you got your hands on this one. How did you acquire it? Would also love to see this get a review of the DTB.

Amazing how this figure still holds up for the most part. A shame there are no up to date versions of Tropeognathus either (or most other pterosaurs for that matter).

[PrimevalRaptor]

Congratulations on acquiring such an elusive figure! Every time another one of those pops up I feel really giddy (and amazing to see how it still holds up pretty well)

[Concavenator]

Congrats on the Trophygnathus!

[TooOldForDinosaurs]

Awesome, awesome, awesome! Congrats on this beautiful little fella. Truly an extraordinary acquisition and worthy of a longer post.