Euoplocephalus has exploded.

[Splonkadumpocus]

Victoria Arbour and Phil Currie just published a new paper separating the genera formerly assigned to Euoplocephalus since 1971.

Dyoplosaurus is still separate, and Scolosaurus and Anodontosaurus have been revived as separate taxa.

Oohkotokia, recently named from Montana, is probably the same as Scolosaurus.

Euoplocephalus is still around, but most of its distinctive features are actually derived from specimens now assigned to different genera.

Of particular note for this forum is that fact that most "Euoplocephalus" models really depict a Scolosaurus with an Anodontosaurus tail club.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Hmm..well I'm getting a bit more relieved I didn't create an Euoplocephalus.

[Takama]

Oh, great. Another figure changeing article

[Splonkadumpocus]

Victoria Arbour is covering the situation in her blog, by the way.

Also, depending on the fallout from this study, one of my 2013 predictions may be confirmed:

Two taxa, at least one of which is fairly popular, will be lumped together or split apart, resulting in arguments ranging from reasonable debate to insults and name-calling all over the Internet and the paleontological community.

Not sure if Euoplocephalus is popular enough to provoke major reactions, though.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I miss the simple days when we had trachodons, brontosaurus, triceratops, and Tyrannosaurus rex, to go with our anklosaurus. Life was much simpler.

[EmperorDinobot]

I don't know what to think. I need to read the papers and see what the differences/deformities are.

[CityRaptor]

Interesting.

As for figures: I think it will get even more chaotic, given that Euoplocephalus also moonlights as Saichania and Ankylosaurus.

I miss the simple days when we had trachodons, brontosaurus, triceratops, and Tyrannosaurus rex, to go with our anklosaurus. Life was much simpler.

[ZoPteryx]

Thank for sharing this Splonkadumpocus!   This means I have some major additions to make to my next dino supplement.  I wonder what I should do about the newly described Oohkotokia?  I guess it should be lumped into Scolosaurus, or at least made a species of Scolosaurus.

[Splonkadumpocus]

Thank for sharing this Splonkadumpocus!   This means I have some major additions to make to my next dino supplement.  I wonder what I should do about the newly described Oohkotokia?  I guess it should be lumped into Scolosaurus, or at least made a species of Scolosaurus.

I would include the following if you're going for Greg Paul's style:

Dyoplosaurus: Add the statement "Euoplocephalus tutus, which is based on inadequate remains*, may be either this or Scolosaurus."

Scolosaurus: Include Oohkotokia with it.

Anodontosaurus: Typical entry. In fact, there's already a separate entry for the Horseshoe Canyon "Euoplocephalus."

*It's not, but by Greg Paul's standards it is.

[Brontozaurus]

Awesome, my Funrise Scolosaurus is an actual dinosaur now.

[Splonkadumpocus]

Awesome, my Funrise Scolosaurus is an actual dinosaur now.

For the record, almost all depictions of Euoplocephalus are mostly based on Scolosaurus and should be considered as such.

[Dinoguy2]

Thank for sharing this Splonkadumpocus!   This means I have some major additions to make to my next dino supplement.  I wonder what I should do about the newly described Oohkotokia?  I guess it should be lumped into Scolosaurus, or at least made a species of Scolosaurus.

I would include the following if you're going for Greg Paul's style:

Dyoplosaurus: Add the statement "Euoplocephalus tutus, which is based on inadequate remains*, may be either this or Scolosaurus."

Scolosaurus: Include Oohkotokia with it.

Anodontosaurus: Typical entry. In fact, there's already a separate entry for the Horseshoe Canyon "Euoplocephalus."

*It's not, but by Greg Paul's standards it is.

As noted in the paper, E. tutus is not known form inadequate remains, as the cervical rings are diagnostic. All 5 animals are valid. Not surprising given that Euoplocephalus as traditionally imagined spanned over 15 million years of time! It would have been unprecedented if it really was all one species.

[CityRaptor]

Seems way too long, even for such a well armored animal. Something like 3 to 5 million years seems more likely.

[wings]

Victoria Arbour and Phil Currie just published a new paper separating the genera formerly assigned to Euoplocephalus since 1971.

Dyoplosaurus is still separate, and Scolosaurus and Anodontosaurus have been revived as separate taxa.

Oohkotokia, recently named from Montana, is probably the same as Scolosaurus.

Euoplocephalus is still around, but most of its distinctive features are actually derived from specimens now assigned to different genera.

Of particular note for this forum is that fact that most "Euoplocephalus" models really depict a Scolosaurus with an Anodontosaurus tail club.

Not to be disrespectful to the authors of the new paper but I'm not quite sure why this particular paper is so significant considering Penkalski has published something very similar in 2001.

References

Penkalski, P. (2001) "Variation in specimens referred to Euoplocephalus tutus". Pp. 261-298 in K. Carpenter (ed.). The Armored Dinosaurs. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.