Opabinia visual guide by Prehistorica (Christian M.)

[Flaffy]

Christian M. on twitter (@Prehistorica_CM) did a fantastic infographic write-up detailing the enigmatic anatomy of Opabinia regalis. Learnt quite a few new things about the genus that I was previously unaware of!

Now that this wonderful resource exists, there's no reason or excuse for any company looking to create their own Opabinia model not to reference this 11-page visual guide.

"Opabinia regalis, one of the most famous animals of the entire paleozoic, is also one of its most misunderstood. In this thread, I present a short, visual guide for reconstructing everyone's favourite many-eyed Cambrian lobopodian." - Prehistorica

Spoiler

"Opabinia is one of the most popular subjects for Cambrian paleoart, and yet, few renditions approach what is actually known from the fossil evidence."


"Some issues prevalent in paleoart include small things, like disorganized eyes, or missing annulations where they should be. Other common issues are much bigger, like missing legs, or hard arthropod-like segments and joints."


"Opabinia has a long and storied history, and many aspects of its anatomy aren't even very well documented in literature. Some things are best observed in the fossils themselves."


"When Harry Whittington presented his new interpretation of Opabinia to a crowd of fellow scientists, the image of the animal was met with unexpected laughter, almost startling Whittington, who then worked even harder to prove his interpretation beyond reasonable doubt."


"And yet, we have learned much about lobopodians since then, including Opabinia. Whittington, for example, did not include legs, and gave his animal arthropod-like segments covering its body."


"Our image of Opabinia in science today is much different than it was then, and yet, many paleoartistic recreations have not moved far beyond this 1975 interpretation."


"Opabinia in reality was a fascinating animal, with many anatomical quirks, large and small, that could be represented in paleoart. From its ventral walking legs and display flaps, to the smooth leathery ridges of its back that rise towards the back."


"Opabinia is no bit less fascinating than it was 50 years ago, and there is much more we still need to learn. Its legs, although evident in many of the fossils, are still poorly studied in full, and new specimens are rare."


"Opabinia was a rare component of the Burgess Shale, hard to find among the coral and arthropods, a 9 centimetre long oddity sorting through silt on the ocean floor. Perhaps, it was even colourful, dazzling predators with flashy displays, or finding unique ways to hide."


"This concludes my guide on reconstructing Opabinia regalis. I hope it inspires future works to go even further. I have provided my sources below, and will answer any questions in comments or direct message. I will do more with this model in the future."

[close]

[ceratopsian]

Of all the Cambrian oddities, Opabinia is the one I'd most like a good model of. One day, I hope! An interesting read. Thanks @Flaffy.

[Faelrin]

Hold up Opabinia had legs too? First time I'm learning about this. Now I have even more questions lol. That said, here's the obligatory question about which is the most accurate figure out there now? I need to find my guide on Paleozoic figures again as I imagine that would be helpful to have around.

[Flaffy]

Hold up Opabinia had legs too? First time I'm learning about this. Now I have even more questions lol. That said, here's the obligatory question about which is the most accurate figure out there now? I need to find my guide on Paleozoic figures again as I imagine that would be helpful to have around.

Yeah the legs is something people often miss, but surprisingly Favorite Co. managed to sneak them in for both their regular and mini Opabinia.

As for the most accurate figure... very hard to say. Every figure on the market has some aspect wrong with it. I'll list some major issues with the two that I personally consider "most accurate".

Favorite Co.
- Incorrect appendage orientation
- Claws on the legs
- Missing tube-like mouth (I think they went with the trunk = mouth hypothesis)
- Proportion of eyes in relation to head

Paleozoo
- Missing legs? (can't see clearly with promotional images)
- Missing spikes on tail
- Size and shape of flaps
- Segments potentially too "hard" looking

[Faelrin]

Didn't catch the mouth tube earlier. Gosh makes me love it even more. Definitely alien in like every sense of the word, and yet this existed.

Not gonna lie would love to see this reconstruction as a figure too. Colors are so nice. Imagine it would be pretty pricey though.

Edit: By the way thanks for the breakdown above. Glad the mini Favorite gets some things right. It's my "favorite" so far anyways.

[BlueKrono]

Those legs are very lobopod/velvet worm-like.

[Halichoeres]

It's great to see an in-depth guide to a little critter like this. Thanks for sharing, @Flaffy!