David Silva's Beasts of the Mesozoic: Ceratopsian Series - WAVE TWO SHIPPING!

[Shonisaurus]

I would like the BoTM figures to be marketed soon, Ceraptosians along with the theropods of the Tyrannosaurus rex family are two of my favorite dinosaur species on my part.

[Halichoeres]

That was my first thought, too, when I heard ED was handling fulfillment for Europe. In the event that Brexit happens, perhaps Silva could get Urzeitshop to handle the continental orders. I completely understand why a European collector would prefer to abstain from the campaign, but without their participation, it seems like it might raise less.

[ZoPteryx]

So awesome to see the project get funded!  I was getting a little worried there.    It'll be interesting to see how and if the campaign picks up steam to reach the stretch goals.  Seems like it already is a little bit.

Gorgosaurus also coexisted with Albertaceratops, Avaceratops, Medusaceratops, and Spiclypeus in the Judith River Formation of Montana.

Good catch @suspsy .  I definitely missed that one, although it appears the Judith River Formation's tyrannosaur hasn't been proven to be Gorgosaurus, though that is the most likely suspect.  I'll include those taxa with the same asterisk as Daspletosaurus torosus, but minus Albertaceratops as those remains are apparently now considered Medusaceratops.

Just as a minor correction, Lythronax is only found in the lower Wahweap Formation while Diabloceratops is from the mid-upper, so they didn't coexist. There is another ceratopsid (UMNH VP 20600) that lived alongside Lythronax but it is unnamed.

D @Dinoguy2 Interesting.  Lund et al. 2016 consider Diabloceratops to be from the lower-middle part of the formation in their description of Machairoceratops.  This is also where Loewen et al. 2013 say Lythronax is from.  The original Diabloceratops description (Kirkland & DeBlieux 2010) has remains attributed to it being from both the middle and upper-lower portions of the Wahweap.  Either way, given the error bars involved in dating the formation, I think it's reasonable that Lythronax and Diabloceratops could have encountered each other or very close relatives.  Or is there a more recent dating of these genera that I've missed?


Updated list below:

Suskityrannus --> Zuniceratops
Albertosaurus --> Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai, Regaliceratops
Gorgosaurus --> Avaceratops, Centrosaurus/Monoclonius, Chasmosaurus belli, Einiosaurus, Medusaceratops, Spiclypeus, Styracosaurus
Bistahieversor --> Pentaceratops
Lythronax --> Diabloceratops
Teratophoneus --> Kosmoceratops, Nasutoceratops, Utahceratops
Daspletosaurus torosus --> Albertaceratops, Centrosaurus*/Monoclonius*, Chasmosaurus belli*, Spiclypeus*, Styracosaurus*, Wendiceratops
Daspletosaurus horneri --> Einiosaurus
Zhuchengtyrannus --> Sinoceratops
Tyrannosaurus --> Triceratops, Torosaurus

*it's not positive if these taxa occurred specifically with D. torosus.

Updated: 10/5/19, Judith River taxon confirmed to be Gorgosaurus libratus.

[Dinoguy2]

So awesome to see the project get funded!  I was getting a little worried there.    It'll be interesting to see how and if the campaign picks up steam to reach the stretch goals.  Seems like it already is a little bit.

Gorgosaurus also coexisted with Albertaceratops, Avaceratops, Medusaceratops, and Spiclypeus in the Judith River Formation of Montana.

Good catch @suspsy .  I definitely missed that one, although it appears the Judith River Formation's tyrannosaur hasn't been proven to be Gorgosaurus, though that is the most likely suspect.  I'll include those taxa with the same asterisk as Daspletosaurus torosus, but minus Albertaceratops as those remains are apparently now considered Medusaceratops.

Just as a minor correction, Lythronax is only found in the lower Wahweap Formation while Diabloceratops is from the mid-upper, so they didn't coexist. There is another ceratopsid (UMNH VP 20600) that lived alongside Lythronax but it is unnamed.

D @Dinoguy2 Interesting.  Lund et al. 2016 consider Diabloceratops to be from the lower-middle part of the formation in their description of Machairoceratops.  This is also where Loewen et al. 2013 say Lythronax is from.  The original Diabloceratops description (Kirkland & DeBlieux 2010) has remains attributed to it being from both the middle and upper-lower portions of the Wahweap.  Either way, given the error bars involved in dating the formation, I think it's reasonable that Lythronax and Diabloceratops could have encountered each other or very close relatives.  Or is there a more recent dating of these genera that I've missed?


Updated list below:

Suskityrannus --> Zuniceratops
Albertosaurus --> Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai, Regaliceratops
Gorgosaurus --> Avaceratops*, Centrosaurus/Monoclonius, Chasmosaurus belli, Einiosaurus, Medusaceratops*, Styracosaurus, Spiclypeus*
Bistahieversor --> Pentaceratops
Lythronax --> Diabloceratops
Teratophoneus --> Kosmoceratops, Nasutoceratops, Utahceratops
Daspletosaurus torosus --> Albertaceratops, Centrosaurus*/Monoclonius*, Chasmosaurus belli*, Spiclypeus*, Styracosaurus*, Wendiceratops
Daspletosaurus horneri --> Einiosaurus
Zhuchengtyrannus --> Sinoceratops
Tyrannosaurus --> Triceratops, Torosaurus

*it's not positive if these taxa occurred specifically with G. libratus and D. torosus, respectively.

Yeah, there was a very new paper (like, within the past month or two) that revised the biosteatigraphy, I'll have to find the reference when I get a chance.

[suspsy]

Gorgosaurus also coexisted with Albertaceratops, Avaceratops, Medusaceratops, and Spiclypeus in the Judith River Formation of Montana.

Good catch @suspsy .  I definitely missed that one, although it appears the Judith River Formation's tyrannosaur hasn't been proven to be Gorgosaurus, though that is the most likely suspect.  I'll include those taxa with the same asterisk as Daspletosaurus torosus, but minus Albertaceratops as those remains are apparently now considered Medusaceratops.

Which Gorgosaurus specimen are you referring to? Victoria Arbour and David Evans describe a Gorgosaurus found mere metres away from the Zuul type specimen in their book about the latter. A Gorgosaurus mount was even displayed in a confrontation with Zuul at the Royal Ontario Museum last year.

[ZoPteryx]

Gorgosaurus also coexisted with Albertaceratops, Avaceratops, Medusaceratops, and Spiclypeus in the Judith River Formation of Montana.

Good catch @suspsy .  I definitely missed that one, although it appears the Judith River Formation's tyrannosaur hasn't been proven to be Gorgosaurus, though that is the most likely suspect.  I'll include those taxa with the same asterisk as Daspletosaurus torosus, but minus Albertaceratops as those remains are apparently now considered Medusaceratops.

Which Gorgosaurus specimen are you referring to? Victoria Arbour and David Evans describe a Gorgosaurus found mere metres away from the Zuul type specimen in their book about the latter. A Gorgosaurus mount was even displayed in a confrontation with Zuul at the Royal Ontario Museum last year.

Well I admittedly don't have that book.  But Zuul's description (Arbour & Evans 2017) doesn't make any mention of it.  Currie 2003 assigned specimens (he doesn't give ID numbers) from the Judith River Frm to Gorgosaurus sp., but just in an off-handed remark.  Mallon et al. 2016 only mention fragmentary remains (primarily teeth) in their review of the Judith River fauna, as does Fiorillo 1991 in his work on a bone bed.  I wonder if the confusion comes from the fact the in the old days tyrannosaur teeth from this formation were placed in "Deinodon horridus" which is often considered synonymous with Gorgosaurus.  Curious to know more about the remains mentioned in Arbour and Evans's book though.

[Flaffy]

I find myself in a similar situation with people outside of the US.
Kickstarter shipping fees are really high, and if I had waited till EverythingDinosaur stocked the raptors, I could've saved myself $15 dollars. Even after the price increase of the figures, waiting remains the cheapest option for me.

Therefore I have been conflicted on whether or not to back the Kickstarter, as it offers me no benefits.

[suspsy]

Gorgosaurus also coexisted with Albertaceratops, Avaceratops, Medusaceratops, and Spiclypeus in the Judith River Formation of Montana.

Good catch @suspsy .  I definitely missed that one, although it appears the Judith River Formation's tyrannosaur hasn't been proven to be Gorgosaurus, though that is the most likely suspect.  I'll include those taxa with the same asterisk as Daspletosaurus torosus, but minus Albertaceratops as those remains are apparently now considered Medusaceratops.

Which Gorgosaurus specimen are you referring to? Victoria Arbour and David Evans describe a Gorgosaurus found mere metres away from the Zuul type specimen in their book about the latter. A Gorgosaurus mount was even displayed in a confrontation with Zuul at the Royal Ontario Museum last year.

Well I admittedly don't have that book.  But Zuul's description (Arbour & Evans 2017) doesn't make any mention of it.  Currie 2003 assigned specimens (he doesn't give ID numbers) from the Judith River Frm to Gorgosaurus sp., but just in an off-handed remark.  Mallon et al. 2016 only mention fragmentary remains (primarily teeth) in their review of the Judith River fauna, as does Fiorillo 1991 in his work on a bone bed.  I wonder if the confusion comes from the fact the in the old days tyrannosaur teeth from this formation were placed in "Deinodon horridus" which is often considered synonymous with Gorgosaurus.  Curious to know more about the remains mentioned in Arbour and Evans's book though.

Based on the description and diagrams in the book, it's a disarticulated but relatively complete specimen. Don't know when it's going to be formally described or who's doing it, but Arbour and Evans state in no uncertain terms that Gorgosaurus was the dominant predator of the Judith River Formation.

[Faelrin]

All this talk of the possible tyrannosaur species is interesting, and certainly helpful as I have been going browsing various formation pages on Wikipedia most of today, after hunting down where each dromaeosaurid and ceratopsian offered from these campaigns so far, were found, and compiling together a list for those curious on where each species was found, and if any were possibly contemporaneous. Edit: I was also doing this out of curiosity for my one a day until the campaign ends instagram raptor posts, as I want to give suggestions for which ceratopsians to get alongside the raptors, if focusing on where they are contemporary from.

In fact I've even included the tyrannosaurids I saw, and some tyrannosauroids I'd like to see made too. Hopefully I didn't miss any (other then Deinodon, from the Judith River formation, since it seems those remains may belong to Gorgosaurus).

Here is the list of formations with species from both campaigns below, in a spoiler (as this list is quite lengthy), with the tyrannosaurids and tyrannosauroids in italics, and I've also listed what part of the formations they were found, if it was mentioned:

Spoiler

Bayan Mandahu Formation (Campanian):
Linheraptor exquisitus
Velociraptor osmolskae

Candeleros Formation (Cenomanian):
Buitreraptor gonzalezorum

Djadochta Formation (Campanian):
Protoceratops andrewsi
Tsaagan mangas
Velociraptor mongoliensis

Dinosaur Park Formation (Campanian):
Centrosaurus apertus - middle
Chasmosaurus belli - middle
Daspletosaurus sp. - Middle-Upper
Dromaeosaurus albertensis
Gorgosaurus libratus Lower-Middle
Saurornitholestes langstoni
Stenonychosaurus inequalis
Styracosaurus albertensis - Upper

Foremost Formation (Campanian):
Dromaeosaurus
Saurornitholestes
Xenoceratops foremostensis

Hateg Island (Cenomanian to Maastrichtian?):
Balaur bondoc

Hell Creek Formation (Maastrichtian to Paleocene):
Acheroraptor temertyorum - Upper
Torosaurus latus - Upper
Triceratops horridus - Lower to Middle
Tyrannosaurus rex - Lower to Upper

Horseshoe Canyon Formation (Campanian to early Maastrichtian):
Albertosaurus sarcophagus
Atrociraptor marshalli - Upper
Daspletosaurus. sp
Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai - Lower

Jiufotang Formation (Aptian?):
Microraptor gui
Psittacosaurus mongoliensis

Judith River Formation (Campanian):
Avaceratops lammersi
Dromaeosaurus
Medusaceratops lokii
Monoclonius crassus
Spiclypeus shipporum
Troodon formosus

Kaiparowits Formation (Campanian):
Kosmoceratops richardsoni
Nasutoceratops titusi
Teratophoneus curriei
Utahceratops gettyi

Kirtland Formation (Campanian):
Bistahieversor sealeyi
Daspletosaurus
Pentaceratops sternbergi
Saurornitholestes sullivani

Lance Formation (Maastrichtian):
Torosaurus latus
Triceratops horridus
Tyrannosaurus rex

Moreno Hill Formation (Turonian):
Suskityrannus hazelae (tyrannosauroid)
Zuniceratops christopheri

Nemegt Formation (Maastrichtian):
Adasaurus mongoliensis
Alioramus altai
Mononykus olecranus
Tarbosaurus bataar

Oldman Formation (Campanian):
Albertaceratops nesmoi - Upper
Daspletosaurus torosus Lower - Upper
Saurornitholestes langstoni
Troodon formosus
Wendiceratops pinhornensis - Lower

St. Mary River Formation (early Maastrichtian):
Albertosaurus
Regaliceratops peterhewsi
Saurornitholestes
Troodon

Two Medicine Formation (Campanian):
Daspletosaurus horneri Upper
Dromaeosaurus Lower
Einiosaurus procurvicornis Upper
Gorgosaurus libratus(?) Upper
Saurornitholestes Lower - Upper

Wahweap Formation (Campanian):
Diabloceratops eatoni - Lower Middle
Lythronax argestes

Wapiti Formation (Campanian to Paleocene):
Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai
Saurornitholestes (?)

Xingezhuang Formation (Campanian):
Sinoceratops zhuchengensis
Zhuchengtyrannus magnus

Yixian Formation (Barremian to Aptian):
Dilong paradoxus (tyrannosauroid)
Yutyrannus huali (tyrannosauroid)
Zhenyuanlong suni

[close]

Perhaps worth noting is that many remains and teeth have been referred to Dromaeosaurus, Saurornitholestes, etc, though in the case of those two their holotypes were found in the Dinosaur Park Formation. I have both Stenonychosaurus and Troodon listed for the Mountain Accessory pack and 2 pack species, though Stenonychosaurus is likely the more correct choice as Troodon's holotype is a single tooth.

Edit: Pyroraptor I think is the only one not listed as I'm not entirely sure if it was found in particular formation or not.

[ZoPteryx]

@Faelrin  Great list, much better organized than mine! 

Gorgosaurus also coexisted with Albertaceratops, Avaceratops, Medusaceratops, and Spiclypeus in the Judith River Formation of Montana.

Good catch @suspsy .  I definitely missed that one, although it appears the Judith River Formation's tyrannosaur hasn't been proven to be Gorgosaurus, though that is the most likely suspect.  I'll include those taxa with the same asterisk as Daspletosaurus torosus, but minus Albertaceratops as those remains are apparently now considered Medusaceratops.

Which Gorgosaurus specimen are you referring to? Victoria Arbour and David Evans describe a Gorgosaurus found mere metres away from the Zuul type specimen in their book about the latter. A Gorgosaurus mount was even displayed in a confrontation with Zuul at the Royal Ontario Museum last year.

Well I admittedly don't have that book.  But Zuul's description (Arbour & Evans 2017) doesn't make any mention of it.  Currie 2003 assigned specimens (he doesn't give ID numbers) from the Judith River Frm to Gorgosaurus sp., but just in an off-handed remark.  Mallon et al. 2016 only mention fragmentary remains (primarily teeth) in their review of the Judith River fauna, as does Fiorillo 1991 in his work on a bone bed.  I wonder if the confusion comes from the fact the in the old days tyrannosaur teeth from this formation were placed in "Deinodon horridus" which is often considered synonymous with Gorgosaurus.  Curious to know more about the remains mentioned in Arbour and Evans's book though.

Based on the description and diagrams in the book, it's a disarticulated but relatively complete specimen. Don't know when it's going to be formally described or who's doing it, but Arbour and Evans state in no uncertain terms that Gorgosaurus was the dominant predator of the Judith River Formation.

Very cool!  I had assumed the mount next to Zuul was just for show, nice to know it's based on an actual specimen.  Sounds like they've got enough evidence to determine the genus then.  Do they specifically refer it to G. libratus?  If not I think it'd be prudent to leave the asterisk disclaimer.

[Flaffy]

Medusaceratops: https://creative-beast.com/ceratopsians/medusaceratops-lokii/

[suspsy]

Looks very pretty!

[LeapingLaelaps]

Beautiful! Reminds me of a sunset

[CityRaptor]

Double suns on the shield. I guess the could also be ( fake ) glowing eyes, referencing the fact that it is named after Medusa, making them her eyes, while the horns are her snake-like hair.

[ITdactyl]

I keep telling myself that I only want the Pachyrhinosaurus...

...and then David plops Medusa on the desk... and... well... inhibition just left the room, and my wallet is giving me an angry warning stare....

[TaranUlas]

Just going to buy the Zuni and the Mono. Just going to buy the Zuni and the Mono.

*Looks at the pictures of the Medusaceratops*

Just going to buy the Zuni, the Mono, and the Medusa. Just going to buy the Zuni, Mono, and the Medusa...

[Shonisaurus]

How beautiful is the medusaceratops. I know what I am going to comment on is not very popular, but I honestly like BoTM figures differently from other brands of fully articulated figures. It is for me the best company of articulated figures.

[Faelrin]

The beautiful package art of the Nasutoceratops has been posted now (with pics of the finished painted prototype coming tomorrow):

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/creativebeast/beasts-of-the-mesozoic-ceratopsian-series-action-figures/posts/2641615



Come to think of it, I don't think the package art has been shared for the Medusaceratops either.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/creativebeast/beasts-of-the-mesozoic-ceratopsian-series-action-figures/posts/2639665



Worth mentioning is that the campaign page has been updated to include Diabloceratops, its package art, and Medusaceratops, and its package art. If I had to guess Nasutoceratops will be added tomorrow as well.

Edit: As if this wasn't pic heavy enough, I want to share this pic of the Medusaceratops that was posed alongside the Zhenyuanlong. Just wow. They make for a wonderful pair (and nice to see the Forest Accessory pack stuff there too to get an idea of scale/size next to the ceratopsians. I wonder if the tree's from either that or the mountain pack would better scale with these ceratopsians then they did with the raptors).

[ZoPteryx]

That Medusaceratops looks way better than I initial thought.  Really like the subtle stripes on the horns.

[Flaffy]

Really liking the Medusaceratops, though it's a bit of a shame the snake eye patterns on the frill were omitted.
It's going to be really hard choosing just a few figures out of 25.