Archosauromorpha in a Toob

[stemturtle]

In 2011 Safari will release a toob of ten prehistoric crocodilians. Have a look: dinotoyforum.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=toys&action=display&thread=3314 Let’s see how these species are related to dinosaurs. Three photos review the archosauromorphs that have already been manufactured. Each clade is illustrated with only one example, rather than attempting a complete listing. Additional figures can be seen in the Collections topic: Before the Dinosaurs Pt 3 : Triassic.
We simplify a cladogram based on the Palaeos website
www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Lists/Cladograms/300Archosauromorpha.html.
Finally, we comment on the Toob (numbered) figures.

Nobody knows where the ancestor of turtles fits in here, probably not more recently than about 235 MYA.



ARCHOSAUROMORPHA
Choristodera - (1) Champsosaurus
Rhynchosauria - Scaphonyx
Trilophosauridae - Trilophosaurus
Prolacertiformes - Tanystropheus
Archosauriformes - next

Archosauriformes
Proterosuchidae - (2) Chasmatosaurus
Erythrosuchidae - Erythrosuchus
Euparkeriidae - (3) Euparkaria
Archosauria - next

Archosauria
Ornithodira - Pterosauria, Dinosauromorpha
(These clades are so popular that we will not elaborate here.)
Crurotarsi - next

Crurotarsi
Phytosauridae - (4) Rutiodon
Rauisuchia
- Ornithosuchidae - Ornithosuchus
- Prestosuchidae - Saurosuchus
- Rauisuchidae - (5) Postosuchus
- Poposauridae - Arizonasaurus
Suchia
- Aetosauridae - (6) Desmatosuchus
- Crocodylomorpha - next



Crocodylomorpha
Sphenosuchia - Saltoposuchus
Crocodyliformes
- Protosuchus
- Mesoeucrocodylia
-- Thalattosuchia
----- Metriorhynchidae - (7) Dakosaurus
-- Metasuchia
----- Peirosauridae - (8) Montealtosuchus
-- Neosuchia
---- Pholidosauridae - (9) Sarchosuchus
---- Mahajangasuchidae - Kaprosuchus (in 2011)
-- Eusuchia
---- Pristichampsidae - (10) Pristichampsus
---- Crocodylia
------- Alligatoridae - Deinosuchus

Toob Figures
1. Champsosaurus has never before been released as a figure. Similar to a gharial, about 5 feet long, it lived from the Cretaceous to the Eocene. Bruce Ericson of the Science Museum of Minnesota is an authority on these obscure crocodilians.
2. Chasmatosaurus was a star in the video, “Walking with Monsters.” It will be a more realistic alternative to the Yowie’s Tasmaniosaurus. Proterosuchids survived the Permian extinction. I would buy the toob for this figure alone.
3. Euparkaria was available only as a Starlux figure. This is another basal archosaur, an early attempt at bipedality, also a movie star like Chasmatosaurus.
4, 5, 6. Rutiodon, Postosuchus, and Desmatosuchus were already represented with excellent figures. It seems that every set of figures has its repeats. Will the new figures surpass the old ones? I would trade all 3 for a Mesosaurus, which is actually an anapsid, with convergent body shape.
7. Dakosaurus was a marine croc, up to 15 feet in length, Jurassic. Legs served as fins. Previous to this new species, we had Metriorhychus.
8. Montealtosuchus was terrestrial, less than 6 feet long, late Cretaceous. This animal reverted to the original lifestyle of crocodilians, long-legged, and fast moving.
9. Sarchosuchus, available from Procon CollectA, reached 40 feet, 112 MYA, may have fed on dinosaurs. The SuperCroc was featured in a National Geographic special with Paul Sereno.
10. Pristichampsus terrorized London in BBC’s ”Primeval.” Its toes were hoofed, length about 10 feet, 50-40 MYA. One has to wonder how the crocs survived the K-T extinction when the nonavian dinosaurs did not.

We eagerly await the new species: a few wonderful basal forms, and new examples of the crocodylomorph clades. Thanks, Safari!

[sbell]

I don't fully get what you are up to here, but the pictures are pretty!

And for those who don't know--as with the sharks, I helped Safari put together the assortment (Montealtosuchus was a late addition, I think it pushed out Hesperosuchus). The goal was to find ones that were unique, and get a broad view of what a 'crocodile' is (okay, so it's more like a crurotarsan toob). The big issue is that most crocs look like modern crocs, so going down the family tree was a way to broaden the variety. But we tried not to stray to far down the tree (yeah, Mesosaurus and a Gorgonopsid would have been cool, but then it loses the 'croc' name).

And crocs and sharks were chosen specifically because they are easily marketable and still interesting from an educational point of view (I know people want amphibians or early fish, but those would just be pushing too far for now. If we want to see those sorts of toobs made, make sure that these ones succeed. If you know any kids? Perfect gift. Halloween? give out crocs and sharks (individually)--I know at least one woman in town that bought skull toobs for Halloween giveaways (again, individual skulls). And will anyone here be happy with just one set of each?

Also just noticed? The aquatic crocs are going to be shinier than the terrestrial crocs. Makes sense.

Couple of other things:

The Trilophosaurus is a Chinasaur from a set of small lizards from FUL. Interestingly, I have a couple, and came up with the same identification independently (the rest in that set are modern lizards and salamanders, they aren't too bad). They were recently repackaged by Wild Republic in a bag set (this is part of K&M's strategy of reducing quality and cost to apparently compete with the very desirable cheap market--at local zoos and museums everywhere!).

The small Erythrosuchus is from the King Kong movie toys, obviously the smaller set. If I ever see it cheap, I may pick one up. I had the big one, but it was very badly made; it's 'action feature' meant that it never stayed up right. And in the movie, it was called Foetodon.

The JP Ornithosuchus is a better representative. Head's too big though.

Champsosaurs are not crocodilians. They are choristoderes, another early branch of archosaurs, sister taxa to rhynchosaurs, protosaurs/prolacertiformes, and trilophosaurs. Their superficial resemblance to crocs is one reason why I sort of insisted on it being in the toob (it bumped out Metriorhynchus, after I pointed out that there was already one in the marine reptiles toob).

There is a Dakousaurus figure out there--APII had one in an 'I Dig Sea Monsters" dig set (it also came with a bryozoan/coral and ammonite) but for those who think that the I Dig sharks are hard to find (unless you talk to me--I have some in store), I don't think the Sea Monster set ever actually got made.

One big key to the repeats--many of them do not yet exist in a small form; or if they did (Panorama Desmatosuchus, Dinotales Rutiodon) they aren't that easily available. Plus, the context of the toob--evolution of crurotarsans/archosaurs--required some other animals. And as you point out, a lot of these have only been done by Starlux; again, if we want them to become better known, we're going to need a more available medium than 30 year old, plaster&glue figures that cost a lot on ebay!

[stemturtle]

Sbell,

What am I up to? I am utilizing the excitement about these figures as a motivation for learning about the phylogeny.

You should be credited with the idea of using the Wild Republic lizard as a trilophosaurus. The loss of fenestration hints at the possibility of turtles as diapsids.

Credit Randy Knol with the idea of the Foetodon as an Erythrosuchus.

Thanks for insisting that the champsosaur was included. Rather than saying crocodilians, I should have said choristoderes. Spelling correction for Bruce Erickson (not Ericson). I finally located his monograph on Champsosaurus in an old file.

Thank you for your helping Safari put together an excellent toob. You are a hero.

[Horridus]

With regard to the first picture - wasn't the neck of Tanystropheus actually rather inflexible...? It seems to frequently be depicted with a snaking neck, but so are plesiosaurs I guess.

[sbell]

Nov 29, 2010 18:48:07 GMT Horridus said:

With regard to the first picture - wasn't the neck of Tanystropheus actually rather inflexible...? It seems to frequently be depicted with a snaking neck, but so are plesiosaurs I guess.

That's the Carnegie one--it was made long before the neck was determined to be stiff (just like plesiosaurs). In this case, the neck of the figure is actually bendable due to a wire, so it can be changed (mine is more or less straight forward, with a slight dorsal curve because it looks better!).

[stemturtle]

Yes, the neck is posed incorrectly in the photo. Here is a reference:
“Moreover, most of the neck vertebrae bear a pair of elongate and slender ribs that extend posteriorly well past the subsequent vertebrae. The result is a bundle of overlapping neck ribs that would have acted to keep the neck in an almost permanent horizontal position, so that movement of the neck would have been severely restricted.” (Page 98)

Fraser, N.C. 2006. Dawn of the Dinosaurs: Life in the Triassic. Bloomington: Indiana Universtiy Press.