Lably
Skip to content

Tylosaurus

Extinct genus of marine squamate reptiles

  • 51 min read
  • 5 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Atlantic Ocean, North America and Europe

The first named species, T. proriger, was originally described in 1869 by Edward Drinker Cope as a member of a separate mosasaur genus, Macrosaurus which is now synonymous with Halisaurus, and subsequently redescribed as the type species of the genus Tylosaurus named in 1872 by Othniel Charles Marsh. Fossil evidence shows that Tylosaurus regularly engaged in intraspecific combat and consumed various prey as an apex predator of their ecosystem, including predatory fish, ornithuran birds, sea turtles, plesiosaurs and other mosasaurs. It had an endothermic metabolism, which is unlike nearly all modern squamates.

Research history

Possible first finds

The earliest Tylosaurus fossils were likely discovered by various Native American peoples and may have been the source of much of their folklore, with the earliest known ones dating back to well before the arrival of European settlers, around the 1500s. More recent accounts from peoples living in the Great Plains even speak of an ancient era ruled by massive aquatic creatures that were in constant combat with thunderbirds and were petrified by them. The considerable presence of fossils of large mosasaurs such as Tylosaurus and pterosaurs such as Pteranodon in this region may have been the origins of these myths.

In 1804, the Lewis and Clark Expedition discovered a now-lost fossil skeleton alongside the Missouri River, which was identified as a 45-foot (14 m) long fish. In 2003, Richard Ellis speculated that the remains may have belonged to Mosasaurus missouriensis. Alternatively, a 2007 study led by Robert W. Meredith and colleagues suggested that the fossils would possibly come from a tylosaurine mosasaur based on the measurements cited by Clark and Gass and the evidence of Tylosaurus fossils that have been found in the Missouri River. However, the authors also mentioned the possibility that the remains would also come from an elasmosaurid plesiosaur, which are also known from the river, although being rarer.

First formal discoveries

Tylosaurus was the third new genus of mosasaur to be described from North America behind Clidastes and Platecarpus and the first in Kansas. The early history of the genus as a taxon was subject to complications spurred by the infamous rivalry between Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh during the Bone Wars. The type specimen was discovered in the late 1860s by U.S. Army colonel John Butler Conyngham and a certain Mr. Minor in a deposit of the Niobrara Formation located near Monument Rocks, close to the Union Pacific Railroad line at Fort Hays, Kansas. The discovery consisted of a partial skull measuring nearly 5 feet (1.5 m) in length associated with thirteen vertebrae. Acquired by Louis Agassiz during his visit to the Great Plains in August 1868, the specimen has since been catalogued as MCZ 4374. After noticing photographs of it at a meeting of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Cope borrowed the specimen from Agassiz and presented a preliminary description of it in 1869. His first publication of the fossil was very brief and was named Macrosaurus proriger, the genus being a preexisting European mosasaur taxon. The specific epithet proriger means "prow-bearing", which is in reference to the specimen's unique prow-like elongated rostrum and is derived from the Latin word prōra (prow) and suffix -gero (I bear). In 1870, Cope published a more thorough description of the type specimen. Without explanation, he moved the species into another European genus Liodon and declared his original M. proriger a synonym.

In 1872, Marsh argued that L. proriger is taxonomically distinct from the European genus and must be assigned a new one. For this, he erected the genus Rhinosaurus, which means "nose lizard" and is a portmanteau derived from the Ancient Greek words ῥίς (rhī́s, meaning "nose") and σαῦρος (saûros, meaning "lizard"). Cope responded by arguing that Rhinosaurus was already a preoccupied synonym of Liodon. He disagreed with Marsh's arguments but proposed that in case Marsh was indeed correct, the genus name Rhamphosaurus should be used. Marsh later discovered that the taxon Rhamphosaurus was preoccupied as a genus of lizard named in 1843. As a result, he suggested a move to a newly erected genus named Tylosaurus. This name means "knob lizard" in another reference to the elongated rostrum characteristic of the genus. It is derived from the Latin tylos (knob) and Ancient Greek σαῦρος. Despite coining the new genus, Marsh never formally transferred this Rhinosaurus species to Tylosaurus; this was first done in 1873 by Joseph Leidy. Tylosaurus subsequently became the almost universally accepted genus to include this species, the exception to this adoption being Cope, who refused to accept Marsh's new genus and continued to refer the species as Liodon. Cope's persistence can be seen in his 1874 description of another species which he named L. nepaeolicus. The type specimen of this species was discovered by Benjamin Franklin Mudge near the Solomon River, and consists of several cranial fragments and a dorsal vertebra now catalogued as AMNH 1565. This species, whose specific epithet refers to Nepaholla, the Native American name for the Salomon River is formally transferred to the genus Tylosaurus in 1894 by John Campbell Merriam. In 2026, Amelia R. Zietlow, Michael J. Everhart, and Michael J. Polcyn redescribed the holotype specimens of T. proriger and T. nepaeolicus, 150 years after their original descriptions by Cope, revising the diagnoses of both species.

Later discoveries and other species

In his major work published in 1967, Dale A. Russell recognized only two valid species in Tylosaurus, namely T. proriger and T. nepaeolicus. However, throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, many species of mosasaurs coming from around the world, originally described as being from separate genera, were now recognized as belonging to Tylosaurus.

In 1885, Louis Dollo described the genus and species Hainosaurus bernardi from an almost complete but poorly preserved skeleton discovered in a phosphate quarry in the Ciply Basin of Mesvin, Belgium, since numbered as IRSNB R23. The genus name Hainosaurus means "lizard from the Haine", in reference to the eponymous river located nearby the Ciply Basin. The specific epithet bernardi is named in honor of Leopold Bernard, who made the excavation and exhumation of the specimen possible. In 1988, a second species historically pertained to Hainosaurus was described by Elizabeth Nicholls based on a partial skeleton catalogued as MT 2 and having been discovered in Manitoba, Canada. The specific epithet refers to the type locality of the taxon, namely the Pembina Member of the Pierre Shale. The attribution of H. pembinensis to Hainosaurus is first discussed by Johan Lindgren in 2005, but it was in a revision published in 2010 that the species was moved to Tylosaurus by Timon Bullard and Michael Caldwell, being then renamed as T. pembinensis. In this same revision, the authors suggested that a redescription of the type species H. bernardi would be necessary in order to know if Hainosaurus should be maintained as a distinct genus. This redescription was finally carried out by Paulina Jimenez-Huidobro and Caldwell in 2016, in which they transferred the species to Tylosaurus, being then renamed as T. bernardi. Although this new combination has been widely recognized since, some authors nevertheless suggest continuing to maintain the genus Hainosaurus as distinct, justified in particular on the basis of dental traits not detailed in the 2016 revision.

In 1896, Armand Thevenin described a new mosasaurid on the basis of a partial skull discovered at Éclusier-Vaux, in Somme, France. In his description, Thevenin thinks that this specimen, since catalogued as MNHN 1896–15, would represent a new species of Mosasaurus, naming it Mosasaurus gaudryi. The specific epithet is named in honor of his mentor Jean Albert Gaudry, the latter having previously studied the skull and thinking that it would come from a species of Liodon. In 1992, Theagarten Lingham-Soliar reassigned the species to Hainosaurus, having previously interpreted the holotype as an additional specimen of H. bernardi. In 2005, Lindgren moved this species to Tylosaurus, notably due to its dental characteristics being closer to other members of the genus.

In 1963, Per Ove Persson identified a new mosasaurid on the basis of isolated teeth discovered in a deposit located in Ivö Klack, near Ivö Lake in the Kristianstad Basin in Scania, Sweden. Fossils from this same taxon have been documented in this area since 1836, but it is from that year onwards that they are described as coming from a subspecies of Mosasaurus hoffmannii, named M. hoffmannii ivoensis in reference to Ivö Klack. In 1967, Russell elevated the taxon to a separate species within the genus, and assigned to it fossils from the Niobrara Formation of Kansas, including a partial skull. When the taxon was significantly revised in a in 2002 study, being reassigned to Tylosaurus, Lindgren and Mikael Siverson referred additional fossils to this latter that had been discovered at Ivö Klack, including cranial and vertebral remains. In their study, the authors also found that Russell's attributions of the Kansas fossils to this species were erroneous, the remains coming from a distinct taxon. The study furthermore noted similarities between these teeth and those of Taniwhasaurus, but considered such an attribution unlikely because of the limited material known for this related genus and its geographic distance (Taniwhasaurus then being known exclusively from New Zealand). However, in 2008, Caldwell and colleagues reported the presence of Taniwhasaurus in northern Japan and reaffirmed the dental similarities with T. ivoensis. This discovery revived the hypothesis of a possible reassignment of the species to Taniwhasaurus, but the authors see this as a subject for another study.

In 1964, Miguel Telles Antunes described the species Mosasaurus iembeensis from a partial skull excavated from the Itombe Formation near the town of Iembe (hence the name), Angola. In 1992, Lingham-Soliar argued that the cranial features were not consistent with those of Mosasaurus and were more characteristic of Tylosaurus, the species being renamed as T. iembeensis. However, the author did not identify the holotype skull, which he considered to reside in the collections of the NOVA University Lisbon without a catalogue number, and it is since 2006 reported as being destroyed in a fire. In 2012, Octávio Mateus and colleagues reported that an additional specimen of T. iembeensis consisting of fragmentary cranial elements was recovered during an expedition to the locality of the since-destroyed holotype, although it was not figured or formally described.

In 2005, Michael J. Everhart described the species T. kansasensis based on thirteen specimens recovered from the Niobrara Formation of Kansas. The holotype specimen, catalogued as FHSM VP-2295, consists of a well-preserved complete skull associated with six cervical vertebrae that was discovered in 1968 in Ellis County. Prior to its formal description, several authors had already suggested during the 1990s that this specimen might represent a new species of Tylosaurus. This interpretation was nevertheless challenged by Caldwell as early as 2007. At the 2013 annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Caldwell and Jiménez-Huidobro presented an abstract questioning the distinction between T. kansasensis and T. nepaeolicus. This hypothesis was further developed in a 2016 study led by Caldwell, which interpreted T. kansasensis as a juvenile form of T. nepaeolicus, thereby treating the former as a junior synonym of the latter. This conclusion was subsequently rejected by Everhart himself in his 2017 book, in which he described the study as "poorly researched and written" without further elaborating on the criticism. In 2018, Robert F. Stewart and Jordan Mallon also rejected this synonymy, arguing that the differences observed between T. kansasensis and T. nepaeolicus do not match the ontogenetic variation documented in T. proriger. In 2020, Amelia R. Zietlow renewed support for Caldwell's hypothesis on the basis of a cladistic analysis incorporating ontograms.

In his 2006 Master of Science thesis, Bullard described the species T. saskatchewanensis from a partial skeleton catalogued as RSM P2588.1, known from the Bearpaw Formation. This specimen, nicknamed "Omācīw" (meaning "hunter" in Cree), was discovered in 1994 near Herbert Ferry, at the Lake Diefenbaker, Saskatchewan. Although originally described informally and via incompletely prepared fossils, the proposed taxon was nevertheless recognized as valid in some subsequent studies. In 2018, Bullard co-authored a multi-author study led by Jiménez-Huidobro which formally described Omācīw, which by then was more fully prepared, and confirmed its identity as belonging to a distinct species. The following year, Jiménez-Huidobro and Caldwell noted the strong anatomical similarities between the dubious species T. neumilleri, T. saskatchewanensis, and T. pembinensis, later leading Zietlow, Polcyn, and Ronald S. Tykoski to suggest in 2026 that the first two could represent junior synonyms of the latter.

In his 2020 MS thesis, Samuel Garvey described a specimen of Tylosaurus catalogued as TMP 2014.011.0001, discovered in the Puskwaskau Formation in Alberta. Recovered approximately 55 kilometers (34 mi) northeast of Grande Prairie, this fossil, consisting of a partial snout and a fragmentary mandible, represents the northernmost known occurrence of the genus. Its morphology was recognized as very distinct from the other recognized species, featuring notably slender paedomorphic teeth. Garvey therefore considered that it could represent a new species, which he named T. "borealis" in reference to its northern distribution.

In 2026, Zietlow, Polcyn, and Tykoski described the species T. rex based on numerous more or less complete fossil specimens discovered in the fossil record of Texas and Kansas, which had previously been assigned to T. proriger. The holotype consists of a partial skeleton preserving, among other remains, a complete skull catalogued as PMNS 8029, discovered in 1979 in Lake Ray Hubbard, a reservoir located east of Dallas. The specimen was long informally nicknamed as the "Heath mosasaur", after the eponymous city within whose boundaries it was discovered. Its exact stratigraphic position is uncertain, but its locality indicates that it originated from the Wolfe City Formation. The specific name rex, meaning "king" in Latin, is an homage to a passage from a 1967 letter written by John T. Thurmond to Barnum Brown, in which he suggested that some Texan specimens of Tylosaurus might represent a distinct species because of their gigantic size. The authors also considered this name appropriate due to the animal's massive skull, large serrated teeth, and powerful musculature, all of which reflect its role as an apex predator.

Depiction history

When Cope described the holotype specimen of T. proriger in 1870, he visualized it as an "excessively elongated reptile", due the morphological arrangement of its caudal vertebrae. Based on his descriptions, it would have corresponded to a sea-serpent-like marine reptile, with the largest individuals reaching sizes comparable to those of the largest cetaceans. The following year, Cope added more details to his visualization of the animal. For him, the head of Tylosaurus would be conical in shape, with eyes on top, and having a jaw connected to a throat similar to that of a pelican, thus facilitating the entry of its prey. Still according to Cope, the animal would have had only the flippers located at the front of the body, those at the back being absent. The tail is seen as long and flat, used in eel-like locomotion. This reconstruction was subsequently adopted in various works published during the late 19th century, although some authors also portrayed the animal with a long neck.

Modern understanding of the anatomy of Tylosaurus started as early as 1898 with the publication of a major revision of the Kansas mosasaurs by Samuel Wendell Williston. In this work, he provided a new anatomical description of the genus, correcting numerous erroneous interpretations that had been proposed previously. Specifically, his paper included a rigorous skeletal reconstruction of T. proriger based on three partial specimens from the collections of the University of Kansas Natural History Museum. This reconstruction depicted the animal as a highly mobile marine reptile with four flippers, as well as a neck and tail that were considerably shorter than in earlier representations. Williston also estimated the maximum length of the animal at approximately 11 m (36 ft), a value close to those still proposed today. Although the vertebral column was reconstructed as straight rather than curved, this skeletal depiction is considered broadly accurate by modern standards. The discovery of the first known substantially complete skeleton of Tylosaurus was revealed as early as 1899 by Henry Fairfield Osborn, followed by other more or less similar finds which were made from the beginning of the 1900s.

Sign in to keep reading

4 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Animals