Dryptosaurus

Up until 1866, theropods from the Americas were only known from isolated teeth discovered by Ferdinand Van Hayden during Geological Survey excursions into Montana.^[1] During the summer of 1866, workers from the West Jersey Marl Company uncovered an incomplete theropod skeleton in a quarry near Barnsboro, New Jersey with sediments belonging to the Maastrichtian-aged New Egypt Formation. In August 1866, paleontologist Edward Drinker Cope was notified of the discovery and encouraged to visit the marl pit to obtain the specimen. When he arrived, he was thoroughly surprised by the skeleton's completeness and uniqueness, calling it the "finest discovery I have yet made". The skeleton was then deposited at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia under the catalogue number ANSP 9995 and includes; skull and dentary fragments, teeth, caudal vertebrae, humeri, an incomplete manus, a partial pelvis, and nearly complete left hindlimb. However, four chevrons, a sternum, and a scapula which are now lost were also noted by Cope in addition to several sacral vertebrae which are now referred to the protostegid Pneumatoarthrus. An isolated metatarsal possibly belonging to the skeleton was found at the same locale, but this has come into question.^[2]

Cope presented his description of the specimen to the Academy on August 21, 1866, naming it a new genus and species of dinosaur, Laelaps aquilunguis. "Laelaps", which is derived from the Greek word "hurricane" or "storm wind", was also the name of a dog in Greek mythology who never failed to catch what it was hunting.^[3] The genus name was occupied by a mite and replaced by the name Dryptosaurus, "slashing reptile", by Othniel Marsh, Cope's rival in the Bone Wars, in 1877.^[4][5] However, Cope maintained that the name Laelaps was valid for years after, refusing to use Dryptosaurus. Also in the 1870s, a partial dentary of a theropod was unearthed from the Late Jurassic strata of the Morrison Formation outside Canon City, Colorado. Cope coined Laelaps trihedrodon, "three-hedged tooth", for the dentary in 1877, but it has since been lost. Later L. trihedrodon was moved the genus Antrodemus, now Allosaurus, based on its derivation but it is now considered a nomen dubium. Five damaged partial tooth crowns from AMNH 5780, mistakenly thought to have belonged to the L. trihedrodon holotype, share many features in common with Allosaurus and probably belong to that genus instead. However, some of the Allosaurus-like characteristics of the teeth are primitive to theropods as a whole and may have been present in other large-bodied Morrison Formation theropod species.^[6] Brusatte et al. (2011) noted that well-preserved, historic casts of most of the type material from ANSP 9995 and AMNH FARB 2438 are housed in the collections of the Natural History Museum in London (NHM OR50100). The casts show some detail that is no longer preserved on the original specimens, which have significantly degraded due to pyrite disease.^[7]

The discovery of this genus gave North American paleontologists the opportunity to observe an articulated, albeit incomplete, theropod skeleton. During the late 19th century, this genus unfortunately became a wastebasket taxon for the referral of isolated theropod elements from across North America, given that Tyrannosauroidea was not recognized as a distinct group of large theropods at the time and numerous theropod species were assigned to it (often as Lælaps or Laelaps), only to be later reclassified.

Laelaps trihedrodon was coined by Cope in 1877 for a partial dentary (now missing) from the Morrison Formation of Colorado.

Laelaps macropus was also coined by Cope for a partial leg found in the Navesink Formation that Joseph Leidy had referred earlier to the ornithomimid Coelosaurus, distinguishing it from Dryptosaurus by its longer toes.^[8] Thomas R. Holtz listed it as an indeterminate tyrannosauroid in his contribution to the second edition of the Dinosauria.^[9] In 2017, it was informally given the new generic name "Teihivenator".^[10] Earlier that year, Brownstein (2017) analyzed the material of Laelaps macropus and found that only the partial tibia could be definitely classified as that of a tyrannosauroid and that the distal metatarsal could have been from an ornithomimosaur.^[11] Brownstein also placed the pedal phalanges in Ornithimimosauria, though he did not create a lectotype for Laelaps macropus.^[11]

Some potential specimens consisting of partial teeth and femur fragments from the Tar Heel/Coachman Formation have been described in 1979 as cf. Dryptosaurus or Albertosaurus.^[12] In February 2018, based on specimens described by Baird and Horner (1979), Brownstein tentatively classified the partial teeth (USNM 7199 and ANSP 15332) as D. sp. and the partial femur fragments (ANSP 15330 and USNM 7189, the latter of which was in part a syntype of Hypsibema) as D. aquilunguis. He also referred some teeth and fragmentary postcranial material from the Marshalltown Formation to D. sp.^[13] In December 2018, he simply referred to these specimens as "material comparable to the tyrannosaur Dryptosaurus aquilunguis", not directly representing Dryptosaurus itself.^[14]

It was suggested that the indeterminate specimens from Marshalltown Formation might belong to Appalachiosaurus instead, and most of the putative specimens (ANSP 15330, ANSP 15332 and USNM 7199) from the Tar Heel/Coachman Formation were subsequently referred to as indeterminate Eutyrannosauria separate from Dryptosaurus, with only USNM 7189 tentatively classified as D. sp.^[2] ANSP 15330 was simply referred to as a medium-sized theropod without specific classification in a 2023 study.^[15]

Dryptosaurus is estimated to have been 7.5 metres (25 ft) long and 756–1,500 kilograms (1,667–3,307 lb), although this is based on partial remains of one individual.^[5][16] Like its relative Eotyrannus, Dryptosaurus seems to have had relatively long arms when compared with more derived tyrannosaurs, such as Tyrannosaurus. Its hands, which are also relatively large, were once believed to have had three fingers. Brusatte et al. (2011), however, observed an overall similarity in the shape of the available phalanges of Dryptosaurus with those of derived tyrannosaurids and noted that Dryptosaurus may have had only two functional digits.^[17] Each of its fingers were tipped with an eight-inch long, talon-like claw.^[18] Its arm morphology suggests that arm reduction in tyrannosauroids may not have proceeded in a uniform fashion.^[17] Dryptosaurus may have used both its arms and its jaws as weapons when hunting, capturing, and processing its prey.^[17]

The type specimen is a fragmentary skeleton belonging to a single adult individual, ANSP 9995. ANSP 9995 consists of a fragmentary right maxilla, a fragmentary right dentary, a fragmentary right surangular, lateral teeth, 11 middle-distal caudal vertebrae, both the left and right humeri, three manual phalanges from the left hand (I-1, II-2, and an ungual), the shafts of the left and right pubic bones, a fragmentary right ischium, the left femur, the left tibia, the left fibula, the left astragalus, and a midshaft fragment of metatarsal III. The ontological maturity of the holotype individual is supported by the fact that the neurocentral sutures are closed in all of its caudal vertebrae.^[17] AMNH FARB 2438 consists of left metatarsal IV, which are likely from the same individual as the holotype.^[5]

The fragmentary right maxilla preserves the three alveoli in full and the fourth only partially. The authors were able to ascertain that Dryptosaurus had ziphodont dentition. The shape of the alveolus situated on the anterior portion of the fragment suggests that it housed a tooth that was smaller and more circular than the others. This incisiform tooth is common among tyrannosauroids. The disarticulated teeth recovered are transversely narrow, serrated (17–18 denticles/cm), and recurved. The femur is only 3% longer than the tibia. The longest manual ungual phalanx recovered measured 176 mm (6.9 in) in length. The morphology of the proximal portion of metatarsal IV suggests that Dryptosaurus had an arctometatarsalian foot, an advanced feature shared by derived tyrannosauroids, such as Albertosaurus and Tyrannosaurus, in which the third metatarsal is "pinched" between the second and fourth metatarsals.^[17]

According to Brusatte et al. (2011), Dryptosaurus can be distinguished based on the following characteristics: the combination of a reduced humerus (humerus: femur ratio = 0.375) and a large hand (phalanx I-1:femur ratio = 0.200), the strong mediolateral expansion of the ischial tubercle, which is approximately 1.7 times as wide as the shaft immediately distally, the presence of an ovoid fossa on the medial surface of the femoral shaft immediately proximal to the medial condyle (which is demarcated anteriorly by the mesiodistal crest and demarcated medially by a novel crest) the presence of a proximomedially trending ridge on the anterior surface of the fibula immediately proximal to the iliofibularis tubercle, the lip on the lateral surface of the lateral condyle of the astragalus being prominent and overlapping the proximal surface of the calcaneum, and metatarsal IV being observed with a flat shaft proximally (resulting in a semiovoid cross section that is much wider mediolaterally than it is long anteroposteriorly).^[17]

Since the time of its discovery, Dryptosaurus has been classified in a number of different theropod families. Cope (1866), Leidy (1868), and Lydekker (1888) noted obvious similarities with the genus Megalosaurus, which was known at the time from remains discovered in southeastern England. Based on this line of reasoning, Cope classified it as a megalosaurid. Marsh, however, examined the remains and later assigned to its own monotypic family, Dryptosauridae. The fossil material assigned to Dryptosaurus was reviewed by Ken Carpenter in 1997, in light of the many different theropods discovered since Cope's time. He felt that due to some unusual features it couldn't be placed in any existing family and, like Marsh, he felt that it warranted placement in Dryptosauridae.^[5] This phylogenetic assignment was also supported by the work of Russell (1970) and Molnar (1990).^[19][20] Other phylogenetic studies during the 1990s suggested that Dryptosaurus was a coelurosaur, though its exact placement within that group remained uncertain.

In 1946, Charles W. Gilmore was the first to observe that certain anatomical features may link Dryptosaurus with coeval Late Cretaceous tyrannosaurids, Albertosaurus, and Tyrannosaurus.^[21] This observation was also supported by the work of Baird and Horner (1979), but did not have wide acceptance until a new discovery was made in 2005.^[22] Dryptosaurus was the only large carnivore known in eastern North America until the discovery of the basal tyrannosauroid Appalachiosaurus in 2005.^[23] Appalachiosaurus, which is known from more complete remains, is similar to Dryptosaurus in both body size and morphology.^[24] This discovery made it clear that Dryptosaurus was also a basal tyrannosauroid. Detailed phylogenetic analysis by Brusatte et al. (2013) confirmed the tyrannosauroid affinities of Dryptosaurus and assigned it as an "intermediate" tyrannosauroid that is more derived than basal taxa, such as Guanlong and Dilong, but more primitive than members of the more derived Tyrannosauridae.^[25]

The following cladogram containing almost all tyrannosauroids is by Loewen et al. (2013).^[26]

Brownstein (2021) found Dryptosaurus to be the sister taxon to an unnamed and potentially new theropod from the Merchantville Formation of Delaware and reinstated the family Dryptosauridae for these taxa.^[27]

The type specimen of Dryptosaurus is ANSP 9995 and was recovered in the West Jersey Marl Company Pit, in what came to be known as the New Egypt Formation in Barnsboro, Mantua Township, in Gloucester County, New Jersey. The specimen was collected by quarry workers in marl and sandstone that were deposited during the late Maastrichtian stage of the Late Cretaceous period, approximately 67 million years ago.^[18][28] Studies suggest that the New Egypt Formation is a marine unit and it is considered to be the deeper-water equivalent of the Tinton and Red Bank formations.^[29] This formation overlies the Navesink Formation, from which potential Dryptosaurus referred material has been reported.

During the Maastrichtian stage, the Western Interior Seaway, which stretched in a north–south direction from the present-day Arctic Ocean down to the Gulf of Mexico, separated Dryptosaurus and its coeval fauna from western North America, which was dominated by the much larger tyrannosaurids. Although certainly a carnivore, the paucity of known Cretaceous East Coast dinosaurs make ascertaining the specific diet of Dryptosaurus very difficult.^[18] Hadrosaurids are known from the same time and place as Dryptosaurus, the island continent of Appalachia, and they may have been a prominent part of its diet. Nodosaurs were also present, although they were less likely to be hunted due to their armor plating.^[18] When hunting, both the skull and hands were important for the capture and processing of prey.

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The 1897 watercolor painting by Charles R. Knight titled Leaping Laelaps may represent the earliest depiction of theropods as highly active and dynamic animals. Knight's artistic hand was guided by E. D. Cope and reflects their progressive opinion about theropod agility, despite their large size, as well as the opinion of Henry Fairfield Osborn, the curator of vertebrate paleontology at the American Museum of Natural History at the time of the painting's commission. The original painting is now preserved in the AMNH collections. By contrast, the typical illustrations of large carnivorous dinosaurs like Megalosaurus, in the late 19th century, depicted the animals as large, slow, tail-dragging behemoths.

• Timeline of tyrannosaur research