Fossils Show How Shovel-Beaked Dinosaurs Grew

A collection of tiny skull bones offers new insights to the early life of Edmontosaurus

Edmontosaurus

An adult Edmontosaurus at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences.

Brian Switek

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


When we think of a dinosaur – or any animal, really – we often envision them as healthy adults in the prime of life. Yet, at the same time, we know that dinosaurs didn’t just pop into existence fully-formed. Each and every one started small, a hatchling just a fraction of the size of its parents.

The fact that fossils revealing dinosaurian infancy are hard to find only intensifies the disconnect. There are dinosaurs that we’ve known from subadult or adult skeletons for over a century and yet we know almost nothing at all about what they were like when they hatched. Edmontosaurus, named in 1917, is one such example. Up until recently, the published record of the famous shovel-beaked dinosaur mostly consisted of large bones and skeletons. Now that’s changed.

Back in 2017, Mateusz Wosik, Mark Goodwin, and David Evans described a nestling-sizedEdmontosaurus specimen from the collections at the University of California Museum of Paleontology. The partial skeleton indicated that baby Edmontosaurus principally walked on all fours, just like adults, and there wasn’t a change in gait with age. Then, earlier this year, Andrew Farke and Eunice Yip described the femur of a juvenile Edmontosaurus that hints that this dinosaur grew up in a pattern similar to related, better-known hadrosaurs. Now Wosik, Goodwin, and Evans are back with nestling-size Edmontosaurus skull bones that outline how this dinosaur’s skull changed shape with age.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The four bones, found in the Hell Creek Formation of northeastern Montana, are from multiple individuals. Each is part of a lower jaw, including the parts that held the dinosaur’s densely-packed teeth. And it’s these bones – the dentaries – that provide some insight on how age altered Edmontosaurus.

The dentary bones of hadrosaurs are very variable between one individual and another. Following from this, Wosik and colleagues write, the facial bones of these dinosaurs would have been variable, as well, meaning that young Edmontosaurus might look very different from each other. This matters in identifying hadrosaur material as part of an existing species or something new. Wosik, Goodwin, and Evans attribute the Hell Creek skull pieces to Edmontosaurus because it’s the only hadrosaur in the formation, but what about Alaska?

Late Cretaceous bones found in the far north were initially identified as Edmontosaurus, then reassigned to a new genus called Ugrunaaluk. But this determination was made on the basis of juvenile-age skull bones. If we know that juvenile Edmontosaurus were highly-variable in their skull shape during their youth, then it’s possible that the Alaskan fossils really do belong to Edmontosaurus, after all. Resolving the issue will require comparing adult material from Alaska to adult Edmontosaurus bones from further south, avoiding the anatomical squishiness of youth.  

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe