Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979

Mcfeeters, Bradley, Evans, David C. & Maddin, Hillary C., 2021, Ontogeny and variation in the skull roof and braincase of the hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum from the Upper Cretaceous of Montana, USA, Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 66 (3), pp. 485-507 : 488-501

Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979

Figs. 1–13 .

Holotype: PU 22405; James and John Peebles ranch, Teton County, Montana; upper Two Medicine Formation , Campanian , Upper Cretaceous.

Material.—ROM 66182, relatively small skull roof and braincase including articulated prefrontals ( Figs. 1A , 2A ); additional material (from same bonebed but not all from same individual) including disarticulated partial nasals ( Fig. 3 ), lacrimal, and palatine. ROM 66181, intermediate-sized posterior skull roof and dorsolateral portion of the braincase, lacking the basisphenoid and basioccipital ( Figs. 1B , 2B ). ROM 60261, intermediate-sized right half of posterior skull roof, and both sides of neurocranium ( Figs. 1C , 2D ). ROM 60260, large, heavily fractured posterior skull roof and braincase ( Figs. 1D , 2E ). ROM 66180, large skull roof and braincase including articulated nasals and prefrontals ( Figs. 1E , 2C ). All from the Two Medicine Formation of the Linster Quarry bone bed locality in Teton Country, Montana.

Emended diagnosis.—Maiasaurin hadrosaurine characterized by a short naris separated from the anterior margin of the orbit by an elongated mid-facial region; elongate facial region wide in transverse section; and nasals concave anterior to articulation with frontals (modified from Horner and Makela 1979). In the mature ontogimorph, additional autapomorphies include lateral expansion of the prefrontals as part of a dish-like, semicircular nasal–prefrontal–frontal crest; extensive thickening and fusion of the frontals, with a dorsally extending arcade that buttresses the nasal and forms the back part of the crest; and a markedly overhanging crista prootica with a defined a ventral channel. Skull roof differs from Acristavus in the anteroposteriorly less elongate dorsal exposure of the frontals and presence of an elevated solid crest at the nasal–frontal contact; from Acristavus and Brachylophosaurus in the posterior elevation of the squamosal process of the postorbital; from Brachylophosaurus and Probrachylophosaurus in that the expansion of the posterior nasal is directed dorsally rather than posteriorly, and in the incorporation of the prefrontals and frontals into the dorsally exposed surface of the crest; and from Brachylophosaurus in the relatively flattened dorsotemporal bar, and relatively dorsoventrally deep posterior squamosals.

Description.— Dermatocranium: Nasal: Nearly complete paired nasals are preserved in articulation in ROM 66180 ( Fig. 4 ), and a small posterolateral fragment of the left nasal is preserved in articulation with the ROM 66182 partial cranium ( Fig. 5A ). Additionally, four disarticulated partial nasal pieces are also catalogued under ROM 66182 ( Fig. 3 ). The left and right posterior nasal pieces catalogued under ROM 66182 are compatible with being parts of the same individual, but cannot be articulated comfortably with the ROM 66182 partial cranium, and in the case of the left nasal cannot belong to it because an overlapping part of that element is already attached. However, these pieces do articulate well with the frontals of ROM 66181, and could represent the nasals of that individual (or another of the same size). The other two disarticulated nasal pieces catalogued under ROM 66182 cannot be manipulated into articulation. One is a flat middle part of a nasal with part of the contact surface for the posterolateral process of the premaxilla ( Fig. 3B ). The other is an anterior part of a right nasal including the posterior border of the narial fenestra ( Fig. 3C ).

The nasals of ROM 66180 are highly diagnostic of this taxon, contributing to both the elongate facial region that distances the external naris from the orbit, and participating in the composition of the distinctive forward-facing crest Horner and Makela 1979). In both ROM 66180 and 66182 partial cranium, the dorsal surfaces of the articulated nasals descend anteroventrally, unlike the Acristavus specimen MOR 1155 ( Gates et al. 2011:fig. 4A) and Brachylophosaurus Sternberg 1953 ), in which the horizontal dorsal surface of the nasal is approximately level with the frontal. The nasals of ROM 66180 resemble those of YPM-PU 22405 in being broad in dorsal view and dorsoventrally shallow in lateral view ( Horner 1983). The nasals are broadest and flattest at mid-length, directly anterior to the prefrontal–lacrimal contact. The contact surface for the posterolateral process of the premaxilla is separated from the external surface of the nasal by a pronounced ridge, which is low and rounded posteriorly and becomes an enlarged, sharply defined overhang anteriorly, until merging with the anteroventral process beneath the narial fenestra. The posterior end of the contact surface is exposed dorsolaterally, and tapers to a point medial to the prefrontal–lacrimal contact. The dorsal exposure of the contact decreases anteriorly until it is hidden from view by the overhanging ridge, occurring at approximately the same distance along the nasals as the posterior end of a triangular gap between the nasals that held the posterodorsal processes of the premaxillae. Anteriorly, the nasals curve lateroventrally, giving the rostrum a rounded, tubular cross-section ( Fig. 4 ). The outer boundary of the circumnarial fossa is not defined as a distinct depression in the region surrounding the narial fenestra, but the lateral side of the nasal is flattened in the region indicated as the fossa by Horner (1983: fig. 1B).

The posterior ends of the nasals are inclined vertically in ROM 66180 to form the anteromedial surface of the crest ( Fig. 4 ). The combined width of the nasal contribution to the crest is 100 mm. Numerous small foramina are present near the ends of the nasals, as in YPM-PU 22405 ( Horner 1983: fig. 2E). The nasals in this region of ROM 66180 are thickest medially, forming a median peak with a triangular cross-section. Laterally, each nasal is slightly concave transversely, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893; Cuthbertson and Holmes 2010). The peaked median edge of each nasal becomes more rounded anteriorly, and expands laterally as the dorsal surface of the nasals transitions from vertically oriented to horizontally oriented, eventually reaching the lateral margin of each nasal and restricting the transverse concavities to the crest region. Anteroventral to the crest region, the arms of the median ridge diverge to define a shallow, ovoid median depression on the dorsal surface of the nasals measuring approximately 70 mm long and 40 mm wide. The posterior margin of the nasal contribution to the crest appears to have been shallowly curved in ROM 66180, versus more pointed in YPM-PU 22405 ( Horner 1983: fig. 2E). The posterior edges of the nasals in ROM 66180 are reconstructed, but the dorsal margin of the nasofrontal contact on the frontal is partially preserved, giving some sense of their probable shape. ROM 66180 differs from ROM 44770 in that the latter has an appreciably more distinct median ridge along the internasal contact directly anterior to the crest, flanked by correspondingly deeper concavities, superficially recalling this region of the nasals in Prosaurolophus ( Brown 1916: fig. 3; McGarrity et al. 2013: fig. 4). ROM 44770 further differs from ROM 66180 in that the dorsal margin of the nasals between the prefrontal region and the external naris is slightly convex in lateral view. However, ROM 44770 is strongly compressed mediolaterally, and these differences may be diagenetic in origin.

The smaller, disarticulated, posterior partial nasals problematically catalogued with ROM 66182 (but not referable to the ROM 66182 partial cranium, and possibly belonging to the same individual as ROM 66181) present a less complex dorsal topography ( Fig. 3A ). These nasals have a triangular cross-section over most of their preserved length, formed by a thick medial edge smoothly grading to a thin lateral edge. The dorsal angle measured in anterior view is 107° ( Fig. 2E ). The medial surface, forming the internasal contact, is flat and vertical ( Fig. 2D ). The thin lateral margins are incompletely preserved. The posterior part of the nasal curves dorsally. The posterodorsal extremity of the nasal is relatively flatter and slightly transversely concave. The ventral side of the dorsally curved posterior region is characterized by anteroposterior striations for articulation with the frontal, resembling this contact on the subadult nasal of Probrachylophosaurus (MOR 1097, Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015: fig. 8F). Although the posterior margins of the small posterior nasals are incompletely preserved, there is no indication of the nasal crest extending farther posteriorly than the nasofrontal contact in any specimen of Maiasaura , unlike Brachylophosaurus and Probrachylophosaurus .

Prefrontal: The hadrosaurid prefrontal is considered a fusion of the ancestral prefrontal with the supraorbital elements ( Maryańska and Osmólska 1979; Horner et al. 2004). A boundary between these ancestral components was not observed in any of the material examined, and the total element is herein referred to simply as the prefrontal. The prefrontal contacts the frontal posteriorly, the nasal medially, and the lacrimal ventrally. In at least one specimen referred to Maiasaura, ROM 44770, the posterolateral process of the premaxilla also reaches the prefrontal laterally, separating the nasal from the lacrimal, as in Brachylophosaurus ( Prieto-Márquez 2005: fig. 6A; Cuthbertson and Holmes 2010: fig. 2B), but apparently not in Acristavus ( Gates et al 2011: fig. 4C). No premaxilla–prefrontal contact is shown in the published figures of YPM-PU 22405 ( Horner 1983: fig. 1B) or TCMI 2001.89.2 ( Gates et al. 2011: fig. 2B), possibly due to breakage. Complete pairs of prefrontals are preserved in articulation with the frontals and nasals in ROM 66180 ( Fig. 4 ), and with the frontals in ROM 66182 ( Fig. 5A ). A portion of the left prefrontal is preserved in articulation with the frontal in ROM 66181 ( Fig. 5B ). The anteroventral portion of the prefrontal forms a complex articulation with the lacrimal. In both ROM 66180 and 66182, this surface is subtriangular in ventral view, with a large socket-like depression for receiving the lacrimal on the medial side, and a smaller, shallower contact on the lateral side. In ROM 66180, the anterior tip of the ventral articular surface is elongate and tapered, with a series of parallel, anteroposterior ridges and grooves, which extend as far posteriorly as the posterior margin of the medial depression. The flat posterolateral corner of the articular surface is inclined posterodorsally towards the orbit, and bordered posteriorly by a pronounced transverse lip. The lateral side of the lacrimal directly dorsal to this flat surface is very rugose. Posteromedial to the lacrimal contact on the ventral surface of the skull roof, there is a fusiform depression enclosed by a prominently protruding rim (at least on the left side, where this region is better prepared), incorporating at least the medial edge of the prefrontal, and possibly the posterior edge of the nasal. In ROM 66182, the anteroventral surface of the prefrontal is proportionately shorter anteroposteriorly, and the rugosity on the lateral surface dorsal to the lacrimal contact is absent. The right prefrontal of ROM 66182 can be connected to a disarticulated right lacrimal sharing the same specimen number, and possibly belonging to this individual. The long axis of the lacrimal in ROM 66182, when articulated with the prefrontal, is steeply angled anteroventrally, maintaining approximately the same inclination as the anteroventral portion of the prefrontal. In larger specimens of Maiasaura , including YPM-PU 22405 Horner 1983: fig. 1) and ROM 44770, the long axis of the lacrimal is nearly horizontal.

Horner (1983: 31) was unable to determine the shape of the prefrontal in YPM-PU 22405, but noted that it appeared to form “a portion of the lateral surface” of the nasofrontal crest. The prefrontal in ROM 66180 is confirmed to participate extensively in the anterolateral surface of the crest, contributing an anteriorly directed surface continuous with and comparable in area to that of the posterior nasals. The area of the crest formed by the prefrontals is weakly concave anteriorly with a convex dorsolateral rim, producing an approximately semi-circular, dish-like overall crest morphology in anterior view. Like the nasal, the tilted posterodorsal portion of the prefrontal is broad mediolaterally and thin dorsoventrally. It descends steeply anteroventrally from the dorsal edge of the crest, and its convex lateral edge projects laterally from its contact with the frontal, attaining a maximum width in dorsal view that is greater than the frontals, comparable to the squamosals, and only slightly less than the postorbitals. As with the other bones forming the dorsal margin of the orbit, the lateral margin of the prefrontal is rugosely textured, particularly on a flat, posterolaterally-facing triangular surface directly anterior to the prefrontal–frontal contact, but also continuing anteroventrally along the lateral rim of the crest. The anteroventral end of the lateral rim of the crest overhangs the posterior end of the lacrimal contact.

The dorsal portion of the prefrontal is also anteroposteriorly elongate and steeply tilted with curved lateral margins in ROM 44770 and 66182, but its anterodorsal surface is relatively flat, so the dish-like crest morphology is not expressed. In ROM 66182, the dorsal surface of each prefrontal is pierced by a supraorbital foramen, positioned towards the medial side of the element approximately two-thirds of the total length from its posterior margin, a short distance posterior to the point at which it narrows to its minimum breadth and twists laterally ( Fig. 5A ). On the ventral side of the prefrontal, the foramen is positioned more posteriorly, close to the visible interdigitating contact with the frontal. Definitive prefrontal foramina were not observed in ROM 44770 or 66180, possibly due to preservational factors. A small foramen may be visible towards the medial edge of the ventral surface of the left prefrontal in ROM 66180.

Frontal: The frontals contact the nasals and prefrontals anteriorly, the postorbitals and parietal posteriorly, and the neurocranium ventrally. The contact between the left and right frontals is visible in ROM 66181 and 66182 ( Fig. 5A, B ), but it is less prominent than in subadult Brachylophosaurus ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015: fig. 11). In ROM 60260 and 66180, the frontals are indistinguishably fused into a single element, unlike other hadrosaurines. The state of this character is obscured by breakage in ROM 60261. Horner (1983) characterized the frontals of YPM-PU 22405 as short and massive, which is corroborated by the new material. The frontals are proportionately wider and thicker in the larger individuals, relative to their length.

The anterior surface of the frontal forms a broad, continuous contact with the nasal and prefrontal. In dorsal view, the external frontal margin of the contact produces a weakly pronounced apex inserting between the individual nasal contact surfaces in ROM 66182 ( Fig. 5A ), whereas the midline of the nasal–frontal contact is transversely straight in dorsal view in ROM 60260 and 66181 ( Fig. 5B ). At its lateral limits, the nasal–frontal contact curves slightly anteriorly in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182, whereas the entire contact is straight in dorsal view in ROM 60260 and 66180. Among hadrosaurines, a relatively straight transverse nasal–frontal contact is also present in Edmontosaurus , but differs from Maiasaura in being distinctly crenulated ( Xing et al. 2017). The nasal contact is flat and only partially inclined in ROM 66182, but is anteroposteriorly concave and approximately vertical in ROM 60260, 60261, 66180, and 66181. The contact surface is relatively finely grooved in ROM 66182, more deeply grooved in ROM 66181 and 60261, and very strongly grooved in ROM 60260. In ROM 60261, the prominence of the grooves increases medially. In dorsal view, the contact between the nasals and frontals is slightly bowed posteriorly in ROM 44770, 60261, 66181, and 66182, and essentially straight in ROM 60260 and 66180. Elevation of the frontal immediately posterior to the nasal contact is slight in ROM 66181 and 66182, but distinctly present in ROM 60261. The flat dorsal surface of the frontal in ROM 66181 and 66182 has a slightly wrinkled, pebbly texture. The dorsal surface appears to be damaged in ROM 60261. The anterior frontal is highly elevated posterior to the nasals in ROM 60260 and 66180, and the dorsal surface across the paired frontals is convex transversely. A lesser, but distinct elevation also occurs at the posterior margin of the frontal in ROM 60260 and 66180, so in lateral view the dorsal surface of the frontal is concave.

Frontal depressions, previously noted to occur in other maiasaurins ( Horner 1988; Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015), are essentially absent in ROM 66182 ( Fig. 5A ). The posterior corner of a shallow, incomplete incipient frontal depression may be present on the right frontal, if this indentation is a true anatomical feature. Frontal depressions in ROM 60261 and 66181 are narrow and elongate, oriented diagonally, and projecting posteromedially between the nasal–frontal contact and the orbital rim ( Fig. 5B ). The frontal depressions are situated close to (though not contacting), and parallel to, the interdigitating frontal–postorbital sutures. In ROM 66181, the distance between the frontal depression and the parietal is slightly less than the length of the depression, and a projection of the long axis of the depression would contact the middle of the midline parietal bar. In ROM 60261, the distance between the frontal depression and the parietal exceeds the length of the depression, and a projection of the long axis of the depression would contact the anterior end of the midline parietal bar. In ROM 66180, the frontal depressions are relatively deep (over 10 mm), but constricted anteriorly, so that the dorsal openings are smaller and more circular than in the other specimens ( Fig. 5C ). The frontal depressions may also be constricted in ROM 60260, but damage to this region makes their morphology, if present, unclear.

Horner (1983) described the frontal of YPM-PU 22405 as contacting supraorbital elements laterally, though most descriptions of maiasaurin skulls do not mention these elements and describe the frontal as contributing directly to the dorsal margin of the orbit ( Sternberg 1953; Prieto-Márquez 2005; Cuthbertson and Holmes 2010; Gates et al. 2011; Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015). Definitive supraorbitals were not observed in any of the Maiasaura specimens examined in this study, but the contacts may be obscured by imperfect preservation. A possible example of a supraorbital is visible in ventral view in the right orbit of ROM 66180, based on comparison to the figure of YPM-PU 22405 ( Horner 1983: fig. 2G). The small foramen described by Horner (1983) as entering the dorsal surface of the skull medial to the orbit was also not observed in the specimens examined, though prominent foramina are visible ventrally near the orbital rims. The exposed lateral edge of the frontal is heavily rugose, with thick columnar ridges. In dorsal view, the orbital margin of the frontal is recessed medially from the lateral edge of the postorbital (and prefrontal, when preserved), as in some specimens of Brachylophosaurus canadensis , and unlike Acristavus gagslarsoni and Probrachylophosaurus bergei ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015) . The contact between the frontal and postorbital is an open interdigitating suture in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182. In ROM 66180, this suture is fused (or at least, not obviously detectable), but a raised ridge that is absent in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182 marks the location of the contact. The region is too damaged in ROM 60260 to determine whether this ridge was present or absent.

Posteriorly, the contact between the frontal and parietal is most clearly visible in ROM 66182, resembling the contact in other maiasaurins ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015: fig. 11). In this specimen the skull roof slopes gently from the frontal–parietal contact to the dorsotemporal fenestra, with no ridge or overhanging structure ( Fig. 6A ). A slight ridge is present in ROM 60261 in the same position as the frontal–parietal contact in ROM 66182, and also very slightly in ROM 66181, particularly on the left side. In ROM 60260 and 66180, the skull roof has a short ledge (averaging approximately 10 mm in ROM 66180) overhanging the anterior margin of each dorsotemporal fenestra, at approximately the same position as the frontal–parietal contact in ROM 66182, and the slight ridge in ROM 60261. Because the boundary between the frontal and parietal is not clearly visible on these larger specimens, it is not absolutely certain whether these overhangs are extensions of the frontal, the parietal, or both elements ( Fig. 6B, C ). In Brachylophosaurus ( Fig. 6D ), a similar but more extensive (2–5 cm) overhang onto the dorsotemporal fenestrae is reported to be variably composed of the prefrontals and frontals ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015). However, ROM 60260 and 60261 differ from Brachylophosaurus in that in the latter taxon the overhang buttresses the nasal crest, and is only developed in individuals in which the nasal crest overlies the entire anteroposterior length of the frontals ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015).

Postorbital: The postorbitals form the lateral margin of the skull roof posterior to the frontals. They contact the frontals anteromedially, the parietals medially, the laterosphenoids anteroventrally, and the squamosals posteroventrally. The anterodorsal edge of the postorbital, forming the posterodorsal margin of the orbit, is crenulated and rugose in the manner of the frontal. The anteriorly directed sheet of bone that covers the posterodorsal corner of the orbit in Acristavus ( Gates et al. 2011) is absent, though the interior space of the orbit extends posteriorly onto the recessed anteromedial surface of the postorbital, which is hidden in lateral view posteromedial to the orbital margin. This concavity does not take the form of a hypertrophied, strongly demarcated “pocket”, as it does in Edmontosaurus regalis Xing et al. 2017 : fig. 12). In ROM 60260, 60261, 66181, and 66182, the rugose texture on the postorbital is restricted to the orbital margin, and the dorsolateral surface of the triangular jugal process is smooth. Farther ventrally, the lateral surface of the jugal process in ROM 60261 and 66182 is lightly striated. In ROM 66180, the anterodorsal and posterodorsal margins of the jugal process are connected lateroventrally by an irregular, U-shaped rugosity covering the middle of the jugal process ( Fig. 1E ). The ventral part of the jugal process, in contrast, is smooth. The right postorbital of ROM 66180 also has an anomalous circular depression on the dorsal surface between the jugal and squamosal processes ( Fig. 2C ); a pathological circular depression has been reported on the same element in the Brachylophosaurus specimen TMP 1990.104.0001 ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015). The dorsal part of the jugal process is triangular in cross-section with well-defined corners, with broad anterior and posterior surfaces, and a narrower lateral surface. The ventral part of the jugal process has an L-shaped cross-section, with the anterior and posterior surfaces compressed to a transverse sheet forming the longer side of the L, and the lateral surface forming the shorter side of the L projecting as a ridge posteriorly from the transverse sheet. The jugal process is relatively straight in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182, whereas its ventral part is bent strongly anteriorly in ROM 60260 and 66180, though this difference may be a preservational artefact. In at least ROM 66180, a small circular foramen perforates the posteroventral surface of the main body of the postorbital, between the jugal and squamosal processes. A small foramen also opens at the approximately same level on the anterior side of the right postorbital in this specimen, but is not observed on the left.

The squamosal process is approximately horizontal in ROM 66182, as in Acristavus ( Gates et al. 2011) and Brachylophosaurus ( Sternberg 1953) , so the skull roof is not strongly elevated posteriorly. In ROM 44770, 60260, 60261, 66180, and 66181, the squamosal process is arched dorsally, and its posterior end is elevated with respect to the main body of the postorbital. The squamosal process is dorsoventrally flattened, with a dorsal surface that is gently convex mediolaterally. The lateral and medial edges separating the dorsal and ventral surfaces are well defined. The lateral ridge is continuous with the posterolateral ridge on the jugal process, and forms the ventral edge of the dorsotemporal bar in lateral view ( Fig. 7A ). In Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893), in contrast, this ridge continues to rise dorsolaterally on the squamosal process, and a portion of this process ventral to the ridge is visible in lateral view ( Fig. 7B ). The posterior end of the squamosal process overlying the squamosal is bifurcated ( Fig. 7C ), with a broad lateral branch and a narrow medial branch (“mitten shaped”), as in Saurolophus angustirostris ( Bell 2011a: fig. 1). This differs from the condition in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893; Fig. 7B ) and Probrachylophosaurus ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015: fig. 13B) in which the posterior end of the squamosal process is scalloped and diagonally oriented. The squamosal process is also deeply bifurcated in Gryposaurus notabilis ( Prieto-Márquez 2010: fig. 3), but in that taxon both branches are narrow. In ROM 66180, the dorsal surface of the squamosal process has a faint diagonal ridge that ends at the point of this bifurcation, and distinguishes the dorsal surface (terminating in the narrow medial branch) from the dorsolateral surface (terminating in the broad lateral branch).

Parietal: The parietal forms the midline bar between the dorsotemporal fenestrae, and overlies the posterior part of the endocranial cavity. It is expanded laterally at its anterior and posterior ends. At the anterior end, the contact with the postorbital occurs immediately lateral to the main body of the parietal in ROM 60261, related to the relative narrowness of the dorsotemporal fenestrae. In individuals with relatively broader dorsotemporal fenestrae, including ROM 66180 and 66181, the parietal has short anterolateral processes extending between the main body and the postorbital; however, the precise location of the boundary between the parietal and postorbital in ROM 66180 is unclear ( Fig. 6C ).

The region of the skull roof joining the midline bar of the parietal to the frontal forms a posteriorly directed triangle. This triangular region is relatively low and unornamented in ROM 60261 and 66181, but is an elevated, roughened mound in ROM 60260, 66180, and 66182, as previously noted for the posterior-most frontal region of YPM-PU 22405 ( Horner 1983). The triangular platform is anteroposteriorly short in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182. It is elongated posteriorly in ROM 60260, flanking either side of the dorsally protruding sagittal crest. This elongated condition is asymmetrically present on the right side of ROM 66180, which has experienced some deformation of the parietal midline. Dorsally, the edge of the parietal is thin in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182, but is somewhat more robust in ROM 60260 and 66180. The parietal continues as a mediolaterally narrow plate considerably ventral to the level of the skull roof, with the expansion for the endocranial cavity reaching farthest dorsally towards the anterior end of the parietal. Posteriorly, the parietal thins out and wedges between the squamosals. The lateral surfaces of the parietal are commonly cracked and poorly preserved, making detailed description of this region difficult. Ventrally, the contact between the parietal and neurocranium follows a straight line. There is no indication of a foramen at the intersection of the laterosphenoid, prootic, and parietal, which was described in Acristavus ( Gates et al. 2011) .

Squamosal: The squamosals form the posterolateral corners and posterior margin of the dorsal skull roof. The postorbital ramus of the squamosal is a flattened triangular sheet that underlies, and is depressed into, the ventromedial surface of the squamosal ramus of the postorbital. The tapered anterior end of the postorbital ramus terminates posteriorly to the anterior margin of the dorsotemporal fenestra. The postorbital ramus is connected to the prequadratic process by a short, diagonal strut that spans the posterodorsal corner of the lateral temporal fenestra, and defines a laterally concave pocket in the squamosal anterodorsal to the prequadratic process. This subtly contrasts with the condition in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893), in which the postorbital ramus is exposed laterally for its entire length along the dorsal margin of the lateral temporal fenestra, rather than only in the posterodorsal corner.

The prequadratic process is spike-like with a flattened, approximately triangular cross-section. Its orientation is approximately parallel to the jugal ramus of the postorbital. The posterolateral surface of the prequadratic process adjoining the quadratic condyle is large and flat, with sharply defined edges. The anterolateral surface, facing the lateral temporal fenestra, is the narrowest surface of the prequadratic process, and has a rounded transition to the broad anteromedial surface. The prequadratic process is dorsoventrally longer than mediolaterally wide, whereas these dimensions are reported to be equal in the stouter prequadratic processes of Probrachylophosaurus and subadult Brachylophosaurus ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015) . The prominent quadrate cotyle is longer anteroposteriorly than mediolaterally. Both quadrate cotyles are compressed anteroposteriorly in ROM 66180, such that the prequadratic and postquadratic processes meet in a sharp “V” in ventral view. In less distorted specimens, such as ROM 60261, the angle between the processes is much broader. The postquadratic process has a compressed, blade-like shape, with an anterolaterally facing external surface and a posteromedially facing internal surface. The posterior margin of the postquadratic process closely follows the curve of the paroccipital process of the exoccipital.

The hook-shaped medial ramus of the squamosal is bowed posteriorly, and curls anteromedially with an anteriorly directed extension appressed to the lateral surface of the parietal. In ROM 60261 ( Fig. 2D ) and ROM 66180 ( Fig. 2C ), the minimum breadth of the medial ramus of the squamosal in dorsal view is considerably less than that of the dorsotemporal bar, as in Edmontosaurus regalis ( Xing et al. 2017: fig. 10) and Prosaurolophus maximus ( McGarrity et al. 2013: fig. 4), whereas in ROM 66181 ( Fig. 2B ) these dimensions are subequal, as in Acristavus gagslarsoni ( Gates et al. 2011: fig. 4). The squamosals contact each other at the midline posteriorly in ROM 60260, 60261, and 66180–66182, as in Acristavus and Probrachylophosaurus ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015) , but are separated by the parietal in ROM 44770, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893).

Neurocranium: Presphenoid: Partially preserved presphenoids (sensu Evans 2006) are visible in ROM 60260, 60261, and 66182, but little morphological detail is recorded, and the boundary between this element and the orbitosphenoid is unclear in all specimens analysed. The presphenoid bridges the space between the ventral side of the frontal and the anterodorsal side of the orbitosphenoid. It is a thin, plate-like element that encloses the olfactory channel laterally and ventrally.

Orbitosphenoid: Orbitosphenoids are preserved in ROM 60260, 60261, 66181, and 66182. The paired orbitosphenoids contact each other and the presphenoids anteriorly, the frontals dorsally, the laterosphenoids posteriorly, and the parabasisphenoid ventrally. In ROM 60260, the poorly preserved orbitosphenoid appears to be fused to the frontal. In ROM 66182, the contact between the frontal and orbitosphenoid is unfused, while fusion to the laterosphenoid is indeterminate. The contact between the orbitosphenoid and laterosphenoid is visible on the left side in ROM 66181, occurring anteromedial to the vertical ridge that marks the posterior limit of the interior space of the orbit. The general morphology of the orbitosphenoid is best observed on the left side of ROM 60261 ( Figs. 8 , 9 ). The exposed upper portion of the orbitosphenoid is rectangular in lateral view, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893). The orbitosphenoid lacks an obvious separate foramen for the trochlear nerve (CN IV) in the same region that it exits in CMN 8893, where instead only a small, horizontal groove is observed in ROM 60261. However, this small foramen may be obscured by a crack in the latter specimen immediately posterior to the groove, and thus not greatly different in position from closely related taxa. The groove for the trochlear nerve fades out above the foramen for the optic nerve (CN II), rather than remaining distinct up to the anterior edge of the orbitosphenoid, as figured for Kerberosaurus ( Bolotsky and Godefroit 2004: fig. 3A). The region ventral to the rectangular body of the orbitosphenoid is a web of struts enclosing three larger foramina. The most anterodorsal of these, forming the exit for the optic nerve, opens laterally and has an anteroposteriorly elongate ovoid shape. The optic nerve foramen is more completely ossified around and more laterally facing than in specimens of Brachylophosaurus ( Prieto-Márquez 2005; Cuthbertson and Holmes 2010) and Gryposaurus ( Prieto-Márquez 2010) , in which the optic nerve exits anteriorly into the hypophyseal cavity. The dorsal and ventral borders nearly connect anteriorly, but given the broken state of the available material it cannot be definitively determined whether the foramen was fully enclosed by bone on each side, as in adult Edmontosaurus ( Xing et al. 2017) , Saurolophus ( Bell 2011b: fig. 11), and lambeosaurines ( Ostrom 1961; Godefroit et al. 2004; Evans 2010). The two other posteroventral foramina, forming the exits for the occulomotor nerve (CN III) dorsally and abducens nerve (CN VI) ventrally, are more anteriorly directed, and separated by a bar projecting from the laterosphenoid. The presence of separate foramina for CN III and CN VI differs from the condition in edmontosaurins ( Bolotsky and Godefroit 2004; Godefroit et al. 2012; Xing et al. 2017) and lambeosaurines ( Ostrom 1961; Godefroit et al. 2004; Pereda-Suberbiola et al. 2009; Evans 2010), in which these nerves exit through a single, merged foramen. The foramen for CN III is bordered by the orbitosphenoid anteriorly and the laterosphenoid posteroventrally, while the foramen for CN VI is bordered by the orbitosphenoid anterodorsally, the laterosphenoid posterodorsally, and the parabasisphenoid ventrally, with the contact between the orbitosphenoid and the cultriform process occurring at the anterior point on this foramen.

Laterosphenoid: The paired laterosphenoids are the anterior elements of the lateral walls of the braincase ( Fig. 9 ). They contact the orbitosphenoids anteriorly, the frontals, postorbitals, and parietal dorsally, the basisphenoid ventrally, and the prootics posteriorly. The contact with the prootic is visible along the posterior border of the laterosphenoid in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182, while the laterosphenoid is fused to both the basisphenoid and the prootic in ROM 60260 and 66180. The laterosphenoid is approximately triangular in shape, broad dorsally and tapering ventrally. Anteriorly the laterosphenoid forms a sharply defined vertical edge, defining the border between the orbit and the lateral wall of the braincase. Dorsolaterally, this edge is continuous with the posteromedial edge of the postorbital. The dorsal contact between the laterosphenoid and parietal is straight. The posterior border of the laterosphenoid contributes to the anterior border of the large foramen for the trigeminal nerve (CN V). From the trigeminal foramen, a horizontal groove for the ophthalmic ramus (CN V 1) continues along the lateral face of the laterosphenoid to the anterior corner of the lateral wall of the braincase. In ROM 60261, a small tab is preserved projecting ventrally from the laterosphenoid along the dorsal edge of this groove, close to the edge of the trigeminal foramen, indicating the attachment of the musculus levator pterygoideus ( Holliday 2009). Ventrally, a process of the laterosphenoid overlies a laterally projecting pedestal formed by the basisphenoid, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893).

Prootic: The paired prootics are the middle elements of the lateral wall of the braincase ( Fig. 9 ). They contact the laterosphenoids anteriorly, the parietal dorsally, the opisthotic–exoccipitals posteriorly, and the basisphenoid ventrally. The prootic is unfused to either the parietal or the exoccipital–opsithotic complex in ROM 60261, 66181, and 66182, and fused to both elements in ROM 60260 and 66180. The ventral margin of the prootic, along with the opisthotic–exoccipital complex, contributes to a distinct pit or pocket on the lateral side of the braincase immediately dorsal to the basal tubera, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893), in all of the examined specimens of Maiasaura that are adequately preserved to evaluate this character (ROM 60260, 60261, 66180, and 66182).

The anterior border of the prootic is mediolaterally broad where it encloses the posterior part of the trigeminal foramen. The trigeminal foramen has a rounded subtriangular outline similar to that of Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893), rather than the more angular condition described for Acristavus ( Gates et al. 2011) . In ROM 60261 and 66182, the prootic ventral to the trigeminal foramen forms a slight horizontal bar, as in Brachylophosaurus ( Godefroit et al. 2012) , but a distinct pocket is not developed ventral to the bar as in Kerberosaurus ( Bolotsky and Godefroit 2004) . In ROM 60260 and 66180, the bar is absent, and the ventrolateral surface of the prootic is smooth. A pronounced groove posterodorsal to the trigeminal foramen is observed in ROM 60261.

The small foramen for the facial nerve (CN VII) is contained entirely within the prootic, separated from the trigeminal foramen by a posterodorsally inclined ridge confluent with the alar process. The facial nerve exits through a singular foramen on each side positioned directly posterior to the trigeminal foramen in ROM 60260, 66180, and 66182, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893). In ROM 66181, the facial nerve foramen is displaced ventrally on both sides, such that it does not overlap the trigeminal foramen horizontally ( Fig. 10 ). On the left prootic of ROM 66181, but not the right, a small hole directly posterior to the trigeminal nerve may be a second exit for the facial nerve, or merely damage to the prootic. The position of the facial nerve foramen is obscured by breakage in ROM 60261. A groove for the palatine branch of the facial nerve runs anteroventrally from the facial nerve foramen following the posterior margin of the alar process.

The vestibular fenestra opens along the contact between the prootic and the opisthotic–exoccipital complex, with the majority of this fenestra positioned over the basioccipital contribution to the basal tubera, though in ROM 60261 it partly straddles the basisphenoid–basioccipital boundary. The vestibular fenestra is much larger than the facial nerve foramen, but smaller than the trigeminal foramen. In ROM 66180 it has the same height as the trigeminal foramen, but is not as wide anteroposteriorly. A thin bony septum, the crista interfenestralis, divides the vestibular fenestra into its dorsal and ventral components ( Fig. 11 ). These two openings have been variously identified in other hadrosaurids as the fenestra ovalis and fenestra rotunda ( Bolotsky and Godefroit 2004), or fenestra ovalis and glossopharyngeal (CN IX) foramen ( Langston 1960), respectively. The crista interfenestralis has a posterodorsal-to-anteroventral diagonal orientation in ROM 60260, 66182, and possibly 66181, based on a fragment visible on the right side. It is only slightly inclined from the horizontal in ROM 66180, in which it parallels the nearly horizontal crista prootica in this region of that specimen ( Fig. 11 ). The crista prootica of ROM 60261 is also nearly horizontal, but may be slightly inclined in the opposite direction (posteroventral-to-anterodorsal); however, the bone is fragmented in this region and may not reflect the original orientation. On the right side of ROM 60261, a vertical septum further subdivides the fenestra ovalis. This septum was not observed in the other specimens.

Opisthotic–exoccipital complex: The opisthotic and exoccipital are indistinguishably fused in all specimens. By convention, the term exoccipital is used for the description of this element ( Evans 2010). The exoccipitals contact the prootic anteriorly, the parietal, squamosals, and supraoccipital dorsally, and the basioccipital ventrally. The contact between the exoccipital and basioccipital is visible in all examined specimens for which both elements are preserved. It is relatively high in ROM 60261 and 66182, and very low in ROM 60260 and 66180, with little exposure of the basioccipital in lateral view.

The metotic strut is indistinct from the rest of the lateral wall of the braincase, beyond forming the posterior border of the vestibular fenestra and the anterior border of the metotic foramen. A broad groove extending posterodorsally from the vestibular foramen is well defined in ROM 66180 and on the right side of 66181. Posterior to the metotic strut, the lateral surface of the exoccipital is pierced by two foramina, as in Probrachylophosaurus ( Freedman Fowler and Horner 2015: fig. 15) and the type specimen of Brachylophosaurus canadensis ( Cuthbertson and Holmes 2010: fig. 4). A third foramen is variably present in Brachylophosaurus from Montana ( Prieto-Márquez 2005: fig. 8), but is not present in any of the Maiasaura specimens for which this character was observed (ROM 44770, 60260, 60261, 66180–66182). The opening of the metotic foramen is oriented primarily laterally in ROM 44770, 66180, and 66182; posterolaterally in ROM 60260 and 66181; and posteriorly in ROM 60261. It is positioned more ventrally on the side of the braincase than the vestibular fenestra, and does not overlap with it horizontally, except for slightly on the right side of ROM 66181. The metotic foramen is semi-divided by a small septum projecting from its posterior margin in at least ROM 60261. The metotic foramen may also preserve a remnant of a septum on the left side of ROM 66180, and the right side of ROM 66181 ( Fig. 10 ). The metotic foramen appears to be a single, round foramen in ROM 66182, but this is difficult to confirm as the actual condition, rather than a preservational artefact. The more posterior foramen is an exit for the hypoglossal nerve (CN XII). The metotic and hypoglossal foramina are at the same horizontal level. The distance between the posterior edge of the hypoglossal foramen and the posterior edge of the exoccipital (measured straight back from the foramen) is considerably greater than the distance between the posterior edge of the hypoglossal foramen and the anterior edge of the metotic foramen in ROM 60261, but not in ROM 44770, 60260, 66180–66182.

The posterodorsally angled crista prootica is strongly pronounced, and variable in form. In ROM 66181 and 66182, there is no gap between this ridge and the dorsal margin of the vestibular foramen, and there is no distinct pocket or overhang ventral to the ridge. In ROM 60261, a conspicuous pocket is present ventral to the crista prootica, dorsal to the metotic and hypoglossal foramina, but not extending as far anteriorly as the vestibular fenestra. In ROM 60260 and 66180, this pocket is elaborated to form a laterally enclosed, ventrally open channel on the underside of the crista prootica ( Fig. 11 ). This channel extends farther anteriorly over the vestibular fenestra, which is separated from the crista prootica by a distinct gap. In ROM 66180 this channel contains a lateral groove, connecting to the dorsal groove from the facial nerve foramen on the prootic, and a medial groove, connecting to the dorsal groove from the vestibular foramen, separated by a small ridge where they come together below the posterior extent of the crista prootica.

The exoccipitals meet posteriorly, forming a shelf that supports the supraoccipital dorsally, and overhangs the foramen magnum ventrally ( Fig. 12 ). The underside of the shelf has a ridge along the contact between the exoccipitals in ROM 66181, as in Brachylophosaurus (CMN 8893). This ridge is absent or only very faintly present in ROM 60260, 66180, and 66182. In ROM 60261 the exoccipitals were slightly pushed together during diagenesis, so the ridge” cannot be reliably assessed. Between this shelf and the foramen magnum are a pair of depressions that serve as the insertion sites of the musculus rectus capitus posterior ( Ostrom 1961). These depressions are quite shallow in ROM 60260, 66180, and 66182, and relatively deep in ROM 60261 and 66181. The diamond-shaped foramen magnum is enclosed by the exoccipitals. A small ridge overhangs each side of the foramen magnum dorsolaterally. These are most prominent in ROM 60261 and 66182, and slight in 66180. The posteroventral protrusions of the exoccipital condyloids project farther posteriorly than the occipital condyle of the basioccipital. The paroccipital processes are anteroposteriorly compressed. A small tuberosity is present on the medial edge of the paroccipital process. The ventral extremities of both paroccipital processes are preserved in ROM 66180, in which each is capped by a small, roughened protrusion on the anteroventral corner ( Fig. 12 ).

Supraoccipital: The supraoccipital is a median element exposed on the posterior surface of the braincase, ventral to the squamosals and dorsal to the exoccipitals ( Fig. 12 ). As in other hadrosauriforms, the supraoccipital is excluded from the foramen magnum. The exposed region of the supraoccipital is somewhat variable in form, which can be partly attributed to differential deformation among the sample. The ventral body of the supraoccipital is a relatively shallow, flat plate in ROM 66180–66182, while it is thicker in ROM 44770, 60260, and 60261. The posterior edge of the plate-like body is transversely striated in ROM 66182, as in Acristavus ( Gates et al. 2011) , but not in other specimens of Maiasaura (e.g., ROM 66180). The triangular nuchal pit is relatively shallow in ROM 66182, and excessively shallow in ROM 66181, although in at least the latter specimen this is the result of the pit being post-depositionally collapsed. In contrast, the nuchal pit is dorsoventrally high in ROM 44770 and 60261, and in at least the former specimen (the latter is infilled by matrix), anteroposteriorly very deep. In ROM 60260 and 66180, the nuchal pit has a tripartite structure, with a large median depression flanked on either side by a smaller lateral depression. The laminae that separate these depressions are oriented dorsolaterally to ventromedially. One of these laminae is possibly also visible on the right side in ROM 60261, though the entire tripartite structure is not clear in that specimen. In ROM 66180, the laminae meet ventrally to form a roughened, semicircular platform posteroventral to the median depression. The large median depression in ROM 66180 is fairly deep anteroposteriorly but relatively low dorsoventrally, though this could be the result of dorsoventral compression. Following the soft tissue reconstructions of the hadrosaurid head by Ostrom 1961), the larger median pit likely corresponds to the attachment area of the nuchal ligament, and the two smaller lateral pits likely correspond to the insertions of the musculus spinalis capitis. However, the relative sizes of these landmarks are the inverse of those illustrated by Ostrom (1961: fig. 53) for Hypacrosaurus .

Parabasisphenoid: The parasphenoid and basisphenoid are indistinguishably fused into a parabasisphenoid in all of the examined specimens. The parasphenoid is the more anterior of the two elements, and forms the cultriform process. The basisphenoid contacts the laterosphenoid and prootic dorsally, and the basioccipital posteriorly. The cultriform process is best preserved in ROM 60261 and 66182. In ROM 66180, this process is artificially reconstructed, and should not be used as a basis for morphological comparisons. The cultriform process projects anterodorsally. It is subrectangular in lateral view, with approximately parallel dorsal and ventral margins at mid-length. Anteriorly, the cultriform process is slightly expanded dorsally in ROM 60261, but no contact with the presphenoid is preserved. The cultriform process is teardrop-shaped in cross-section, with a mediolaterally compressed sheet forming the dorsal part and a more robust, rounded ventral part. Posteriorly, the rounded lateroventral edges of the cultriform process give rise to sharpedged laminae, which diverge posterolaterally and connect the cultriform process to the basipterygoid processes. The triangular region of the basisphenoid between these laminae is concave. The anterior foramen for the internal carotid artery pierces the basisphenoid posteroventral to the cultriform process, anteroventral to the pedestal for the basisphenoid–laterosphenoid contact, anterior to the alar process, and dorsal to the basipterygoid process ( Fig. 8 ). This foramen is shielded laterally by a small, anteroventrally projecting tablike process of the basisphenoid ( Fig. 9 ).

The paired basipterygoid processes project ventrolaterally and slightly posteriorly in ROM 66182, and ventrolaterally and slightly anteriorly in ROM 60260, 60261, and 66180. The degree of ventrolateral orientation of the basipterygoid processes is variable, ranging from more ventrally oriented in ROM 66182 to more laterally oriented in ROM 66180. The basipterygoid processes are subtriangular in cross-section. They consist of a proximal region bound by the descending lamina of the cultriform process anteriorly and the interbasipterygoid ridge posteromedially, and a freely projecting distal region. The posterodorsal edge of each basipterygoid process is well defined in ROM 60260 and 66182, but is more rounded in ROM 60261 and 66180. The smaller interbasipterygoid process is flattened along a posterodorsal to anteroventral axis, and the distal end tapers medially. It is oriented posteroventrally, approximately parallel to the cultriform process in ROM 60261 ( Fig. 9 ), but more ventrally in ROM 66182.

The paired alar processes are large, thin sheets of bone formed mostly by the basisphenoid, except for a small, medial section of the dorsal edge that was possibly formed by the prootic (ROM 60261, 66181). The alar process of each side projects laterally from the braincase and is posterodorsally inclined. The anterodorsal and posteroventral surfaces have lightly striated or fluted textures. The anteroventral edge of the alar process is distinctly pendent below the ventral extent of the basal tubera in ROM 60261, and just slightly so in ROM 60260. The alar processes do not extend ventrally past the basal tubera in ROM 66180 and 66182, but the ends of the processes are broken. In ROM 60260, 60261, and 66182, the alar process is approximately co-planar with the posterodorsal edge of the basipterygoid process, such that extending the plane of the alar process anteroventrally would bisect the basipterygoid process along its length. The anterior face of the alar process is oriented slightly more dorsally in ROM 66180, compared to other specimens of Maiasaura , but this could be a preservational artefact. Immediately ventral to the alar process, and posterodorsal to the basipterygoid process, the lateral surface of the basisphenoid is pierced by the posterior foramen for the internal carotid artery. This foramen is hidden behind the alar process in lateral view.

Posterior to the basipterygoid and alar processes, the basisphenoid is hourglass-shaped in ventral view. Several tiny foramina are present in the median concavity of the ventral surface of the basisphenoid posterior to the interbasipterygoid ridge in ROM 60261 and 66182, but are absent in ROM 60260 and 66180. The basisphenoids form the anterior half of the basal tubera, with a rather loose connection to the posterior halves formed by the basioccipital. In ventral view, the boundary between the basisphenoid and basioccipital contributions to the basal tubera is strongly angled anteromedially in ROM 60261 and 66182, only slightly angled in ROM 60260, and nearly straight transversely in ROM 66180 ( Fig. 13 ). A V-shaped contact between the basisphenoid and basioccipital is visible medial to the basal tubera in ROM 60261, where the basisphenoid receives an anteriorly projecting triangular process of the basioccipital. This V-shaped contact is not visible in ROM 66180, where the boundary between the basisphenoid and basioccipital is distinct ventrally only on the basal tubera.

Basioccipital: The basioccipital forms the posteroventral region of the braincase. It contacts the basisphenoid anteriorly, and the exoccipitals dorsally. In ventral view, the basioccipital is approximately square in ROM 60261 and 66182, whereas it is distinctly wider than long in ROM 60260 and 66180 ( Fig. 13 ). The width of the basioccipital is approximately the same across the basal tubera as across the occipital condyle. Posterior and medial to the basal tubera, an abrupt “step” transversely crosses the ventral surface of the basioccipital, with the surface posterior to this step extending farther ventrally. The paired small excavations possibly occurring medial to the basal tubera on the basioccipital of Acristavus ( Gates et al. 2011: fig. 9C, D), similar to Gobihadros ( Tsogtbaatar et al. 2019: fig. 8B), are not observed in any individual of Maiasaura . The underside of the occipital condyle projects further ventrally still, and may be separated from the rest of the ventral surface by a transverse sulcus, as in ROM 66182. The portion of the occipital condyle formed by the basioccipital is separate from that formed by the exoccipital condyloids, and is directed posteroventrally. In ROM 66182, the condyle is cleft posteriorly along its midline, to a greater extent than seen in ROM 60260, 60261, and 66180, although this may be a result of damage. The lateroventral surfaces of the occipital condyle are deeply furrowed in ROM 66180, whereas they are smooth in ROM 60260, 60261, and 66182.

Stratigraphic and geographic range.—Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Montana, USA.

Figures

Fig. 1. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; partial crania in right lateral view. A. ROM 66182. B. ROM 66181. C. ROM 60261. D. ROM 60260. E. ROM 66180.

Fig. 2. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; partial crania in dorsal view. A. ROM 66182. B. ROM 66181. C. ROM 66180. D. ROM 60261. E. ROM 60260.

Fig. 3. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979 (ROM 66182) from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry,Montana, USA; disarticulated partial nasals. A. Paired posterior parts of nasals in dorsal (A1), anterior (A2), ventral (A3), and medial A4) views. B. Middle part of a nasal in lateral view. C. Anterior part of a nasal in lateral view.

Fig. 4. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979 (ROM 66180), from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; partial skull of in anterior (A1) and anterodorsal (A2) views, with schematic interpretation of prefrontal–nasal crest morphology.

Fig. 5. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; detail of frontal morphology showing the variable development of frontal depressions. A. ROM 66182, in anterodorsal view. B. ROM 66181, in oblique right anterodorsal view. C. ROM 66180, in oblique right posterodorsal view. Scale bars 20 mm.

Fig. 6. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA (A–C) and Brachylophosaurus canadensis Sternberg, 1953, from Oldman Formation (Campanian) of Alberta, Little Sandhill Creek, Canada (D); detail of anterior margins of dorsotemporal fenestrae showing the variable development of overhanging ledges. A. ROM 66181, in oblique left posterodorsal view. B. ROM 60260, in oblique right posterodorsal view. C. ROM 66180, in posterodorsal view. D. CMN 8893, in oblique right posteroventral view, detail of overhanging ledge viewed through the right lateral temporal fenestra. Scale bars 20 mm.

Fig. 7. Dorsotemporal bar of hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979 (ROM 60261, A; ROM 66180, C), from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; compared to Brachylophosaurus canadensis Sternberg, 1953 (CMN 8893, B) from the Oldman Formation (Campanian) of Alberta, Little Sandhill Creek, Canada.A, B1 in right lateral view; B2, C in dorsal view. Scale bars 20 mm.

Fig. 8. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; partial skull of ROM 60261 in anterior view.

Fig. 9. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; partial skull of ROM 60261 in left lateral view.

Fig.10.Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979 (ROM 60261), from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; lateral wall of neurocranium showing possible variation in the position of cranial nerve VII in left lateral (A1) and right lateral (A2) views.

Fig.11. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner andMakela, 1979 (ROM 66180), from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; lateral wall of neurocranium showing the prominent overhang of the crista prootica in right lateral (A1) and oblique right posteroventral (A2) views.

Fig. 12. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; skulls in posterior view A. ROM 60261. B. ROM 66180. ROM 66180 is photographed in a slightly more posterodorsal perspective than ROM 60261; in actuality, the basipterygoid processes of both specimens project ventral to the occipital condyle.

Fig. 13. Hadrosaurid dinosaur Maiasaura peeblesorum Horner and Makela, 1979, from the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), Linster Quarry, Montana, USA; basicrania in ventral view. A. ROM 66182. B. ROM 60261. C. ROM 60260. D. ROM 66180.Arrows point to the contact between the basisphenoid (anterior) and basioccipital (posterior), and illustrate the variable orientation of this contact. Scale bars 20 mm.