What’s in a nose—er, I mean, a name? For the newly described dinosaur, Nasutoceratops titusi, a great, big, honking lot!

Nasutoceratops means “big-nose horned face” and indeed this Triceratops relative is mostly nose. Having a “Jimmy Durante profile,” claims National Geographic’s Phenomena blog. And ScienceNOW says, “Does it sometimes seem that dinosaurs were competing with each other to see who could look the wackiest?”

Behind that nose is a familiar-looking dinosaur, with a huge skull bearing a single horn over the nose, one horn over each eye, and an elongate, bony frill at the rear, like other ceratopsids.

Unearthed in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah, the huge plant-eater inhabited swampy Laramidia, a landmass formed when a shallow sea flooded the central region of North America, isolating the western and eastern portions of the continent for millions of years during the Late Cretaceous Period.

“Nasutoceratops is one of a recent landslide of ceratopsid discoveries, which together have established these giant plant-eaters as the most diverse dinosaur group on Laramidia,” says Andrew Farke of the Raymond M. Alf Museum of Paleontology.

And while other ceratopsid fossils in Laramidia have raised questions about whether the specimens represent separate species or instead illustrate the differences between the juveniles and adults of a single species (see our video on that topic), Nasutoceratops titusi is not just a separate species, it’s from an entirely different group (read this article in Nature News to learn more).

So why the distinctive nose? Even scientists can’t sniff this one out. “The jumbo-sized schnoz of Nasutoceratops likely had nothing to do with a heightened sense of smell—since olfactory receptors occur further back in the head, adjacent to the brain—and the function of this bizarre feature remains uncertain,” according to Scott Sampson of the Denver Museum of Nature & Science.

The findings are published this week in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Image by Lukas Panzarin

T. rex—hunter or scavenger? In this day and age of social freedoms, why not choose both? Because studying dinosaurs, especially fierce, glamorous ones like Tyrannosaurus rex, leads to fame and—well, if not fortune, then at least movie deals.

A study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences determines, due to dental data, that T. rex was definitely a hunter.

In the Hell Creek Formation of South Dakota, researchers discovered a fossilized spine of a plant-eating hadrosaur that had an odd bone growth. Examining the fossil with a CT scan, the researchers found a tooth—belonging to a T. rex—within the bone. In fact, the bone had grown around the tooth.

“Lo and behold, the tooth plotted out just exactly with T. rex—the only known large theropod from the Hell Creek formation,” exclaims study author David Burnham of the University of Kansas. “We knew we had a T. rex tooth in the tail of a hadrosaur. Better yet, we knew the hadrosaur got away because the bone had begun to heal. Quite possibly it was being pursued by the T. rex when it was bitten. It was going in the right direction—away. The hadrosaur escaped by some stroke of luck.”

T. rex teeth had previously been found in the fossilized bones of a young ceratopsian (Triceratops or one of its kin), but there was no evidence to conclude whether the ceratopsian was alive or dead when the T. rex made a snack of it. The hadrosaur’s escape provides evidence that T. rex was a dangerous, if not always accurate, predator, according to the study’s authors.

Because T. rex regularly shed its teeth, the dinosaur went away hungry, but otherwise no worse for the encounter. It would have grown a new tooth to replace the one left behind in the hadrosaur’s tail. This could have been a typical example of T. rex’s hunting efforts, even if it didn’t result in a meal.

But the story doesn’t end there. Just because you hunt doesn’t mean that’s how you find all your meals, and most scientists agree that T. rex was likely an opportunistic scavenger, too. In fact, researchers and science writers that focus on dinosaurs are tired of the either-or question. “Whether or not T. rex hunted is the most-asked question I get at talks and on the radio. And that makes me sad,” tweeted Brian Switek Monday in response to this study. There are so many more exciting questions in the field, posted paleontologist John Hutchinson, in his blog response to the publication.

So we’ll put it to rest here… T. rex: hunter and scavenger.

Illustration by Robert DePalma II

“I tried to come up with serious names after that, but Mojoceratops just sort of stuck,” said Nicholas Longrich, a postdoctoral associate at Yale University. With the publication of Longrich’s paper describing his find in the Journal of Paleontology, the name is now official.

But, with the dinosaur’s frilly, heart-shaped skull, Longrich found that the name actually fits. “I discovered that ‘mojo’ is an early 20th-century African-American term meaning a magic charm or talisman, often used to attract members of the opposite sex,” he said. “This dinosaur probably used its frill to attract mates, so the name made sense.” (You can find a great artist’s rendering of Mojoceratops on Discover’s Discoblog.)

Longrich didn’t make his discovery in the field, digging for bones, but rather in museums, sorting through them. While studying dinosaur fossils at the American Museum of Natural History in 2008, he found the distinctive skull in the Chasmosaurus collection. It didn’t quite fit. Trips to other museums in Western Canada turned up more examples that didn’t fit with the rest of the known species.

All in all, Longrich turned up eight partial skulls of the new species, which now boasts a name with just as much flair as its unusually shaped head.

“You’re supposed to use Latin and Greek names, but this just seemed more fun,” Longrich said. “You can do good science and still have some fun, too. So why not?”

Photo by Nicholas Longrich