Eosphargis gigas
Eosphargis gigas
Summary
Eosphargis gigas was a large early leatherback turtle and an important stage in the evolution of the highly specialised dermochelyid body plan. Its shell was already reduced compared with the solid carapace of ordinary hard-shelled sea turtles, but the reduction was not yet as extreme as in later leatherbacks. Broad, ridged midline shell bones and the form of the pectoral skeleton show an animal built for sustained marine swimming.
Large humeri and shoulder-girdle elements indicate powerful forelimb propulsion, so Eosphargis was probably an active coastal or open-water swimmer rather than a bottom-walking turtle. Its diet is not directly preserved. Although the living leatherback is strongly associated with gelatinous prey, there is no good reason to assume that this specialised feeding ecology had already evolved unchanged in Eosphargis. London Clay material includes skull, shell and substantial limb and shoulder bones.
Quick Identification
Look for: very large marine-turtle bones, especially a robust humerus with a strongly expanded proximal end and a long, proximally pointed deltopectoral crest. Shell material is unusual for a turtle: midline neural plates are very broad, wider than long, and carry a pronounced median ridge; the nuchal has a deep front notch.
Diagnostic Features
- Neural plates of the carapace are exceptionally broad, wider than long, and carry a strong median keel.
- Nuchal plate has a deep anterior emargination.
- Humerus has a robust, strongly expanded head and medial process.
- Secondary deltopectoral crest of the humerus is elongate and proximally pointed.
- Lateral process of the humerus is displaced away from the extreme proximal end of the bone.
Fossil Details
Similar Species
Recorded Fossil Sites
London Clay Formation
References
- Gentry, A.D.; Burns, M.E.; Ebersole, J.A.; Gregson, K.A.; Martinez, E.C.; Parham, J.F. (2025). A new leatherback marine turtle from the lower Oligocene of North America and a phylogenetic nomenclature for Dermochelyidae. Palaeodiversity, 18(1), 127–149 View reference