Dentition
The dentition of Wadisuchus consisted of four teeth in each premaxilla and at least 14 in each maxilla. Specimen MUVP 637 suggests that at least 14 teeth were present in the lower jaw as well. [1]
The teeth of Wadisuchus display prominent size-heterodonty, meaning that the tooth size varied significantly based on their position in the jaw. Some of the largest tooth sockets for example reached a width that was over 1.7 times greater than that of the smallest. In the premaxilla the second pair of teeth was the largest, while the fourth was the smallest. The maxilla displays two distinct waves of enlarged tooth sockets, one around the large fourth and another in the region of the ninth and tenth alveoli, with the two peaks separated from each other by smaller teeth, giving the toothrow a gently festooned profile. The posterior maxillary teeth meanwhile are clearly smaller and more densely spaced, showing significantly narrower interalveolar septa. In the lower jaw the fourth and seventh dentary teeth are both notably enlarged. [1]
The spacing between teeth also differs throughout the jaw. The first pair of premaxillary teeth for instance is very closely spaced, leaving little space between them, but the second pair is separated from the first by deep notches that serve to receive the first pair of dentary teeth when the jaws were closed. Due to the way the premaxilla is deflected downward there is also prominent vertical spacing that can be observed, with the first two pairs sitting far below the palatal surface of the maxilla. The third premaxillary tooth is almost on the same level as the maxillary teeth, creating the appearance of a step between the two sets of teeth. In the case of the maxillary teeth, the space between the alveoli seems to grow smaller the further back in the jaw they are located, with those in the posterior-most maxilla being especially densely packed. Looking at the tooth spacing in the lower jaw shows the presence of two tooth couplets, as the sixth and seventh tooth are positioned much more closely to each other, as are the eight and ninth. [1]
While heterodont in size, the tooth morphology is described as homodont, meaning that the dentition of Wadisuchus was consistent in its shape throughout the jaw rather than displaying different tooth shapes. There are however still minor differences between the teeth, for instance the fact that those of the premaxilla show no signs of having had a cutting edge (carina), whereas the maxillary and dentary teeth display well-defined anterior carinae. They are generally elongated, pointed and conical and bear striations that run down the length of each tooth longitudinally. The posterior maxillary teeth furthermore show signs of labiolingual compression, meaning they are flattened side-to-side. This is shared with the dentary teeth behind the mandibular symphysis, which additionally appear to have been lateromedially compressed. [1]
Size
Saber and colleagues estimated both the body length and mass of the holotype specimen MUVP 180 as well as those of the second known skull, MUVP 636, in both cases basing their primary estimate on the methodology of O'Brien et al. (2019), meaning that rather than employing skull length the results are based on head width. Between the two specimens, MUVP 180 was found to be smaller, with the head width of 33.77 cm (13.30 in) yielding a total body length of roughly 3.51 m (11.5 ft), a snouth-vent length of around 1.87 m (6 ft 2 in) and a body mass ranging between 199.75–265.15 kg (440.4–584.6 lb). Specimen MUVP 636, having a head with of 40.93 cm (16.11 in), was estimated to have reached a total body length of 4.12 m (13.5 ft), a snout-vent length of 2.18 m (7 ft 2 in) and a weight of around 351.52–470.77 kg (775.0–1,037.9 lb). Using Paul Serenno's skull length based equation would result in a total body length of approximately 5.3–6 m (17–20 ft), though Saber and colleagues highlight how these larger results likely reflect broader allometric assumptions of the method and do not align with the size trends seen in dyrosaurids the same way the results using O'Brien's method do. [1]
The holotype specimen fits well into the size range exhibited by typical medium-sized dyrosaurids, whereas MUVP 636, inferred to have been a fully mature individual based on size, may have been among the larger dyrosaurids similar to Rhandognathus and Dyrosaurus , both of which reach lengths of 4–5 m (13–16 ft). [1]
