Teeth The
dental formula of
Josephoartigasia is , with one incisor (I1), no
canines, one premolar (P4), and three molars (M1, M2, and M3) in either half of either jaw. As a rodent, the teeth grew continuously throughout the animal's life, there is a gap (
diastema, and a rather long one) between the incisors and the grinding teeth (premolars and molars), and the grinding teeth are pushed far forward in the mouth ahead of the
eye sockets.
Skull J. monesi is the only species for which the skull has been identified. Its skull is massive, measuring in length. Its skull is 65% bigger than the skull size of the previous largest identified rodent,
Phoberomys pattersoni. (below), showing their paracondyles (teal for the pacarana)Scale = There is nearly complete fusion of several cranial bones, namely the
nasal and
frontal bones; they are poorly differentiated and the shape and size of each one is difficult to observe, most especially the
lacrimal bones in the eye socket. Fusion of the frontal and
parietal bones created a mass of bone projecting laterally (out to the side). There is a tall temporal crest arcing across the top of the skull on either side, which join at the midline to form a short
sagittal crest. The
temporal fossa is narrow but deep.
J. monesi has the deepest insertion point for the
masseter muscle (which closes the mouth while biting down) of any rodent. It is similarly shaped to that of the large
capybara, which is either due to
heterochrony (because
Josephoartigasia is closely related to the capybara) or
allometry (because both
Josephoartigasia and the capybara became big). The
pterygoid fossa is small, conferring to a reduced
medial pterygoid muscle (also important for biting). The
zygomatic arches (cheekbones) of
J. monesi are unexpectedly slender given how fortified the skull is. Like other dinomyids, the
occipital condyles (where the
spine connects to the skull) has paracondyles (extra prominences which serve as attachments).
Body mass J. monesi is the first dinomyid whose near complete skull has been discovered; as other dinomyids are known only by highly fragmentary remains,
J. monesi presented the first opportunity to estimate the living size of a dinomyid. By absolute measure, it is much larger than
J. magna. Blanco disagreed with Millien's methods. He pointed out that, while the
J. monesi skull may have been unexpectedly long in her dataset, it was not inconsistent with the proportions of its closest living relative, the pacarana. She also estimated the measurements from published photos rather than taking them from the specimen itself, which could confound the results. Blanco also pointed out their average estimates are rather close, about , but he was unable to reproduce as low a number as that Millien reported as her lowermost bound. Blanco nonetheless conceded his preliminary estimates were not the most meaningful, especially considering the high error margin, as his body mass estimates were not meant to be so high-resolution, rather to give a general idea of the creature's gargantuan nature. He also agreed that reconstructing the body mass of enormous creatures which far exceed the size of living counterparts will always be highly problematic. In 2022, American biologist Russell Engelman reestimated body sizes of multiple massive dinomyid and
neoepiblemid rodents using the width of the occipital condyles where the skull attaches to the spine, because he had earlier demonstrated it to be a reliable metric for this purpose among several
therian mammals. He also assumed
J. monesi had the same head-to-body ratio as the pacarana, producing a body length of , though he noted these rodents may have proportionally longer heads. He calculated significantly lower body masses: for
J. monesi and for
P. pattersoni. Assuming the paracondyles functioned the same as in paracana, he suggested is the most likely range for
J. monesi; and assuming
rabbit-like condyles in
P. pattersoni, . Though they are still the largest rodents ever discovered, he argued estimates exceeding are unwarranted.
Pathology The type specimen of
J. magna is missing its M3, and the
tooth socket is badly atrophied. The atrophy of the socket was probably a compensatory response to the missing tooth, sharply reducing jaw height towards the back. == Paleobiology ==