known. Hesperornis crassipes was named in 1876 by Marsh, who initially classified it in a different genus as Lestornis crassipes. H. crassipes was larger than H. regalis, had five ribs as opposed to four in the first species, and differed in aspects of the bone sculpturing on the breastbone and lower leg. H. crassipes is known from the same time and place as H. regalis. One incomplete skeleton is known, including teeth and parts of the skull. Marsh explicitly named his second species of Hesperornis in 1876 for an incomplete metatarsus recovered from the same layers of the Niobrara chalk as H. regalis. He named this smaller species H. gracilis, and it was subsequently involved in the rather confused taxonomy of a specimen which would eventually form the basis of the new genus and species Parahesperornis alexi. The type specimen of P. alexi was assumed to belong to the same specimen as that of H. gracilis, so when Lucas (1903) decided that the former specimen represented a distinct genus, he mistakenly used the later specimen to anchor it, creating the name Hargeria gracilis. This mistake was rectified by later authors, who sank Hargeria back into Hesperornis and renamed the more distinctive specimen Parahesperornis. The first species recognized from outside the Niobrara chalk, Hesperornis altus, lived about 78 million years ago in Montana, and is known from a partial lower leg from the base of the freshwater Judith River Formation (or, possibly, the top of the underlying, marine Claggett Shale formation). While initially placed in the new genus Coniornis by Marsh, this was due mostly to his belief that Hesperornis existed only in Kansas, so any species from Montana should be placed in a different genus. Most later researchers disagreed with this, and have placed Coniornis altus in the same genus as Hesperornis as H. altus. A second species from Montana has also been described from the Claggett Shale. H. montana was named by Shufeldt in 1915, and while its known material (a single dorsal vertebra) cannot be directly compared to H. altus, Shufeldt and others have considered it distinct due to its apparently smaller size. In 1993, the first Hesperornis remains from outside of North America were recognized as a new species by Nessov and Yarkov. They named Hesperornis rossicus for a fragmentary skeleton from the early Campanian of Russia near Volgograd. Several other specimens from contemporary deposits have since