As with the Myall Creek assemblage, it is not possible definitively to separate isolated Diprotodon teeth into large- and small-form individuals. However, dental morphometric data of Reddestone Creek Diprotodon are similar to morphometric data of corresponding teeth of undifferentiated size class samples of other assemblages (Tables 2, 3), and the range of teeth sizes encompasses that of both large- and small-form individuals of body size differentiated samples (Figs 14, 15). Those data suggest that both Diprotodon size classes were sampled in the Reddestone Creek assemblage. Additionally, there is little basis to discriminate more than one Diprotodon morphospecies in the assemblage. Thus, the data suggest that a single, sexually dimorphic species is represented at Reddestone Creek.

Horton & Connah (1981) observed that there were very few young or very old Diprotodon individuals represented at Reddestone Creek, and suggested that the Diprotodon assemblage represented a rapid accumulation of individuals from a drought-stressed population. COV values of Reddestone Creek Diprotodon cheek teeth are more similar to values of corresponding teeth of extant grey kangaroos and Bacchus Marsh, Lancefield Swamp and Myall Creek Diprotodon assemblages, than Lake Callabonna and Darling Downs Diprotodon assemblages. Thus, the data suggest that the assemblage was sampled over a shorter temporal scale than at Lake Callabonna and the Darling Downs, thus supporting Horton & Connah’s (1981) suggestion that the accumulation of Diprotodon at Reddestone Creek took place over a relatively short time.