| Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Spinosaurus aegyptiacus v Tyrannosaurus rex | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM (459,248 Views) | |
| Wolf Eagle | Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM Post #1 |
![]()
M E G A P H Y S E T E R
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tyrannosaurus rex Tyrannosaurus is a genus of coelurosaurian theropod dinosaur. The species Tyrannosaurus rex (rex meaning "king" in Latin), commonly abbreviated to T. rex, is a fixture in popular culture. It lived throughout what is now western North America, with a much wider range than other tyrannosaurids. Fossils are found in a variety of rock formations dating to the Maastrichtian age of the upper Cretaceous Period, 67 to 65.5 million years ago.[1] It was among the last non-avian dinosaurs to exist before the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. Like other tyrannosaurids, Tyrannosaurus was a bipedal carnivore with a massive skull balanced by a long, heavy tail. Relative to the large and powerful hindlimbs, Tyrannosaurus forelimbs were small, though unusually powerful for their size, and bore two clawed digits. Although other theropods rivaled or exceeded Tyrannosaurus rex in size, it was the largest known tyrannosaurid and one of the largest known land predators. By far the largest carnivore in its environment, Tyrannosaurus rex may have been an apex predator, preying upon hadrosaurs and ceratopsians, although some experts have suggested it was primarily a scavenger. The debate over Tyrannosaurus as apex predator or scavenger is among the longest running in paleontology. Tyrannosaurus rex was one of the largest land carnivores of all time; the largest complete specimen, FMNH PR2081 ("Sue"), measured 12.8 metres (42 ft) long, and was 4.0 metres (13.1 ft) tall at the hips. Mass estimates have varied widely over the years, from more than 7.2 metric tons (7.9 short tons), to less than 4.5 metric tons (5.0 short tons), with most modern estimates ranging between 5.4 and 6.8 metric tons (6.0 and 7.5 short tons). Packard et al. (2009) tested dinosaur mass estimation procedures on elephants and concluded that dinosaur estimations are flawed and produce over-estimations; thus, the weight of Tyrannosaurus could be much less than usually estimated. Other estimations have concluded that the largest known Tyrannosaurus specimens had a weight exceeding 9 tonnes. ![]() Spinosaurus aegyptiacus Spinosaurus is a genus of theropod dinosaur which lived in what is now North Africa, from the lower Albian to lower Cenomanian stages of the Cretaceous period, about 112 to 97 million years ago. Spinosaurus may be the largest of all known carnivorous dinosaurs, even larger than Tyrannosaurus and Giganotosaurus. Estimates published in 2005 and 2007 suggest that it was 12.6 to 18 metres (41 to 59 ft) in length and 7 to 20.9 tonnes (7.7 to 23.0 short tons) in weight. The skull of Spinosaurus was long and narrow like that of a modern crocodilian. Spinosaurus is thought to have eaten fish; evidence suggests that it lived both on land and in water like a modern crocodilian. The distinctive spines of Spinosaurus, which were long extensions of the vertebrae, grew to at least 1.65 meters (5.4 ft) long and were likely to have had skin connecting them, forming a sail-like structure, although some authors have suggested that the spines were covered in fat and formed a hump. Multiple functions have been put forward for this structure, including thermoregulation and display. Dal Sasso et al. (2005) assumed that Spinosaurus and Suchomimus had the same body proportions in relation to their skull lengths, and thereby calculated that Spinosaurus was 16 to 18 meters (52 to 59 ft) in length and 7 to 9 tonnes (7.7 to 9.9 short tons) in weight. The Dal Sasso et al. estimates were criticized because the skull length estimate was uncertain, and (assuming that body mass increases as the cube of body length) scaling Suchomimus which was 11 meters (36 ft) long and 3.8 tonnes (4.2 short tons) in mass to the range of estimated lengths of Spinosaurus would produce an estimated body mass of 11.7 to 16.7 tonnes (12.9 to 18.4 short tons).
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:10 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| SpinoInWonderland | Feb 6 2013, 07:11 PM Post #1996 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I found out that MNHN SAM 124 was actually from Spinosaurus maroccanus... |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Feb 6 2013, 07:12 PM Post #1997 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sorry, I've forgot about that I know I read it in the Carrano paper, but I have forgot it when writing my last post. So it seems like we indeed have only 2 specimen with size estimates, which we can use to work with. Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Feb 6 2013, 07:15 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 6 2013, 08:12 PM Post #1998 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
First of all: is it fair to compare a not-so-conservative estimate for the larger and only confirmed adult spinosaurus to the extrapolation for a single toebone that to assign alone is already a problem? secondly, I have to say this, I think you all are using way too high figures for both of them, even tough that won't influence this battle. I personally would feel most comfortable with using each animals largest specimen, but spinosaurus at a relatively high estimate like 17m. @superiron I think such a spinosaurus would weigh about 12t, but in comparison to a 6,4t sue, not a 9,5t one. @mega t. rex the magnifcent Sorry, but that's not more and not less than what palaeosaurus would write. Edited by theropod, Feb 6 2013, 08:25 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| SanR | Feb 7 2013, 01:06 AM Post #1999 |
![]()
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you talking about me? I think everyone is misunderstanding my posts, I am not saying that all the MSMN V4047 estimates are liberal, I was talking about the 20 tonne ones. I was just trying to say compare liberal to liberal, conservative to conservative. I did say the extrapolation from the toe bone was more problematic aswell... Or were you talking to Superiron?
Large estimates for Sue are 9.5 tonnes and large estimates for Spino are around 20 tonnes. That would probably be a mismatch... But then again some people would still support the Tyrannosaurus. I would say about 13 tonne Spino vs 7.5 tonne T.rex. 55/45 in favour of Spino IMO. Edited by SanR, Feb 7 2013, 01:15 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 7 2013, 01:51 AM Post #2000 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, I was not adressing you. |
![]() |
|
| Superiron21 | Feb 7 2013, 02:21 AM Post #2001 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@Jinfengopteryx What do you mean of T-rex spec being self-made..... they're real that's for sure... if you were talking about it's reliability.... @SanR Totally respect your point of view but I thinks the max. of Spinosaurus is way too outlandish I believe the max... 9.5 vs 12-13 would be fair... considering the advantages form the two rivals... I would say 65/35 favor T.rex... then do you think should be fair a fight between the mor1126 or mor008 or ucmp137538 vs Del Sasso? cause I understood of your post.. (tell me if I´m wrong please) @theropod I would say like I said before a 13 vs 9.5 would be more reliable... (but if you compare with Sue... Sue is not the largest spec... is the largest complete...) there are more T.rex specs (not well studyied I accept that) but can put the size limit of T.rex in another level.... but again that's gonna be confirmed for both spino and T.rex in a near future when the scientists give more research or discovering new specimens of both of them.... Edited by Superiron21, Feb 7 2013, 02:35 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| SanR | Feb 7 2013, 02:50 AM Post #2002 |
![]()
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ok, sorry for misunderstanding you.. It's because I said something that could have interpreted as similar to Superiron. |
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Feb 7 2013, 07:32 AM Post #2003 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Dude, really? I thought you were supposed to be 20 years old... |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Feb 7 2013, 07:41 AM Post #2004 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
superiron, none of these specimens can reliably be said to have been bigger. c-rex: hype and guesses mor 008: a media report and a skull with proportions and measurements that imply it being smaller thn sue's Ucmp: a single phalanx no-one here seems to know any features of that indicate it was one of those phalanges which it is larger in comparison to sue yeah, sue for sure isn't the biggest. You are using a liberal weight for sue, an intermediate one for spinosaurus and you still claim there where larger T. rexes. |
![]() |
|
| Carcharadon | Feb 7 2013, 07:46 AM Post #2005 |
![]()
Shark Toothed Reptile
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
![]() Edited by Carcharadon, Feb 7 2013, 07:46 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Godzillasaurus | Feb 7 2013, 07:47 AM Post #2006 |
|
Reptile King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yea dude. This guy is a troll. You should ignore him
|
![]() |
|
| Superiron21 | Feb 7 2013, 10:58 AM Post #2007 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Man are you calling the mor1126 a hype and guesses spec? that's rude and I think you're wrong calling it in that way... in the paper of canibalism and Larson, 2008 suggest that the size is 14.1m (aprox) it's not so incomplete it has surangular, prearticular, three partial dorsal vertebrae, twenty dorsal ribs, chevron..... is almost as fragmentary as Del Sasso.... then we have mor008 but even if it's not confirmed but it's size is 13.8 m is an incomplete skull with missing premaxilla, vomer, palatine and epiterygoid, (1.50 m; maxilla 720 mm), incomplete mandibles (entary 880 mm), and it was described in atlas Molnar, 1991... now you can't deny that is unreal just because is not that well studyied as Sue for example.... the ucmp137538 14-15m I know it's just a toe but as I said before maybe other specs. are gonna be found the same size as ucmp137538 or even bigger (we can't say) that can solve that argues... You are using the biggest Spino and I can choose any of these or anyone that's bigger than sue (there are not much but they exist) .. you know that spino is not so well studyied as T.rex., they used it's relatives to give us numbers.... Again we can't say now what is the limit of spino or T.rex cause WE DON'T KNOW IT YET.. You said that Spino has the advantage of being bigger but I don't think a Great Dane (spino) can handel a pitbull (T.rex) even if G.D is bigger and heavier the pitbull is more aggressive and G.D. can't handle.... in not all the cases size matters.. there are other situations and advantages that both could use to win... ... sorry but the weapons of T.rex (jaws and aggressiveness) are 2 factor that could give the victory but as I said before depens on situation... and I don't find enough weapons to see Spino finishing T.rex before Spino were bitten by T.rex (it's jaws are not so powerful... but not so weak as thought) However T.rex can be injured by the claws of spino and Spino can win it too... it depends on the enviroment and situations..... but I give T.rex 65/35 over Spino Edited by Superiron21, Feb 7 2013, 11:13 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| TheROC | Feb 7 2013, 11:58 AM Post #2008 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A great dane can beat a pitbull surely, granted the latter is not one that is specifically trained to fight. Domestic dogs make a poor analogue for wild animal fights though, especially theropods. I imagine something like a turkey vs a rooster or some such to be a closer analogue, even with that being quite terrible an attempt. |
![]() |
|
| Black Ice | Feb 7 2013, 12:05 PM Post #2009 |
![]()
Drom King
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
polar bear vs grizzly? |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Feb 7 2013, 02:08 PM Post #2010 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It seems that no modern animal fight is an analogue to Tyrannosaurus vs Spinosaurus... Using pitbull vs great dane as an analogue is beyond stupid, dinosaurs were not dogs...their biology is completely different(they parted ways in the Late Carboniferous!), and dogs rely almost completely on their jaws, while the same can't be said for Spinosaurus... |
![]() |
|
| 2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:23 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)



![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)









2:23 AM Jul 14