Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Spinosaurus aegyptiacus v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 02:16 AM (459,217 Views)
Wolf Eagle
Member Avatar
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.

Posted Image

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).

Posted Image
Edited by Taipan, Apr 24 2015, 10:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Deleted User
Deleted User

theropod
Apr 24 2013, 01:38 AM
He is right! What's so funny about that?
What? im not laughing.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Apr 20 2013, 12:21 AM
And why is it me who has to bring even more evidence than the evidence you are ignoring, not you who has to bring evidence for the contrary?
Speculation with information (useing the term loosely) that has not been widely accepted combined with imagination is one heck of a mixture
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

!
Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Apr 24 2013, 07:17 AM
theropod
Apr 20 2013, 12:21 AM
And why is it me who has to bring even more evidence than the evidence you are ignoring, not you who has to bring evidence for the contrary?
Speculation with information (useing the term loosely) that has not been widely accepted combined with imagination is one heck of a mixture
It's a much better mixture than mainstream beliefs+biased fanboyism+sensationalistic exaggerations...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sorry nate, it seemed as if you were, but those characters are hard to interpret imo. Could you simply write what you think?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

theropod
Apr 24 2013, 11:55 PM
Sorry nate, it seemed as if you were, but those characters are hard to interpret imo. Could you simply write what you think?
Oh ok.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
genao87
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
So what is the latest news on this matter? I see this has grown to 165 page thread. Was there any new data showing the size of Spinosaurus or any other features for him?? T Rex is still considered the same size and robust teeth.
Edited by genao87, Apr 26 2013, 12:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That's because fossil teeth don't suddenly change robusticity. For sure, Spinosaurus still has a rostrum indicating skull sizes of at the very least 1,5m, arguably more likely 1,7-1,8m, even larger if you restore the skull like that of Suchomimus in Hartman's skeletal, not to mention that extremely long-skulled one I forgot whose it was. And the proportions of a spinosaur with this skull built would still definitely point out to alive lenghts in excess of 15m, and an axial lenght that is even greater.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tyrannosaurus was more advanced, but it was still too small to deal with Spinosaurus. The Spinosaurus is too big.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
More advanced is not an advantage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
"more advanced" is subjective, unless you are talking about immediate successors, and even then it doesn't tell us anything about an animal's biology.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

*post deleted*
Quote Post Goto Top
 
retic
Member Avatar
snake and dinosaur enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think spinosaurus wins due to its size advantage, much bigger arms, intimidation due to size and sail/hump that would make it look even larger, and more experience with other predators such as sarcosuchus and carcharodontosaurus while t. rex didn't have any competition.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Monitor X
Apr 11 2013, 11:08 PM
DarkGricer
Apr 11 2013, 09:48 PM
Nate
Apr 11 2013, 01:03 PM
Spinosaurus never faced big dinosaurs so it would have little experience facing off large dinosaurs
What.

Carcarodontosaurus, Sauroniops, Paralatitan, Aegyptosaurus, and Spinosaurus itself all lived together. Chances are they fought each other every now and then.
But have we evidences that Spinosaurus actually fought these animals ? No. Except a tooth from a carcharodontsaur found embedded in a backbone...
Its semi-aquatic lifestyle is the reason why it could live in such an environment, it did not have to compete for dominance as it filled an unique ecological position and could switch with land and swamps.
It may have sometimes engaged conflicts but we have no evidence. On the other hand for Tyrex we have numerous evidences of its agression with others species and its conspecifics.
All what you argue guys are rampant, boring speculations, ignoring the same for Tyrex.
Modern animals fight each other and I have no reason to believe animals in the past were any more or less prone to getting into a fight. So while we don't always have hard evidence that prehistoric animals fought, we can obviously infer that they did, given what we've seen from today's animals.
Edited by Ausar, May 9 2013, 07:08 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
There are thus far no other large predators from Maastrichtian north america, and intraspecific fights between T. rexes were obviously ritualised, otherwise sue and stan would have crushed skulls. Spinosaurus on the other hand really coexisted with several other gigantic predators, comparably formidable to a T. rex.
If in an animal with so few fossils known we already find evidence for a fight, this wasn't a particularly rare thing to happen. However I would appreciate if anyone could post a source about that spine with the bitemarks, because I have only seen it in Planet Dinosaur so far. Spinosaurs were semi-aquatic, yes, and they didn't compete for food with terrestrial macropredators on most occasions, but obviously, they must still have got into fights often enough, whether it be to defend themselves or for a carcass. Hence the logical conclusion would be that Spinosaurus had reasonable fighting expierience and it is just as fanboyish to state it was a weak and docile animal that never fought as it would be to claim this about T. rex.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.