| 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 (459,215 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: | |
|---|---|
| Jinfengopteryx | May 16 2013, 12:54 AM Post #2491 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yesterady, I really thought this guy is just misinformed, but it seems like he doesn't want to learn. It doesn't matter how often you say it, he jsut keeps repeating the same flawed facts. |
![]() |
|
| Shaochilong | May 16 2013, 12:57 AM Post #2492 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"Advanced"? As in more closely related to birds? What difference does that make? That would be like me supporting a lace monitor over an American alligator because it's more closely related to snakes. EDIT: Oops, sorry, I see that you were supporting Spinosaurus. My bad. Edited by Shaochilong, May 16 2013, 12:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | May 17 2013, 05:58 AM Post #2493 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That lace monitor-example was good! As I said, ignore the troll! |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | May 17 2013, 06:02 AM Post #2494 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I hope you didn't mean Gryposaurus, because the monitor example was reffering to Grypo's post. |
![]() |
|
| Super Kaizer Ghidorah | May 18 2013, 05:37 AM Post #2495 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! Tyrannosaurus is large enough to takle spino. If spino falls and rolls over, it dies by breaking its back. I call spinosaurus,BMSDM, that's short for bipedal mesozoic self destruct machine. |
![]() |
|
| retic | May 18 2013, 06:21 AM Post #2496 |
![]()
snake and dinosaur enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
if t. rex tries that it will get slashed. |
![]() |
|
| Carcharadon | May 18 2013, 06:44 AM Post #2497 |
![]()
Shark Toothed Reptile
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spinosaurus would actually not die from falling on its back |
![]() |
|
| retic | May 18 2013, 07:01 AM Post #2498 |
![]()
snake and dinosaur enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
he probably got the idea from monsters resurrected. |
![]() |
|
| DarkGricer | May 18 2013, 08:30 AM Post #2499 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And if Spinosaurus tackles T.rex, the T.rex is only slightly less likely to break it's own back and die, and only because it's smaller. And who is more likely to knock the other over, the 6-7 ton T.rex or the 12-14 ton Spino? Besides, Spino will not die from rolling over. It's spinal chord was not attached to it's spines. All that would happen from it rolling over is it breaking the spines, which will be painful, but NOT fatal. |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | May 18 2013, 11:43 AM Post #2500 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see this as almost if not a mismatch in favor of Spinosaurus at normal weights, for it's almost or more than twice the size of T.rex. At equal weights however, it's almost if not a mismatch in favor of T.rex.
Edited by Ausar, May 18 2013, 11:49 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Temnospondyl | May 21 2013, 01:37 AM Post #2501 |
|
Stegocephalia specialist.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hell, so many fanboys!!! Spino would be much bigger, Tyrannosaurus doesn't stand a chance. The power isn't everything. The gape is more important for Tyrannosaur, it needs to bite before crushing. But it's adapted to bite smaller animals, maybe a bit bigger ones. But not too large ones. For Tyrannosaurus it would be hard to kill Spinosaurus, which would likely use it's hands. Tyrannosaurus is not flexible, and agile enough to stand in a contest with such a giant. Another predator(e.g. Deltadromeus) would keep fighting for longer time, and would make some wounds to Spinosaurus. Deltadromeus would be agile enough to dodge the massive strikles of such a colossus as a Spinosaurus, and could jump onto it's side, try to reach the sail, or at least, it could try to grab Spino. Tyrannosaurus is low. Spinosaurus is far taller. Tyrannosaurus's short legs wiuldn't throw the body onto Spinosaurus, Tyrannosaurus cant grapple, and it's noy fast, so any of Deltadromeus's actions are excluded, just like any chance of defeating Spinosaurus. A group of Tyrannosaurs would be harder, they can use strategy to defeat the lumbering Spinosaurus, but alone against a giant lumber, you need to be swift. The only thing, able to defeat Spinosaurus is Kelmiyasaurus Gigantus, if one existed, which is doubted. PLEASE, READ ATTENTIVLY! |
![]() |
|
| Temnospondyl | May 21 2013, 01:39 AM Post #2502 |
|
Stegocephalia specialist.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^I'm seriously |
![]() |
|
| Super Kaizer Ghidorah | May 21 2013, 03:13 AM Post #2503 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually, the spines are connected to the vertebrae. I sure wouldnt wanna be spino. I rather have tiny hands than spines on my back |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | May 21 2013, 03:21 AM Post #2504 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spinosaurus' spines have the broad shape to serve as muscle attachments. The arms of tyrannosaurids are only useable for getting up after resting/sleeping And breaking the neural spines won't kill Spinosaurus, the spinal cord is in the neural canal, NOT in the neural spines |
![]() |
|
| Creed | May 21 2013, 03:32 AM Post #2505 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
IDK? |
![]() |
|
| 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