| 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 (459,204 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 | Sep 12 2013, 06:13 PM Post #2656 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^Pot calling the kettle black @Composite Gojira: I fear that they won't ever be able to meet at a neutral conclusion, because of the extreme religion-like bias coming from the Tyrannosaurus fanbase when it is put up with any other dinosaur or even animal for that matter. |
![]() |
|
| thesporerex | Sep 13 2013, 09:11 AM Post #2657 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh don't act like T-rex is the only fanboyed animal in the world, if anything I come across more spinosaurus fanboys than tyrannosaurus fanboys on the internet but that is just based of personal experience which mostly isn't reliable data. Also I cannot understand why you get so butthurt over fanboys its like you are actually taking them seriously. Wait... you... You are taking them seriously!!??? |
![]() |
|
| Makaveli7 | Sep 13 2013, 11:48 AM Post #2658 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think FMNH PR 2081 could beat the holotype Spinosaurus, but the average Tyrannosaurus would have a really hard time. Against MSNM v4047, I think any known Tyrannosaurus specimen loses. T. rex may have a super powerful bite, but that's its only advantage. Spinosaurus has a longer skull, a powerful bite of its own, huge claws, powerful arms and an intimidating ridge/sail. Tyrannosaurus really only has an edge in bite, while Spinosaurus has the edge everywhere else and more weapons. |
![]() |
|
| thesporerex | Sep 14 2013, 01:21 AM Post #2659 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The average tyrannosaurus is probably bigger than sue, don't believe broly's BS average because what he considers average speciemens are young adults (both AMNH 5027 and CM 9380 are 24 years old) sue its not that old aswell (only being 28 years old). It is true that when a tyrannosaurus reaches adult hood it is about 11.5-11.9 metres long. But as blaze said on the "how big was triceratops thread", dinosaurs reach sexual maturity much earlier than their full size. Sue isn't old she is relativly young infact. So I wouldn't count on the 11 metre average for T-rex. Also broly if you are still going to use this "average" for tyrannosaurus than scale up a robust morph tyrannosaurus to 11.8-11.9 metres long instead of using the gracile speciemens. EDIT:Ignore this shit Edited by thesporerex, Oct 1 2013, 10:41 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Sep 14 2013, 01:42 AM Post #2660 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Seriously? The largest out of more than 30+ adult specimens, smaller than average? Are you kidding? This seems like an attempt to make Tyrannosaurus larger. When Tyrannosaurs reach sexual maturity, they aren't the 6+ tonne animals that people commonly think about. ![]() I use CM 9380, which IS considered as a "robust morph". Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Sep 14 2013, 01:45 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Sep 14 2013, 01:45 AM Post #2661 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^Not "much earlier", just a little (<1t after reaching the age of 18, and this isn't a reliable or obligatory growthrate) Sue is a particularly old specimen, that's why in probably over 40 individuals we find none older than it, what you call young adults are not young specimens at all. A 16 year old T. rex is a young adult, not a 24 year old. And there are rexes that age (16-18 years), that have "reached adulthood", or rather, sexual maturity, and those are not 11,5-11,9m, they are 10-11m (I'm speaking of bobby, bucky, black beauty etc.). And of course, you can also apply this point to other theropods; if you consider most T. rex specimens young and not fully grown, the same likely holds true for other species. Considering in our rather large sample we find little evidence, if at all, of rexes bigger than sue, and the vast majority seems smaller by a good margin, it's pretty clear it is above average, not below. And again, all your arguments can also be applied to Spinosaurus, or Carcharodontosaurus, or Giganotosaurus-just to a much larger extent considering our sample size is smaller by orders of magnitude, greatly decreasing the confidence in finding old and large specimens among them. If you consider the holotype or AMNH (which btw are decent-sized rexes) "young", who tells you MNSN v4740 isn't also? Edited by theropod, Sep 14 2013, 01:47 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Sep 14 2013, 01:48 AM Post #2662 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The sexual maturity is already reached, when the specimen is roughly 20 years old, so Sue already passed that. Also, that argument could be used for other theropods as well, because the largest Allosaurus specimen are 13-19 years old: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmor.10406/abstract;jsessionid=A4AEC1BEB062FBC7F8A13A822ED88119.d03t02 EDIT: I am too slow, theropod already brought up that argument, so you can ignore this post. Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Sep 14 2013, 01:49 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spinodontosaurus | Sep 14 2013, 10:16 PM Post #2663 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Although I maintain Sue and other comparable-sized fragmentary specimens are completely normal, they are in no way smaller than any sort of average we can determine. If we find a big bone bed where the average sized individual is bigger than Sue then yeah great, but such a thing doesn't exist, and given the size range of known individuals I find it rather unlikely that Sue would turn out to be below average. Young adult rexes can still be big though; Stan isn't really any smaller than AMNH 5027 despite being only 18, and lets not forget UCMP 118742 which is probably even bigger still despite being only 16 (even if you base it on Sue. Stan and AMNH 5027 yield sizes rivalling Sue, and the type specimen yields far bigger ones that that). |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Sep 14 2013, 11:08 PM Post #2664 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The above is true, however for all dinosaurs. Few or none of the specimens we find have reached the absolute largest size the individual could have reached in it's ontogeny if it hadn't died (eg. unfused scapulocoracoid of "Epanterias"). Extrapolating figures is rather pointless in this context tough. By what Jingoferx has shown Allosaurus' aging patterns resemble T. rex', and 22-28 years of age is stated to be the upper age limit. When talking about the holotype or sue, these are definitely not young but rather old individuals. It is true terms such ad "adult" are problematic to use here since not every adult has already stopped or greatly decellerated growth. That does not mean for every adult that MIGHT have grown a little bigger we have to assume that and extrapolate some hypothetical full-grown size, because A: that won't reflect the actual size distribution of mature individuals of that species, because in reality those mature individuals won't only be composed of 28 year old seniors. B: all that holds true for all theropods or even dinosaurs, so we'd have to do the exact same thing with all of them, something many are not willing to accept. C: we can just as well use the typical size of mature individuals, or, at similar sample sizes, their maximum sizes, which will more accurately represent species, save a whole lot of efford to spend on useful things, and be fair. Edited by theropod, Sep 15 2013, 10:21 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Super Kaizer Ghidorah | Sep 25 2013, 01:17 AM Post #2665 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This source says, that the average tyrannosaurus rex was 9 tons. and the max is 12.5 tons! And I totally disagree. My Webpage |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Sep 25 2013, 03:58 AM Post #2666 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I hope you realise this is just because it is a wiki article from whose language you can already see it was mainly written by children, and from whose claims and structure you can immediately tell there is absolutely NO scientific data backing it up? Damn, it claims it was 12m on average and 15 at maximum, and reached 6m tall! EDIT: I've corrected the BS stated on that page. Let's see how long until some fanboy reverts it... Edited by theropod, Sep 25 2013, 11:04 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Sep 25 2013, 04:20 AM Post #2667 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ignore him. Most of his posts are guilty of points #1 and #3. http://sauropodomorphlair.blogspot.com/2013/09/how-to-fight-fire-with-fire-against.html Edited by SpinoInWonderland, Sep 25 2013, 04:27 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Sep 25 2013, 04:24 AM Post #2668 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
SKG still posts? BTW, could you please not quote him theropod, otherwise the ignore function is pointless. |
![]() |
|
| blaze | Sep 25 2013, 04:55 AM Post #2669 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I do agree that Sue is not young. (is that conversation too old? I'm just reading it now haha) I think it can be compared, ontogenically speaking, to a 40+ year old bull african elephat, T. rex grows and lives faster than bull african elephants, with rapid growth ending around 16 instead of 25 years of age. IMO the average full grown T. rex is ~12m, the only other old adult that I know of, whose catalogue number I can't remember but is part of the LACM collection, is smaller than Sue too but I'm not sure by how much. Also, I think people need to realize that Sue is not gigantic either, more robust true but the size advantage of Sue over, say, AMNH 5027, in terms of lenght, is a 14% bigger head (~18cm) and a 8% longer neck/torso (~32cm), in fact, if you remove the head, Sue is only 3% longer overall and both are pretty much equally tall at the hips. Btw, anyone knows how the 16 years of age estimate for the big UCMP maxilla was made? |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Sep 25 2013, 05:13 AM Post #2670 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Did you read this paper? http://www.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2006/07/11/313.5784.213.DC1/Erickson.SOM.pdf |
![]() |
|
| 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