| 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 (459,191 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: | |
|---|---|
| Sci Fyena | Dec 5 2013, 10:31 AM Post #2851 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you would like to read the part of the article I referenced in my comment, scroll about halfway down the page to the "Results" section, and the subsection titled "Spinosaurs." This section actually seems to support both sides, if that makes sense. It says in the first paragraph that Spinosaurus has higher resistance to dorsoventral (up/down) bending than extant crocodilians, while the second paragraph says that it has lower resistance to mediolateral (side to side) bending than extant crocodilians. To me, this seems to suggest that it was well-suited to clamping down on a wriggly fish, but perhaps not so well-suited to biting onto a large animal like a struggling Tyrannosaurus. Does that make sense? I hope I'm not misinterpreting the data.
|
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Dec 5 2013, 10:40 AM Post #2852 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
well, the only problem with that statement is the fact that some of the fish spinosaurus preyed on are already 3-4 tons, only 2 -3 tons lighter then a max sized tyrannosaur. it makes sence that spinosaurus bit force if stronger dorsoventral because its very neck and even back is made well for that purpose. spinosaurus will not have a problem holding on to a smaller dinosaur even if it is tyrannosaurus size. and to be honest, biting is the least the spinosaurus would want to do. with a 5 ton weight advantage, it could just knock the t-rex down and the fall will end up killing him.
Edited by spinosaurus rex, Dec 5 2013, 10:45 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Sci Fyena | Dec 5 2013, 01:08 PM Post #2853 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you think about, many factors being discussed here, (the tremendous bite forces involved, a fall being able to kill) apply pretty well to both species. I think the only difference is that we disagree on the degree to which these factors would effect the outcome of each animal's fighting capability. Though I still favor Tyrannosaurus, I expect exceptional specimens of either species could defy expectations. Really, though, if we could somehow film this event occurring in real life (I fully realize that it is impossible, as they lived on different continents during different time periods, besides the fact that they're extinct) I think I would be surprised to watch how it would unfold, either way. |
![]() |
|
| Megalosauroid | Dec 5 2013, 01:15 PM Post #2854 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It was perhaps too big for Tyrannosaurus to kill, but a bite as strong as that of T.rex could cause lethal damage even for Spinosaurus. What matters is the true size of Spinosaurus, because a 13 m animal is simply different from a 15-17 m long animal. Did Spinosaurus have a bite as strong to crush the tyrannosaur, or as strong as that of the tyrannosaur? I dont think so, It could cause big damage but the bite of the Tyrannosaur was simply superior for simple reasons: both in mechanical advantage, musculature size and placement, a much thicker and wider skull in every aspect, possesed stronger teeth and the neck was also really powerful, while Spinosaurus had relatively weaker cervicals. What Spinosaurus would mostly use was its claws and weight, advantages unless you consider that Spinosaurus is very fragmentary and no formal estimates have ever been published, at least not for MSMN V4047. |
![]() |
|
| thesporerex | Dec 5 2013, 11:31 PM Post #2855 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Didn't someone come up with a 3 ton bite force estimate for spinosaurus? That would be enough to kill T. rex don't you think? |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Dec 5 2013, 11:44 PM Post #2856 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not all posters agree with this. Theropod (and myself) rather support 2 t. 3 t is adding a bit force on the basis of Spinosaurus having a proportionally (this doesn't mean lb for lb, this means when scaled after bite force scaling rules ot the same size) stronger bite force force. I personally doubt this. There is a quite stable relationship between mass and bite force in crocodilians* (which have a skull shape similar to spinosaurids), so why should this be different in spinosaurids? Also, IIRC, theropod once said that Baryonyx skull wasn't less robust actually (because it may be less wide, but it's deeper). *Here's the source for this claim: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0031781 P.S. Sci Fyena's paper claimed Spinosaurus to perform worse than Baryonyx in terms of cranial resistance, when scaled to the same size. I don't know if they respected scaling rules, but I don't think scientists would make stupid mistakes like forgetting the cube law. |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Dec 6 2013, 08:58 AM Post #2857 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
i think we all agree that tyrannosaurus has a strong bite force, but you can't ignore the fact that its gape can only get around the neck and/ or arms of spinosaurus and at its height advantage, tyrannosaurus can barely erect it's head high enough to bite spinosaurus neck. tyrannosaurus gape is its biggest disadvantage in a fight were your opponent can possibly get twice as heavy as you. the spinosaurus bite force is strong enough to grip and hold on to a tyrannosaur. although it may not sound like it, but 2-3 tons of bite force pressure does qualify as a bone crushing bite. its very low certainly, but at the very least it can hold to a tyrannosaur. the teeth of spinosaurus and tyrannosaurus are relatively the same. both were rather conical yet thick rail road spikes and were no weaker then the other. t-rex did have serrations but there rather insignificant in comparison to the tooth as a whole. and did you read the article sci fyena posted? turns out spinosaurs are very resistant to torque pressures Edited by spinosaurus rex, Dec 6 2013, 09:19 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Daspletosaurus | Dec 6 2013, 11:34 AM Post #2858 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I guess I'll weigh in here: For Bit Tex wins for size Spino wins. However for an all out fight it could go either way. Rex is bigger (By bigger i mean more robust) then most Carcharodontosaurs and Spino lived with one. So if a Carchar could hold its own in fight with Spino (assuming that such a fight would happen) then Rex would fair just as well, if maybe a little better, But I would say that Spino would win 57% of the time. |
![]() |
|
| Megalosauroid | Dec 6 2013, 11:49 AM Post #2859 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spinosaurus, while probably a stronger opponent, it was not as strong pound by pound as tyrannosaurids and carcharodontosaurids, as spinosaurs, at least big bodied ones like Suchomimus were not dinosaurs with particularly long legs, so I would not say that Spinosaurus carried a good height advantage, even Hartman shows this in his skeletal, his MSMN V4047 is only 4.3 m tall at the head, while his Sue is 3.7 m tall at the head, and that is assuming the 15.6 m long estimate is plausible, It could have been smaller too. But I am neither saying Tyrannosaurus would win, just that the bite of Tyrannosaurus was much stronger, and that Spinosaurus did not have strength enough in its jaws to crush the Tyrannosaurus, but perhaps to fatally wound it if given the opportunity, but Tyrannosaurus could do that more easily. The teeth of Tyrannosaurus and Spinosaurus were not unlike, but neither alike. There are differences between the teeth of both carnivores, specially in the adaptations for prey sizes and armour, Spinosaurus had teeth that were for holding and piercing through big fish, while Tyrannosaurus had teeth for crushing, holding, and piercng meat and armour of Sauropods, Ceratopsians and almost deffinitely Ankylosaurs, wether or not predated on them. I read the artivle already, long before Sci Hyena posted it, It says that Spinosaurus performed relatively worse than all the crocodilians and spinosaurs used in the study, while it had a strong skull, its bite was deffinitely not stronger than 2 tons, and the strength was all centered in the back on the skull, while the rest was not as strong unlike in Tyrannosaurus. |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Dec 6 2013, 11:50 AM Post #2860 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
daspletosaurus true points all around, but i don't think we have a good understanding on how the hierarchy worked with spinosaurus and carcharodontosaurus. they could be foes, like lions and hyenas, or they can share mutual respect for each other. its a possibility. and if they were foes, carcharodontosaurus would actually be a better match because its gape is not as restricted and its sliceing teeth with is actually better designed for taking on large prey items or potential enemies. and despite new estimates showing tyranosaurus being heavier then carcharodontosaurs, i not really considering it valid yet. the vary reason tyrannosaurs are so bulky is because they have proportionally larger air sacks then most theropods, including charcharodontosaurus and( if we use his relatives for relations) spinosaurus. so the new theory is still conflicting on my mind. i say 64% in favor of a 14 ton spinosaurus and a 70-75 % against a 15-16 ton spinosaurus Edited by spinosaurus rex, Dec 6 2013, 12:17 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Dec 6 2013, 12:00 PM Post #2861 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
i wouldn't disregard a 3 ton bite force just yet. remember there are other studies that show spinosaurus could have a 3 ton bite force. you are right about t-rex being stronger pound per pound and can definitely kill a spinosaurus at parity or even with a slight weight advantage, but when both are at average or at max sizes, spinosaurus is too much. its not a mismatch, but odds are not really favoring the tyrannosaur in my opinion. also Hartman's skeleton, while impressive, is only an educated guess itself and MSMN V4047 can just as well be bigger as it can be smaller |
![]() |
|
| Carcharadon | Dec 6 2013, 12:17 PM Post #2862 |
![]()
Shark Toothed Reptile
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I would actually give carcharodontosaurus a better chance to kill a spinosaurus then i would to t.rex. Because carchar is more adapted to attack larger adversaries, and also has a much larger gape so it will be easier to get a good grip on spino. But i would still favor spinosaurus due to its size and power. |
![]() |
|
| Sci Fyena | Dec 6 2013, 12:19 PM Post #2863 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Anything held together by nothing more than plastic could easily be dismantled by a six ton bite force.
|
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Dec 6 2013, 12:25 PM Post #2864 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
bah, you actually think that can loose to this. i mean, what can rexy do?
Edited by spinosaurus rex, Dec 6 2013, 12:26 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Daspletosaurus | Dec 6 2013, 01:10 PM Post #2865 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
With these weights I would have to disagree on. I am of the opinion that Spinosaurus is at max 15 meters long and that to me would only constitute a maximum weight of 11 tonnes (imo) So going by these sizes my verdict comes to 57%. it still wins majority but Rex can hold its own. |
![]() |
|
| 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