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 (459,189 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:
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Spinosaurus likely did not mainly fight with its jaws...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 24 2014, 02:36 AM
I think the tyrant lizard king would take this judging by its huge, thick, jaws. The rex has the jaws of an aligator, while the spino has the jaws of a gharial. Although larger, the spino wasn't that much bigger, and the rex seems to have a more powerful build, and seems bulkier for its size. Because of the huge jaws of the trex which are much bigger and stronger than the spino's, and because its teeth are bigger and deadlier, I think the trex takes it. The animals mostly fight with their jaws, and the trex has that major advantage.
Spinosaurus would be overall far stronger than Tyrannosaurus due to its massive size advantage (Spinosaurus is over 60% larger than Tyrannosaurus).
Also Spinosaurus' jaws were NOT like a gharial's jaws.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Spinosaurus clearly has far more robust jaws than the gharial.
Spinosaurus would of had a powerful bite force. Tyrannosaurus' bite force would of been more powerful, but Tyrannosaurus' bite will be less efficient on a larger animal such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' bite gape being small.
Spinosaurus should win 70-80% of the time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
spinosaurus rex
Jan 23 2014, 10:29 PM
i'm sorry, but there are so many incorrections in your post.
firstly, size is an advantage, especially at the sizes were talking about. i believe spinosaurus could attain 16 meters ans even 15 meters is big enough to put up a fight with tyrannosaurus.
1. gape. the gape of tyrannosaurus is around 1 meter. literally, the only place were tyrannosaurus could place the 6 ton bite is at the neck.
and why are you suggesting spinosaurus was a incapable fighter, he lived in a environment full of predators. even if he avoid competition by being mainly piscovous, i doubt it will effect his ability to defend himself.
lastly, you quoted 4 inch teeth. need i have to tell you how wrong is that.
Length is not size, weight is size. Spinosaurus is over 60% more massive than Tyrannosaurus.
This will automatically give Spinosaurus the advantage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Actually nearly 70% heavier (6.5t vs. 11t; 11/6.5=1.69230769-1=0.69230769*100=69.2307692%).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 24 2014, 04:56 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 24 2014, 02:36 AM
I think the tyrant lizard king would take this judging by its huge, thick, jaws. The rex has the jaws of an aligator, while the spino has the jaws of a gharial. Although larger, the spino wasn't that much bigger, and the rex seems to have a more powerful build, and seems bulkier for its size. Because of the huge jaws of the trex which are much bigger and stronger than the spino's, and because its teeth are bigger and deadlier, I think the trex takes it. The animals mostly fight with their jaws, and the trex has that major advantage.
Spinosaurus would be overall far stronger than Tyrannosaurus due to its massive size advantage (Spinosaurus is over 60% larger than Tyrannosaurus).
Also Spinosaurus' jaws were NOT like a gharial's jaws.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Spinosaurus clearly has far more robust jaws than the gharial.
Spinosaurus would of had a powerful bite force. Tyrannosaurus' bite force would of been more powerful, but Tyrannosaurus' bite will be less efficient on a larger animal such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' bite gape being small.
Spinosaurus should win 70-80% of the time.
Actually:
Posted Image
The jaws of the spinosaur suchomimus.
Posted Image
The jaws of gahrial
Posted Image
The jaws of a croc.
They're saying something...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
spinosaurus rex
Jan 23 2014, 10:29 PM
i'm sorry, but there are so many incorrections in your post.
firstly, size is an advantage, especially at the sizes were talking about. i believe spinosaurus could attain 16 meters ans even 15 meters is big enough to put up a fight with tyrannosaurus.
1. gape. the gape of tyrannosaurus is around 1 meter. literally, the only place were tyrannosaurus could place the 6 ton bite is at the neck.
and why are you suggesting spinosaurus was a incapable fighter, he lived in a environment full of predators. even if he avoid competition by being mainly piscovous, i doubt it will effect his ability to defend himself.
lastly, you quoted 4 inch teeth. need i have to tell you how wrong is that.
By biting the Spinosaur, i meant the neck or skull
Spinosaurus didn't compete with other predators. Although they did live in the same time, they hunted different game. I don't see any reason for competition.
The problem is, Spiny was not a good fighter.
And weaponry is far more important than size.
Size is overrated here...
Edited by Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex, Jan 24 2014, 05:41 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The All-seeing Night
Member Avatar
You are without honor
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If they were similar sizes the tyrannosaurus Rex would be more robust and more powerful. It would charge in and overpower the spinosaurus. However larger estimates put spinosaurus' weight at twice the weight of trex. If it was that big trex wouldn't stand a chance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Suchomimus has a considerably narrower, albeit deeper snout than Spinosaurus. Compare the two in lateral view for proof, but don’t compare relatives known to have different snout morphologies instead. Suchomimus too has a more robust snout than a gharial (Baryonyx outperforms even Mecistops, though that Spinosaurus turned out so weak is probably largely due to the only tested region being the anteriormost 18.5% of the snout, which pretty much means "premaxilla, diastema" in this case).

Spinosaurus’ rostrum is both wider and deeper than that of a gharial along most of its lenght, and it has considerably larger and more robust teeth.
Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex
Jan 24 2014, 05:37 AM
spinosaurus rex
Jan 23 2014, 10:29 PM
i'm sorry, but there are so many incorrections in your post.
firstly, size is an advantage, especially at the sizes were talking about. i believe spinosaurus could attain 16 meters ans even 15 meters is big enough to put up a fight with tyrannosaurus.
1. gape. the gape of tyrannosaurus is around 1 meter. literally, the only place were tyrannosaurus could place the 6 ton bite is at the neck.
and why are you suggesting spinosaurus was a incapable fighter, he lived in a environment full of predators. even if he avoid competition by being mainly piscovous, i doubt it will effect his ability to defend himself.
lastly, you quoted 4 inch teeth. need i have to tell you how wrong is that.
By biting the Spinosaur, i meant the neck or skull
Spinosaurus didn't compete with other predators. Although they did live in the same time, they hunted different game. I don't see any reason for competition.
The problem is, Spiny was not a good fighter.
And weaponry is far more important than size.
Size is overrated here...
And how are you deducing that it was a bad fighter? To even stay alive, it would have to be capable enough a fighter to not be a complacent prey for Carcharodontosaurus, Bahariasaurus, Sauroniops or Sigilmassasaurus, all of them T. rex-sized carnosaurs or ceratosaurs.
Fights between competitors, such as conspecifics, are often not even to the death. Fights between predator and prey are. For a Spinosaurus to not be an easy prey, it would take the ability to defend itself in an environment that crowded with giant predators.
Furthermore it still had to compete with some huge crocodilians, such as Aegisuchus (which, after all, may be the biggest crocodilyform known, at a size comparable to Spinosaurus, and likely would have had similar dietary preferences).

No matter how you put it, Spinosaurus had at least as much oppurtunity and need to fight, for feeding, competition, and defense, as T. rex did. The latter is not even known to have coexisted with any other large predator...

Size is a factor hard to overrate in fights. It is true, if the difference is marginal, perhaps too marginal to even be reliably estimates from the fossil record, it is not significant. But if a size advantage is considerable (as in 50%, or 100%), it has to be accepted as such.

You see what this is going at? being able to bite just the skull or neck is already a disadvantage, especially if both are not exactly easy to bite themselves.
Edited by theropod, Jan 24 2014, 06:02 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex
Jan 24 2014, 05:33 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 24 2014, 04:56 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 24 2014, 02:36 AM
I think the tyrant lizard king would take this judging by its huge, thick, jaws. The rex has the jaws of an aligator, while the spino has the jaws of a gharial. Although larger, the spino wasn't that much bigger, and the rex seems to have a more powerful build, and seems bulkier for its size. Because of the huge jaws of the trex which are much bigger and stronger than the spino's, and because its teeth are bigger and deadlier, I think the trex takes it. The animals mostly fight with their jaws, and the trex has that major advantage.
Spinosaurus would be overall far stronger than Tyrannosaurus due to its massive size advantage (Spinosaurus is over 60% larger than Tyrannosaurus).
Also Spinosaurus' jaws were NOT like a gharial's jaws.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Spinosaurus clearly has far more robust jaws than the gharial.
Spinosaurus would of had a powerful bite force. Tyrannosaurus' bite force would of been more powerful, but Tyrannosaurus' bite will be less efficient on a larger animal such as Spinosaurus due to Tyrannosaurus' bite gape being small.
Spinosaurus should win 70-80% of the time.
Actually:
Posted Image
The jaws of the spinosaur suchomimus.
Posted Image
The jaws of gahrial
Posted Image
The jaws of a croc.
They're saying something...
Spinosaurus' jaws are far more robust than Suchomimus' jaws...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dinopithecus
Jan 24 2014, 05:22 AM
Actually nearly 70% heavier (6.5t vs. 11t; 11/6.5=1.69230769-1=0.69230769*100=69.2307692%).
The largest Spinosaurus specimen found is around 13 tons in weight according to Scott Hartman.
Tyrannosaurus (Sue) is around 8 tons.
Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Jan 24 2014, 05:53 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sue is the biggest and oldest in at least 40 T. rex specimens (just counting somewhat decent remains). The Spinosaurus you are talking about is the biggest in 2, or perhaps 3 when including S. marocannus-remains.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jan 24 2014, 05:58 AM
Sue is the biggest and oldest in at least 40 T. rex specimens (just counting somewhat decent remains). The Spinosaurus you are talking about is the biggest in 2, or perhaps 3 when including S. marocannus-remains.
The largest Spinosaurus specimen found (at 16 metres and 13 tons) is the only adult Spinosaurus found. The other S. aegyptiacus is a sub-adult.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
There seems to be no evidence for that. As Andrea Cau pointed out correctly, Stromer does not mention anything about the holotype being a subadult, and noone else ever got the chance to examine it. Though it really is oddly small compared to MNHM V 4047
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The spinos jaws can't match the rexs jaws, and the 7-20 tons is a terrible estimate, they mine as well say that they don't know.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 24 2014, 05:50 AM
Dinopithecus
Jan 24 2014, 05:22 AM
Actually nearly 70% heavier (6.5t vs. 11t; 11/6.5=1.69230769-1=0.69230769*100=69.2307692%).
The largest Spinosaurus specimen found is around 13 tons in weight according to Scott Hartman.
Tyrannosaurus (Sue) is around 8 tons.
I'm using what I think are averages.

Canadianwildlife
 
The spinos jaws can't match the rexs jaws, and the 7-20 tons is a terrible estimate, they mine as well say that they don't know.


Except Spinosaurus doesn't just have jaws.
Edited by Ausar, Jan 24 2014, 06:42 AM.
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.