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 (459,183 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:
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 05:27 AM
Vobby
Jan 25 2014, 02:31 AM
spinosaurus rex
Jan 25 2014, 02:13 AM
we all want a skeleton. but unlike you, I believe its a single species, you believe the complete opposite. in with neither of us can be certain of our claims. and its almost proven that MSNM V4047 is at the very least at weight parity with a large tyrannosaurus, and could be 10 tons at maximum using isometric scaling using relatives.
The whole paleontological world is convinced of the fact that Spinosaurus is a perfectly valid taxon, it isn't really necessary to discuss it. I think it isn't very wise to try and estimate the size of MSNM V4047, it can perfectly have been smaller than the holotype for all we know...
So because they are convinced makes it a fact? They cannot prove how big it was or what it looked like when the best they have is a jawbone. There have been findings of dinosaurs that were thought to be super huge, but in the end, they found out that some of the bones they used to construct the animal, that were mixed with the dinos bones turned out to be the bones of a pig, I can't remember where I got the source. Spinosaurous is guesswork, and that is a fact.
Spinosaurus exists. The remains we have indicate an animal in the same sort of size range as the largest known theropods - whether that be an animal the size of Acrocanthosaurus, one the size of a large Tyrannosaurus or one larger still is the part up for debate. To dismiss rigorous reconstructions as 'guesswork' is to dismiss science itself as guesswork.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Spinodontosaurus
Jan 25 2014, 06:44 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 05:27 AM
Vobby
Jan 25 2014, 02:31 AM
spinosaurus rex
Jan 25 2014, 02:13 AM
we all want a skeleton. but unlike you, I believe its a single species, you believe the complete opposite. in with neither of us can be certain of our claims. and its almost proven that MSNM V4047 is at the very least at weight parity with a large tyrannosaurus, and could be 10 tons at maximum using isometric scaling using relatives.
The whole paleontological world is convinced of the fact that Spinosaurus is a perfectly valid taxon, it isn't really necessary to discuss it. I think it isn't very wise to try and estimate the size of MSNM V4047, it can perfectly have been smaller than the holotype for all we know...
So because they are convinced makes it a fact? They cannot prove how big it was or what it looked like when the best they have is a jawbone. There have been findings of dinosaurs that were thought to be super huge, but in the end, they found out that some of the bones they used to construct the animal, that were mixed with the dinos bones turned out to be the bones of a pig, I can't remember where I got the source. Spinosaurous is guesswork, and that is a fact.
Spinosaurus exists. The remains we have indicate an animal in the same sort of size range as the largest known theropods - whether that be an animal the size of Acrocanthosaurus, one the size of a large Tyrannosaurus or one larger still is the part up for debate. To dismiss rigorous reconstructions as 'guesswork' is to dismiss science itself as guesswork.
It's guesswork, that's clearly a fact! They still cannot prove its size, and they are still guessing it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 06:40 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 06:03 AM
An Edmontosaurus survived an extremely powerful bite from an adult Tyrannosaurus. Spinosaurus COULD survive the bite force of Tyrannosaurus. As I said Spinosaurus is far larger and more durable than Edmontosaurus.
What are you talking about? The tail bite? The tail is not exactly what I would call a vital region.
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 06:03 AM
The immature Baryonyx specimen likely hunted the sub-adult Iguanodon. You are instantly assuming it was scavenged...
I don't want to say it didn't kill the Iguanodon, but how is assuming something else insane? You need to provide more evidence (that's what he asked for) than that if you want to be convincing.
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 06:03 AM
Armoured fish would still be alive when on the ground. A giant sawfish would likely carry on writhing and squirming around on the ground, and Spinosaurus would have to be cautious. The fish that Spinosaurus hunted were hard to kill.
I don't believe Spinosaurus hunted easy prey, but be honest, such fish are practically defenseless when carried on land. Almost every predator has to face heavily struggling prey, this is what animal normally do when getting caught and as long as Spinosaurus attacks from behind (like the jaguar in this video did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_MjHVgzdbk ), the rostrum should be no problem.
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 06:03 AM
Spinosaurus skull is far more comparable to a crocodile than a gharial in terms of bite force.
Spinosaurid skulls in general were not even remotely similar to a gharial's skull. Appearance is not important.
Then how about this?
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0065295
This is about bending resistance and not bite force, but bending resistance is important, too.

P.S. I favor Spinosaurus too, but I fear it you are overestimating it a bit.
I was talking about the Edmontosaurus that survived a bite to the head from Tyrannosaurus...
And I am not saying he is insane... I said that he shouldn't instantly assume that the Iguanodon was scavenged. It is likely that the immature Baryonyx specimen hunted the sub- adult Iguanodon. There are other examples from Spinosaurids around the globe,
I would still rather compare Spinosaurus' jaws to a crocodile and not a gharial.
Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Jan 25 2014, 06:53 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 06:49 AM
I was talking about the Edmontosaurus that survived a bite to the head from Tyrannosaurus...
And I am not saying he is insane... I said that he shouldn't instantly assume that the Iguanodon was scavenged. It is likely that the immature Baryonyx specimen hunted the sub- adult Iguanodon. There are other examples from Spinosaurids around the globe,
I would still rather compare Spinosaurus' jaws to a crocodile and not a gharial.
1. Could you post this?
Sorry, I read insanely, instead of instantly (don't ask me how this happened). Anyway, he didn't instantly assumed this, he was just asking for evidence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 06:59 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 06:49 AM
I was talking about the Edmontosaurus that survived a bite to the head from Tyrannosaurus...
And I am not saying he is insane... I said that he shouldn't instantly assume that the Iguanodon was scavenged. It is likely that the immature Baryonyx specimen hunted the sub- adult Iguanodon. There are other examples from Spinosaurids around the globe,
I would still rather compare Spinosaurus' jaws to a crocodile and not a gharial.
1. Could you post this?
Sorry, I read insanely, instead of instantly (don't ask me how this happened). Anyway, he didn't instantly assumed this, he was just asking for evidence.
http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk/news/2013/13/130228-duckbill-tyrannosaurus-dinosaur-wound-scar-science/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Best compare it to a false gharial, or a slender-snouted crocodile (or a freshwater crocodile).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
@TheMechaBaryonyx789, with near certainty, this Tyrannosaurus did not get a good bite, otherwise there would have been crushed bones. I doubt anyone here believes all of Tyrannosaurus' bites will be good. Most large tetrapods simply don't have a perfect precision and the same of course applies to Spinosaurus', too.
theropod
Jan 25 2014, 07:10 AM
Best compare it to a false gharial, or a slender-snouted crocodile (or a freshwater crocodile).
I agree (this is what the study was about), I just wanted to show that most crocodiles are no good comparison.
Edited by Jinfengopteryx, Jan 25 2014, 07:11 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:10 AM
@TheMechaBaryonyx789, with near certainty, this Tyrannosaurus did not get a good bite, otherwise there would have been crushed bones. I doubt anyone here believes all of Tyrannosaurus' bites will be good. Most large tetrapods simply don't have a perfect precision and the same of course applies to Spinosaurus', too.
theropod
Jan 25 2014, 07:10 AM
Best compare it to a false gharial, or a slender-snouted crocodile (or a freshwater crocodile).
I agree (this is what the study was about), I just wanted to show that most crocodiles are no good comparison.
True.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
They undoubtedly aren’t. Spinosaurus snout morphology is still different, and its tooth morphology even more so. It has the large teeth of a big crocodylus, in a rostrum similarly robust to a slender-snouted crocodile, but deeper, narrower in shape.
All this suggests it did not have the emphasis on gripping and bite force that the closest crocodilian analogies have (only logical, since it was not as reliant on just its jaws, being a semi-terrestrial biped with giant, clawed forelimbs whose ulnae were as robust as other theropod’s humeri), but was well-built for efficient and deep puncturing (eg. to kill a large fish efficiently and quickly).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jan 24 2014, 03:51 AM
Spinosaurus likely did not mainly fight with its jaws...
No evidence to support a claim makes it an opinion
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jan 25 2014, 07:20 AM
They undoubtedly aren’t. Spinosaurus snout morphology is still different, and its tooth morphology even more so. It has the large teeth of a big crocodylus, in a rostrum similarly robust to a slender-snouted crocodile, but deeper, narrower in shape.
All this suggests it did not have the emphasis on gripping and bite force that the closest crocodilian analogies have (only logical, since it was not as reliant on just its jaws, being a semi-terrestrial biped with giant, clawed forelimbs whose ulnae were as robust as other theropod’s humeri), but was well-built for efficient and deep puncturing (eg. to kill a large fish efficiently and quickly).
I was just wondering:
Posted Image
Spinosaurus appears to have a far more impressive skull than Sarcosuchus in lateral view, but Sarcosuchus appears to have a far more impressive skull in top view.
Could you explain which would have a stronger bite force? It seems that Spinosaurus would have a stronger bite than Sarcosuchus judging from lateral view, but it appears to be the exact opposite from top view.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Jan 25 2014, 07:28 AM
theropod
Jan 24 2014, 03:51 AM
Spinosaurus likely did not mainly fight with its jaws...
No evidence to support a claim makes it an opinion
Posted Image
He meant it could also fight with its very robust forelimbs and claws.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 25 2014, 07:32 AM
Drift
Jan 25 2014, 07:28 AM
theropod
Jan 24 2014, 03:51 AM
Spinosaurus likely did not mainly fight with its jaws...
No evidence to support a claim makes it an opinion
Posted Image
He meant it could also fight with its very robust forelimbs and claws.
I fully understood what he meant,unless there can be sources noted of paleontologists who support this than i won't humor it.Assumptions (in terms of any matter) will get your hopes up only to be dashed on the rocks when the facade that was accepted as truth,falls
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jinfengopteryx
Jan 25 2014, 07:01 AM
Canadianwildlife
Jan 25 2014, 06:43 AM
By the way, my thinking that you did not like was Fact, which you cannot change. It wasn't bad thinking, it was fact.
Of course it is a fact, but I found it redundant because paleontology simply consists for the greatest part of speculation. Why not work with what we have?
Yeah I know, but because of that fact, spinosaurous fans have no right to boast that it would beat a t-rex because of the fact I stated. I'm glad they are trying to find out more of what they have, but the best they can do id duduct. Maybe a whole skeleton will be found soon.
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.