| 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 (459,172 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: | |
|---|---|
| Canadianwildlife | Jan 28 2014, 10:32 AM Post #3136 |
![]()
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I did not contradict myself,I admitted it, but my point that it hasn't been proven was correct, despite the fact I supported it did. |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 28 2014, 10:32 AM Post #3137 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Except those sawfish ARE Rhino-sized! |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 28 2014, 10:33 AM Post #3138 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Whatever you say - It is able of killing rhino sized fish, due to its massive size advantage over a 1-2 ton sawfish. |
![]() |
|
| Canadianwildlife | Jan 28 2014, 06:16 PM Post #3139 |
![]()
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It could kill fish much larger than that probably as well. Just saying. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jan 28 2014, 10:30 PM Post #3140 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@jingoferx: It certainly doesn´t mean it could not bite and fatally wound a Spinosaurus (As I said, head or neck for a killing bite, legs for crippling it), I just tried to explain what the point was about; T. rex would have difficulties biting many areas on a Spinosaurus, which can certainly be viewed as a disadvantage relativising its oh-so deadly bite. |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 28 2014, 10:40 PM Post #3141 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, I agree. Rhino-sized fish wouldn't be much for this spinosaurid, if there were 5-6 ton fish I bet it would kill them as well. |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 28 2014, 10:42 PM Post #3142 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I had heard about Tyrannosaurus not having a gape large enough to bite Spinosaurus' leg, but I don't believe that due to what Vobby has shared. I feel inclined to call this a close match, since it's size vs weaponry. |
![]() |
|
| Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex | Jan 29 2014, 12:48 AM Post #3143 |
![]()
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The power of Tyrannosaurus bite and its effectiveness should not be questioned... Its an important advantage that can end Spinosaurus's life with a single hit to the neck or head. |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 29 2014, 12:57 AM Post #3144 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We don't know how the tyrannosaurid would behave against a larger predator. It could try outflanking it, or it could try doing what you said. We can't speculate. If I were to make speculations as well, I could say the possibly larger (and stronger) spinosaurid could, too, inflict damage to its foe's bones. I wouldn't recommend making behaviour-related speculations, however. PS.: I had asked you what your Youtube channel was called, but it appears that you hadn't seen it. What is it called? Edited by Hatzegopteryx, Jan 29 2014, 12:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| TheMechaBaryonyx789 | Jan 29 2014, 01:50 AM Post #3145 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
True, Tyrannosaurus' bite was very powerful, but likely more efficient on smaller dinosaurs. Tyrannosaurus would have trouble trying to find a suitable place to latch its jaws onto Spinosaurus' neck/jaw due to Spinosaurus being taller and Tyrannosaurus' small bite gape. I wish Hartman's GDI would come out soon. Until then I am going to assume that Spinosaurus was larger than Tyrannosaurus, and I will give Spinosaurus the edge in this fight. |
![]() |
|
| Arovinrac | Jan 29 2014, 02:08 AM Post #3146 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Everyones bias to some extent |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 29 2014, 02:12 AM Post #3147 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Small gape? I guess you should read Vobby's post; Tyrannosaurus had a gape large enough to bite Spinosaurus' whole torso. Adn why is its bite efficient only on smaller opponents? Moreover, they don't have that much of a height difference. Shall I make I comparison to demonstrate this? |
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Jan 29 2014, 02:12 AM Post #3148 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I feel inclined to agree with that. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jan 29 2014, 02:27 AM Post #3149 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Unless you are talking about the thigh, T. rex would easily be capable of biting Spinosaurus’ leg (though certainly a massive part). The problem arises from it biting a moving part, from an unstable position (being crouched down fairly far to reach it with the jaws), with a massive skull and short neck, while said animal will undboutedly not try to let itself get bitten.
So what? Noone did. But it is not a superpower, it has its limitations, with regards to what it can bite effectively, and how well it could employ this in a fight. At the same time, that T. rex would die in a fall also shouldn’t be dismissed. |
![]() |
|
| Vobby | Jan 29 2014, 03:49 AM Post #3150 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I find higly questionable that Spinosaurus hunted rhino sized fishes. First, the osteology of its skull doesn't exacly screm "macrophagy"; relatively to its body size, its skull is one of the less impressive in the whole theropoda. Dal Sasso and Maganuco compared it to a gian heron, and given what we know of Spinosaurus, I find the imagine quite appropriate. So that, it is worth noting that such extant, fish-eating theropods aren't exacly suited in taking down big animals. They eat fish, fishes which can be swallowed whole, so just a fraction of their body size. There is nothing like a "big predator than big preys" rule. Think about anteaters, or about the differences on the prey hunted by the maned wolf, and those taken down by other similar sized (or even smaller) members of the order Carnivora. There is incredible variability in this matter... To be precise, I guess Spinosaurus would have been able to kill animals of decent size after all, struggling a lot and risking a lot of failure, but I'm confident that it would fail very much in attemping to hunt the armoured prey of T. rex. But Hatzegopteryx is right, to compare preys matters only to a certain extant. Last note about Spino vs rhino sized fishes: where they would meet? Just look here: ![]() (Curtesy of SpinoinWonderland from the Baryonyx vs GWS thread) Unless Spinosaurus was a specialized swimmer (and then some fantastic reconstructions come to my mind...), I don't see it walking in waters deep enough to kill any fish above some hundreds of kilograms, and only this may be a stretch. |
![]() |
|
| 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