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 (459,162 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:
blaze
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It's not conclusive, given the unknowns there are still ways in which the largest spinosaurus turns out bigger than the biggest T. rex, in my opinion, if the biggest Spinosaurus is bigger than T. rex, is bigger by only about a tonne or so due to the slender build inferred from the vertebrae of the other specimen but that's just me.
Edited by blaze, Feb 12 2014, 11:26 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dinopithecus
Feb 12 2014, 09:05 AM
I just think they're debating Spinosaurus size again.


Well, mind you, should Spinosaurus really turn out to be no bigger than T.rex, I think latter wins (probably even nearly (if not absolutely) easily).
I agree. Even if spinosaurous has a 1 ton advantage, I'm still backing the t-rex.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1.0reef
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
While I love Spinosaurus, T rex's are better armed to take on bigger theropods/similar in a fight. But it would get some bad wounds from Spino's arms.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
1.0reef
Feb 15 2014, 03:35 PM
While I love Spinosaurus, T rex's are better armed to take on bigger theropods/similar in a fight. But it would get some bad wounds from Spino's arms.
If anything, that's the other way round, because Spinosaurus coexisted/competed with many other large theropods in its region, while Tyrannosaurus didn't.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canadianwildlife
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 15 2014, 06:08 PM
1.0reef
Feb 15 2014, 03:35 PM
While I love Spinosaurus, T rex's are better armed to take on bigger theropods/similar in a fight. But it would get some bad wounds from Spino's arms.
If anything, that's the other way round, because Spinosaurus coexisted/competed with many other large theropods in its region, while Tyrannosaurus didn't.
Yes, it may not have coexisted with lots of other large powerful theropauds, but it killed big prey all the time, while spinosaurous didn't, all it killed were fish mostly. Although nothing is conclusive, it appears that this debate is in favor of the t-rex, especially after what blaze and vobby said.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It still needed to defend itself against animals like Carcharodontosaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Feb 16 2014, 03:37 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 15 2014, 06:08 PM
1.0reef
Feb 15 2014, 03:35 PM
While I love Spinosaurus, T rex's are better armed to take on bigger theropods/similar in a fight. But it would get some bad wounds from Spino's arms.
If anything, that's the other way round, because Spinosaurus coexisted/competed with many other large theropods in its region, while Tyrannosaurus didn't.
Yes, it may not have coexisted with lots of other large powerful theropauds, but it killed big prey all the time, while spinosaurous didn't, all it killed were fish mostly. Although nothing is conclusive, it appears that this debate is in favor of the t-rex, especially after what blaze and vobby said.
Spinosaurus had to defend itself from large Carcharodontosaurids such as Sauroniops and Carcharodontosaurus, so Spinosaurus was adapted for fighting other large theropods. Spinosaurus had to kill rhino-sized sawfish. This is large prey, easily comparable in size to Tyrannosaurus' prey. All in all, Tyrannosaurus' prey was probably more difficult to take down, but being more advanced is not an advantage in a hypothetical fight like this. If Spinosaurus turns out to have a significant size advantage (which we will know from Hartman's GDI), then Spinosaurus would win relatively easily. However if they turn out to be at similar sizes Tyrannosaurus would win relatively easily.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Regardless of the body mass, I have problems seeing T. rex taking down that larger Spinosaurus in Hartman’s comparable "easily". Whether it wins or not breaks down to weight and strenght of course, and at weight parity (let alone an, imo unlikely, weight advantage) I would certainly favour the tyrannosaur, but being so large dimensionally offers a few advantages regardless (eg. height, reach, huge forelimb & claw size, and, in Spinsaurus’ case, being difficult to bite due to its body shape), so that Spinosaurus also certainly won’t be an easy kill.

And note that Spinosaurus may not have as much experience with large and well-armed prey, but it would have needed to have a certain degree of experience in dealing with other large theropods (coexisting with several species of T. rex-sized, macrophagous theropods that certainly would not have hesitated to attack an easy prey item).
Edited by theropod, Feb 16 2014, 04:15 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
I don't even need Hartman's GDI. I right now believe T.Rex was bigger (by mass).
But let this thread die. We have made good points and can't say anything new.
Edited by Tyrannoceratospinosaurus Rex, Feb 16 2014, 04:31 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Canadianwildlife
Feb 16 2014, 03:37 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 15 2014, 06:08 PM
1.0reef
Feb 15 2014, 03:35 PM
While I love Spinosaurus, T rex's are better armed to take on bigger theropods/similar in a fight. But it would get some bad wounds from Spino's arms.
If anything, that's the other way round, because Spinosaurus coexisted/competed with many other large theropods in its region, while Tyrannosaurus didn't.
Yes, it may not have coexisted with lots of other large powerful theropauds, but it killed big prey all the time, while spinosaurous didn't, all it killed were fish mostly. Although nothing is conclusive, it appears that this debate is in favor of the t-rex, especially after what blaze and vobby said
I am going to have to agree with you there, he made it rather difficult even for someone who doesn't understand this debate to refute the tyrannosaur being able to dispatch it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The All-seeing Night
Member Avatar
You are without honor
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A thread that actually surpassed lion vs tiger, good job
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think it's safe to say that this thread more pages than any other in this forum.

I really don't care who would have won this hypothetical fight; back then I was sort of a T.rex fanboy and really took joy in the idea that T.rex would best this spinosaur. Obviously not as much anymore, as I even long changed my opinion. But I'll do so again if more and/or better information and insight comes (particularly information for Spinosaurus size).

Currently, I still believe the 'main consensus' on its size.
Edited by Ausar, Feb 18 2014, 11:19 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Megalosauroid
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 6 2014, 08:56 AM
Megalosauroid
Feb 6 2014, 08:39 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 6 2014, 05:26 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Feb 6 2014, 04:29 AM
A 15 metre Spinosaurus is no less than 9 tons, scaling from the (gracile) immature Baryonyx specimen.
Can you teach me how to scale isometrically?
It depends in what you want to scale:
Mass or proportions.
To scale proportions here is an example:
If a T.rex that measures 12.3 m has a 1.52 m long skull, then how long would the skull of a 13 m T.rex would be?
One method is to divide the mayor length (13) between the minor length (12.3) and then multiply it for the skull length.
13/12.3 = 1.0569105691 (1.52) = 1.60 m.
Or you just can divide the skull length between the body length and then multiply it by the larger body length.
1.52/12.3 = 0.1235772358 (13) = 1.60 m.
Same with vertebrae.
For mass, you divide the second length (15) between the first (10) and then muliply it by the cube, then multiply what results per the original mass of the object.
15/10 = 1.5(1.5)(1.5) = 3.375 (original mass 1,700-2,700 kg) the result is 5,737 to 9,112 kg.
Ok thanks.
The immature Baryonyx specimen is actually 9.5 metres in length and 2.6 tons, so I will scale the mass of a 15.6 metre Spinosaurus:
15.6/9.5= 1.6 (rounded to one decimal place) (1.6) (1.6)= 4 (2,600 kg) = 10,400 kg for a 15 metre Spinosaurus.
It has to be exact because that might underestimate weights by a bit.

The immature specimen is estimated to be 9.5 to 10 m so assuming 9.5 m leads:

(1.6421052632)(1.6421052632(1.6421052632)= 4.45491786 (2600) = 11,582.786 kg

1,182 kg heavier than your estimate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
mechafire
Feb 18 2014, 09:28 AM
A thread that actually surpassed lion vs tiger, good job
It already did so since quite a long time.

P.S. I today made a post in all of the "big three" (Megalodon v Livyatan, Lion v tiger and this). :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Megalosauroid
Feb 18 2014, 12:22 PM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 6 2014, 08:56 AM
Megalosauroid
Feb 6 2014, 08:39 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Feb 6 2014, 05:26 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Feb 6 2014, 04:29 AM
A 15 metre Spinosaurus is no less than 9 tons, scaling from the (gracile) immature Baryonyx specimen.
Can you teach me how to scale isometrically?
It depends in what you want to scale:
Mass or proportions.
To scale proportions here is an example:
If a T.rex that measures 12.3 m has a 1.52 m long skull, then how long would the skull of a 13 m T.rex would be?
One method is to divide the mayor length (13) between the minor length (12.3) and then multiply it for the skull length.
13/12.3 = 1.0569105691 (1.52) = 1.60 m.
Or you just can divide the skull length between the body length and then multiply it by the larger body length.
1.52/12.3 = 0.1235772358 (13) = 1.60 m.
Same with vertebrae.
For mass, you divide the second length (15) between the first (10) and then muliply it by the cube, then multiply what results per the original mass of the object.
15/10 = 1.5(1.5)(1.5) = 3.375 (original mass 1,700-2,700 kg) the result is 5,737 to 9,112 kg.
Ok thanks.
The immature Baryonyx specimen is actually 9.5 metres in length and 2.6 tons, so I will scale the mass of a 15.6 metre Spinosaurus:
15.6/9.5= 1.6 (rounded to one decimal place) (1.6) (1.6)= 4 (2,600 kg) = 10,400 kg for a 15 metre Spinosaurus.
It has to be exact because that might underestimate weights by a bit.

The immature specimen is estimated to be 9.5 to 10 m so assuming 9.5 m leads:

(1.6421052632)(1.6421052632(1.6421052632)= 4.45491786 (2600) = 11,582.786 kg

1,182 kg heavier than your estimate.
Ok.
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.