| 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 (459,148 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: | |
|---|---|
| Emperor Sloth | Apr 21 2014, 07:45 PM Post #3496 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hi guys, i am new here, I think the Spinosaurus will just smash the skull of the Tyrannosaur with his massive claws and use his weight advantage to use. |
![]() |
|
| The All-seeing Night | Apr 21 2014, 07:49 PM Post #3497 |
![]()
You are without honor
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hey man
The T.rex is much too durable. Its claws aren't all that big, and the tyrannosaurus can easily withstand a blow. This is a 7 ton animal, I don't think there is proof of a spinosaurus being strong enough to smash its skull and beat it that way. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 21 2014, 09:00 PM Post #3498 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spinosaurus’ claws must have been huge, that’s not the issue (they just wouldn’t be built to smash anything sizeable, like a T. rex skull!). To put this into perspective, the holotype of Baryonyx walkeri has a first manual ungual 31cm long over the curves, which means depending on how it was measured (to the end of the condyle or to the end of the surface covered by the keratin?) it was ~23-24cm long in straight line. That’s all without the claw’s sheath of course, which adds significantly to the curved and straight-line lenght (I measured 63% and 17% respectively in an eagle X-ray, although I would treat the former as an upper bound due to the extreme amount of curvature and high degree of elongation of accipitrid claws). So, given the claws scaled isometrically, Spinosaurus’ manual unguals could realistically be ~48-51cm in straight line lenght and perhaps up to 90cm along the outer curve with the covering included (55cm in curved lenght without covering, just for reference). They are built to grip and rip of course, and its unlikely its arms would have allowed it to swipe like sometimes portrayed. But something that’s caught in its grip would not have an easy time escaping it, such long, powerful claws, and massively robust arms the size of smallish elephant forelimbs would obviously provide a tremendously strong grasp. T. rex skull is specifically adapted to withstand a large loads in multiple directions. Accordingly, its bone structure is very thick and would have been able to withstand huge forces. Edited by theropod, Apr 21 2014, 11:27 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Emperor Sloth | Apr 21 2014, 09:46 PM Post #3499 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, it would still be able to rip open the stomach, And spinosaurus and storbger and bigger, so he will continue to hammer the skull |
![]() |
|
| TheMechaBaryonyx789 | Apr 21 2014, 10:09 PM Post #3500 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I doubt Spinosaurus would be able to reach its claws low enough to attack the underbelly of a Tyrannosaurus. I personally see Spinosaurus mainly using its claws to inflict damage on Tyrannosaurus' skull. Claws and arms as powerful as that of Spinosaurus' could potentially puncture muscle ligaments in the Tyrannosaurid's skull. Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Apr 21 2014, 10:11 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Apr 21 2014, 10:13 PM Post #3501 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't really think the arms and claws alone would do much. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 21 2014, 11:19 PM Post #3502 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
They are likely not as much a means of dealing damage as a grappling tool. Puncturing alone isn’t very effective for damaging muscles, and since the claws likely were not sharp on the inside, the damage done in such cases would be manageable, some puncture wounds, but likely no extensive exanguination or bleeding. However if Spinosaurus got a hold on the torso or throat, it has good chances of puncturing vital organs or damaging major blood vessels. The primary advantage those forelimbs give the Spinosaur is that they allow it to effectively use its edge in raw power and size against an opponent, as well as to augment its jaws. Vicelike jaws with long, pointed teeth and strong arms with long, curved claws would surely be an effective combination. |
![]() |
|
| Drift | Apr 24 2014, 02:16 PM Post #3503 |
|
High Spined Lizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'll have to nod with Hatzegopteryx since it's mouth was too specialized for a specific prey to be detrimental to this carnivore.There have been numerous explanations as to why the arms are not a factor here & i'm not a big fan of repeating information that's been possibly (purposely) overlooked.
Edited by Drift, Apr 26 2014, 01:50 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 26 2014, 08:44 PM Post #3504 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not sure what kind of "overlooked information" you are referring to. How the arms could not be a factor is beyond me. |
![]() |
|
| retic | Apr 26 2014, 11:14 PM Post #3505 |
![]()
snake and dinosaur enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
the robust arms of spinosaurus will be a factor imo, though its jaws probably won't be much of a factor since they won't be able to cause much damage to something as large as t.rex. a bite force of around 2 tonnes and no serrated teeth won't be enough to inflict much damage to a 6-8 tonne animal. |
![]() |
|
| thesporerex | Apr 26 2014, 11:57 PM Post #3506 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Something applying 2 tonnes of force would break almost anything dude... |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 27 2014, 01:55 AM Post #3507 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
At least what those pointed teeth could puncture with that much force is not to be underestimated. |
![]() |
|
| TheMechaBaryonyx789 | Apr 27 2014, 08:28 PM Post #3508 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A bite force of 2 tons could easily cause serious damage to an 8 ton animal such as Tyrannosaurus. Also since when did Spinosaurus' teeth have no serrations? |
![]() |
|
| TheMechaBaryonyx789 | Apr 27 2014, 08:36 PM Post #3509 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
How are Spinosaurus' powerful arms and claws not a factor? They could easily be used to inflict damage on Tyrannosaurus' neck and head. The claws are curved and could be used as great grappling weapons. |
![]() |
|
| thesporerex | Apr 27 2014, 09:50 PM Post #3510 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Grappling? Dude its not like a cat, they would be used to grip the Rex along with the head of the Spinosaurids and control whatever part its gripped onto or could be able to push it over. Also the teeth didn't have any serrations as its conical![]() Compare that to the teeth of Tyrannosaurus rex and Allosaurus Tyrannosaurus ![]() Allosaurus ![]() If Spinosaurus's teeth did have serrations it would be less effective as a gripping weapon to grip fish. |
![]() |
|
| 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