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 (459,131 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:
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
6-7 tonnes for the largest specimens. Although it's now smaller than previously thought Spinosaurus is becoming even more fascinating. But as far as it concerns this fight the outcome should now be pretty obvious.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Spartan
Oct 1 2014, 11:52 PM
But as far as it concerns this fight the outcome should now be pretty obvious.
I agree, but one shouldn't forget that current knowledge would also make this fight strongly environment-dependent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Yeah, even if it has couple tons on T.Rex it would still lose badly. I can see T.Rex using its vast superior height simply chomping down on Spino's long slender neck, pulverize its neck vertebrae and takes one of the easiest neck bite victory ever in its life. The fight now becomes almost unfair.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
thesporerex
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Actually it seems Sue was actually 7.3 tonnes(Campione 2014) which came out around june(I got it like the next day).
Funny enough Scotty(RSM P2523.8) seems to be around 700kg heavier than sue : /

Posted Image

But it seems either way T. rex is larger than Spinosaurus and seems to be the largest theropod discovered by the way things look.
Posted Image

Also the figures mean this
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
So Sue isn't the largest T-Rex specimen known anymore? That's surprising.

Btw, I've read that Theropods were able to swim, does this include giants like T-Rex?
Edited by Spartan, Oct 2 2014, 12:18 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
blaze
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
@thesporerex

IMHO volumetric models, be it digital or physical, are more accurate than regression equations. Scotty has a lower circumference but the shaft is more round so the equation estimates it heavier, we don't know how its actual skeleton compares with Sue, if it's younger with a smaller head and shorter torso it is bound to be lighter even if it has a femur just as thick, B-rex has a femur as thick as that of Stan but from what we know of all of its bones are only 90% the size, maybe we are looking at two different species (as with Triceratops) with one of them having overall thicker femora across their size range, this being an adaptation for increased athleticism compared to the earlier form or it's the other way around with the later form becoming less cursorial and getting proportionally skinnier limb bones as a result or maybe is just good old individual variation.
Edited by blaze, Oct 2 2014, 12:39 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Whatever happened to the previous 3d scanned Sue which got her a weight of 9 tons? Has been any update since then?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
It's interesting to see how a dinosaur become the one who would lose a fight the most of the times, while it was the likely winner until 4 weeks ago. Now T.rex would win the most of the times, being taller (being taller, it can crush the Spinosaurus' neck easier).
Edited by Teratophoneus, Oct 2 2014, 12:59 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
blaze
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
@bone crusher
Is still out there but is a little fat.. anyway one thing that we also have take away from the estimates from Campione et al. (2014) is that they provide error bars, recognize that the real value could fall between 5.5 and 10 tonnes for the largest Tyrannosaurus.

Also, the Tyrannotitan they used is not the big specimen, I suppose that one will come out at 7 tonnes using those equations (range of 5-9 tonnes).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MysteryMeat
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

@bone crusher
The spino in your comparison is about 10% too big.


Is there a spinosaurus skeletal out there that incorporates Sigilmassasaurus material?
Edited by MysteryMeat, Oct 2 2014, 03:26 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
thesporerex
Oct 2 2014, 12:11 AM
But it seems either way T. rex is larger than Spinosaurus and seems to be the largest theropod discovered by the way things look.
Thanks for posting this, but I wouldn't say so, since this study did not look at the second Giganotosaurus and the largest Carcharodontosaurus specimen.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
thesporerex
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
MysteryMeat
Oct 2 2014, 03:10 AM
Posted Image

@bone crusher
The spino in your comparison is about 10% too big.


Is there a spinosaurus skeletal out there that incorporates Sigilmassasaurus material?
Sigilmassasaurus is apparently now Synonymous with Spinosaurus now.
Cau posted this a while back so this may answer your question(Sigilmassasaurus is highlighted in yellow)
Posted Image
Jinfengopteryx
Oct 2 2014, 03:33 AM
thesporerex
Oct 2 2014, 12:11 AM
But it seems either way T. rex is larger than Spinosaurus and seems to be the largest theropod discovered by the way things look.
Thanks for posting this, but I wouldn't say so, since this study did not look at the second Giganotosaurus and the largest Carcharodontosaurus specimen.
Considering the first Giganotosaurus specimen is also smaller than Hartman's estimate I would bet also that the second one will be smaller than Sue though not by much. Also I don't think there is enough Carcharodontosaurus to give an accurate estimate as we only have the front part of the skull : /
blaze
Oct 2 2014, 01:11 AM
@bone crusher
Is still out there but is a little fat.. anyway one thing that we also have take away from the estimates from Campione et al. (2014) is that they provide error bars, recognize that the real value could fall between 5.5 and 10 tonnes for the largest Tyrannosaurus.

Also, the Tyrannotitan they used is not the big specimen, I suppose that one will come out at 7 tonnes using those equations (range of 5-9 tonnes).
What I find interesting is that they provided this graph for other studies. It seems this one has a pretty consitently somewhat fast growth rate with it getting exponential larger at the same time unlike the others which are very exponential in growth.
Posted Image

The 2011 computer analysis one by Hutchinson(2011) being the big ass one. Also that study is no longer valid according to Hutchinson(2014)
Hutchinson(2014)
 
Based on our plot in Figure 6, we stated that the data in our paper support the view that DME was a reasonable first approximation for modeling growth in non-avian dinosaurs. However, several inconsistencies were introduced in this plot, a fact brought to our attention by Myhrvold (2013).

Errors include using a minimum mass of 9693 kg for “Sue” instead of the published 9501 kg, and using femoral lengths published in Kilbourne and Makovicky (2010) instead of the ones in Table 3 of our paper. An important source of ambiguity came to light as we reviewed our data: the “Jane” specimen’s femur, which is broken and incomplete, was reconstructed on the cast as being 788 mm in length, whereas other studies estimate the length at 720mm (the value used in our Fig. 6).

After reviewing these mistakes and sources of uncertainty, we now judge that the data in our paper do not support our published conclusions regarding the accuracy of DME models. We no longer consider our data sufficient to permit an evaluation of how accurate this method may be, and we wish to withdraw our earlier statements on this issue (p9: the last paragraph of the results section headed 'Growth', p13: the three paragraphs in the discussion headed ‘Implications for growth rates?'; and Figure 6).


Link to correction: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0097055
Paper to Hutchinson(2011): http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0026037
Edited by thesporerex, Oct 2 2014, 04:12 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Winner is obvious: Rexy on land, Spino in water.

I find it interesting how a hypothetical versus scenario that was once regarded as one of the most discussion-worthy among them now...just isn't.
Edited by Ausar, Oct 2 2014, 04:53 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MysteryMeat
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
@thesporerex

I read Cau's blog post. I don't know if Ibrahim's reconstruction includes Silgilmassasaurus material, the cervical seems too elongated in comparison.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
thesporerex
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
MysteryMeat
Oct 2 2014, 04:22 AM
@thesporerex

I read Cau's blog post. I don't know if Ibrahim's reconstruction includes Silgilmassasaurus material, the cervical seems too elongated in comparison.
Doesn't seem very elongated to me, its in the death pose which would make it look to the naked eye very elongated by comparing it to these it doesn't seem so.

Spoiler: click to toggle
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.