| 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 (459,121 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: | |
|---|---|
| bone crusher | Nov 19 2014, 11:35 PM Post #3901 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
| Jiggly Mimus | Nov 20 2014, 01:10 AM Post #3902 |
![]()
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes I know this, but Spino was big on it's own term, also isn't there intimidation factor. In which the sail and length could have made the T-Rex hold back. It then could go for the attack couldn't it? |
![]() |
|
| Fist of the North Shrimp | Nov 20 2014, 02:22 AM Post #3903 |
|
vá á orminum
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Seth Sorensen also calls Carcharodontosaurus the Africana T. rex. He also says that Crocodilians are related to mosasaurs. And Deltadromaeus is a Dromaeosaur to him. The Spinosaurus material he speaks of is/was in bis private possesion and I would not wonder if it actually came Form another theropod. We have two specimens with reduced hindlimbs vs. a guy who has less knowledge than the average forumite. I gonna call this a mismatch. And I know that there is additional material for the new model coming. |
![]() |
|
| The Reptile | Nov 26 2014, 07:35 AM Post #3904 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spinosaurus would need a HUGE size advantage over anything that it is attempting to kill/hunt, especially now with the new quadrupedal reconstruction (this would fundamentally reduce its terrestrial agility and hunting capacity) The spinal column would be advantageous for this sort of function, but it was probably for other purposes such as courtship or thermoregulation probably. And as well, tyrannosaurus would have been arguably the most well-adapted theropod for head-on confrontation/biting, as its skull was designed for such. Something like carcharodontosaurus or spinosaurus would need to utilize more acute hunting strategies, which is why in any case, an ambush technique is probably what spinosaurus would do to grab any other dinosaur, especially another large theropod Edited by The Reptile, Nov 26 2014, 01:06 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| genao87 | Nov 26 2014, 05:26 PM Post #3905 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thanks Rock, I will look forward for this new info on Spino |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Nov 27 2014, 08:02 AM Post #3906 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think before speculating on yet more new material, we should first completely studying the material that's currently known. |
![]() |
|
| Drift | Dec 22 2014, 10:58 PM Post #3907 |
|
High Spined Lizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
At long last, the spino fanboyism has died down due to the new (and actually accurate for a change) information on the animal. Hopefully, logic now dictates the choice as to who would win. |
![]() |
|
| TheBeast | Dec 23 2014, 02:48 AM Post #3908 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spino wins.Kinda good bite, sharp claws and weight. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 23 2014, 03:14 AM Post #3909 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What a surprise. Enlighten me, what does this material have that makes it more accurate than previous material? For all intends and purposes, it threw up more questions than it answered, and neither is it properly described atm. Edited by theropod, Dec 27 2014, 04:40 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Drift | Dec 24 2014, 03:31 PM Post #3910 |
|
High Spined Lizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Agreed. |
![]() |
|
| Ceratodromeus | Dec 27 2014, 02:53 AM Post #3911 |
|
Aspiring herpetologist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
they actually have more substantial remains now whereas they relied heavily on speculation in the past years. Edited by Ceratodromeus, Dec 27 2014, 02:57 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Sarcoimperator | Dec 27 2014, 03:46 AM Post #3912 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yet even with these remains there is a lot of speculation (tail length, span of the sail, torso length, only one spinosaurus arm bone known to date ...). Not to mention the fact that these remains give no clear answer about how it moved on land. |
![]() |
|
| Ceratodromeus | Dec 27 2014, 04:00 AM Post #3913 |
|
Aspiring herpetologist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm aware of this. my point was we have more to work with then we did in the early 2000's, i know that these finds do open more questions as to what the terrestrial locomotion was like. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Dec 27 2014, 04:50 AM Post #3914 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What’s your point? With every new fossil found, we’ve got more remains than before. Stromer arguably described the biggest bunch, and yet his conclusions about it were the most mislead in retrospect. Taquet & Russel had even more to work with during the Nineties, and so did Dal Sasso et al. in 2005. And of course Ibrahim et al. had more substantial remains than before (at least access to their descriptions), but that doesn’t automatically make what they stated more accurate than what was stated before. Every new discovery adds new data, that doesn’t set one apart over the others, and that doesn’t create absolute truths where there are none. They still rely heavily on speculation. Mostly, what this one did was throw up questions, make a number of bold conclusion, yet many of them poorly supported (like the actual morphology, the remains that were referred, the taxonomy, the stance…). Drift always calls the information he personally favours the absolute, accurate truth on his crusade against what he considers Spinosaurus fanboyism. That it isn’t so simple is apparently too difficult to grasp. Edited by theropod, Dec 27 2014, 07:51 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Drift | Dec 27 2014, 06:18 PM Post #3915 |
|
High Spined Lizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Cognitive dissonance at its finest, cherry picking through old outdated information (deciding what's viable as evidence to support what you think) and disregarding new finds when they conflict with the romanticized fiction? That's a lowly tactic & ineffective to say the least imo.Maybe the realization of more than a decade of believing an asinine idea was be the most common occurrence in a hypothetical match, is finally setting in and now, and the only goal left is to grasp at straws. |
![]() |
|
| 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