| 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 (459,107 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: | |
|---|---|
| Ceratodromeus | Oct 28 2015, 09:26 AM Post #4111 |
|
Aspiring herpetologist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I wouldn't say its a mismatch. Probably far from it. |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Oct 28 2015, 09:46 AM Post #4112 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I wouldn't say T.rex has a size advantage; they're about the same size from what I can tell. But in that case, I think Tyrannosaurus is the obvious victor, at least on land (simply because it brings a far better armament to the table and would be in its element on land). |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Nov 1 2015, 08:42 PM Post #4113 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
T Rex definitely has a size advantage here, even the holotype is half a ton heavier than the upper estimate of Spino from Ibrahim. Throw in Sue, Scotty and Samson then it's gonna be a slaughter. Even on weight parity T Rex would take this due to height advantage and jaw power. |
![]() |
|
| Jaws | Nov 2 2015, 02:00 PM Post #4114 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
rex is 9.5 tons vs 8 ton spino |
![]() |
|
| maker | Nov 2 2015, 05:51 PM Post #4115 |
|
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^These are around the largest estimated specimens, we're using the average here. |
![]() |
|
| Wombatman | Nov 2 2015, 06:59 PM Post #4116 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
May I have understood that Spinosaurus got its big legs back? That could change things a lot |
![]() |
|
| bone crusher | Nov 2 2015, 07:49 PM Post #4117 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
6-7 tons for Spino from the most recent update. |
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 3 2015, 04:06 AM Post #4118 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Maybe it would be killed if Spinosaurus was tearing apart its chest, cause it had large claws. And as I said somewhere else, you should neither take for 100% sure the Ibrahim paper, just because it is in favor of your Tyrannosaurus, nor make your own assumptions like that Spinosaurus was less than 7 tons in weight or it couldn't run or it was a fish-eater. Edited by Thalassophoneus, Nov 3 2015, 04:08 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Ceratodromeus | Nov 3 2015, 04:29 AM Post #4119 |
|
Aspiring herpetologist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thing is, the 6-7 ton estimate published in Ibrahim et.al has more of a factual basis then this erroneous 10t figure you keep throwing around, which is only wishful thinking. Is there something specifically wrong with this theropod being a piscivore? It is clearly adapted to do so. And despite this, it was pretty obviously not restricted to only fish as its diet. |
![]() |
|
| Thalassophoneus | Nov 3 2015, 04:46 AM Post #4120 |
![]()
Pelagic Killer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Donald F. Glut in 1982 listed it as among the most massive theropods in their surveys, at 15 meters (49 ft) in length and upwards of 6 t (5.9 long tons; 6.6 short tons) in weight. Did Ibrahim actually measure its weight between 6 and 7 tons? Such weight sounds to small for a 15 m. long reptile anyway.
Many people use this as an excuse to say that Spinosaurus couldn't kill dinosaurs, off course having Tyrannosaurus in their mind. I don't know if you are aware of this but I'm annoyed by this Spinosaurus underrating that is taking place in the forum. I mean I accept that the Ibrahim paper might be valid and it is based on findings, but when you take it as sure like how Christians do with the Bible and you make your own assuptions like "Spinosaurus couldn't run" and "Spinosaurus was just a fish-eater" c'mon! It's clear that you (not specifically you) do this on purpose cause of the Spinosaurus VS Tyrannosaurus battle! |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Nov 3 2015, 05:53 AM Post #4121 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
From here.That's assuming Spinosaurus even used its tail as a weapon (I doubt this was the case, for any theropod for that matter). Well, that can only get the spinosaurid so far here. Since Spinosaurus doesn't exactly have the best jaws for a similar-sized opponent, I don't think this would be all that big of a problem for Tyrannosaurus, which could just outbite its opponent or, with its superior mobility on land, get to another region of Spinosaurus' body and attack. True, bite force by itself certainly doesn't tell you how potent a bite is. But in this certain case, it certainly will contribute to how the tyrannosaurid's bite will be far more damaging than that of its opponent. Edited by Ausar, Nov 3 2015, 05:57 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| stargatedalek | Nov 3 2015, 08:01 AM Post #4122 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I originally brought this up in reference to claims that the paper by Ibrahim was being used as a method to slander Spinosaurus and make Tyrannosaurus appear more powerful, illustrating points from modern animals with similar proportions to debunk the logic of this claim. I'm moving this here by request of Ausar (seemed a more than reasonable request to remain on topic). Ausar actually beat me to quoting myself, thanks for saving me that trouble. I highly doubt a theropod tail would have been an effective weapon, but lashing it about could have been a very good deterrent and could have kept Tyrannosaurus from risking an attempt to flank Spinosaurus. Indeed Tyrannosaurus bite is going to be far more damaging, I'm just not going to put a ton of faith in it. One way of looking at it is that Tyrannosaurus has more powerful finishing attacks, and would likely be trying to reach the vitals with the least resistance possible. Whereas Spinosaurus has more versatility of tactics and options available to it, and would likely rely on drawing out the fight as long as possible defensively until Tyrannosaurus either left it alone or made a mistake. I wouldn't put any particular degree of faith in either one winning, and the winner isn't getting away without serious injury. But if I absolutely had to guess, I'd say Tyrannosaurus has a slight advantage, but slight. This is all assuming that Spinosaurus was semi-aquatic and not that it was only rarely returning to land, in which case pitting them against each other just wouldn't be fair in any circumstance. It would be like pitting a sea turtle against a wolf, it wouldn't matter which was more powerful because it would be an unfair fight no matter where it toke place since both are affected so heavily by environmental bias.
I honestly don't know what to say other than "please stop". Spinosaurus wasn't some super predator time travelling Tyrannosaurus face eating daikaiju, nor was Tyrannosaurus some sort of giant pseudo-antagonist that killed everything with bacteria teeth and couldn't see movement. Dinosaurs weren't Pokémon or B movie monsters that existed just to fight one another. There is no shame in having a favorite dinosaur that wasn't a mega-carnivore or invulnerable horn-headed herbivore. You know what my favorite dinosaur is? Fratercula arctica, the clowns of the sea. I don't care that it isn't some super predator great white shark eating monster, because I love them as the real animals that they are, and not as some demonic super being. My favorite extinct animal is Tupandactylus imperator, a frugivore, but I'm not going to go around insisting that it must have used it's crest to swat Hatzegopteryx out of the air just because that sounds cooler. I actually like Spinosaurus a lot more since the new publications on it's proportions, before it was just another super predator, but now we can begin to understand it's ecological niche and the way it interacted with its world. Which for me is a lot more interesting, and a lot more important, than how big or powerful it may have been. I honestly would not mind if Spinosaurus lost to Tyrannosaurus, because being big or powerful isn't what makes an animal interesting or important. For anyone curious about my use of italics, I prefer to use italics only for full species names, and since we are all very clearly in understanding of which species of Tyrannosaurus, Spinosaurus and Hatzegopteryx was in reference I left it out. Edited by stargatedalek, Nov 3 2015, 08:03 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spinodontosaurus | Nov 3 2015, 08:49 AM Post #4123 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes. They created a full 3D model of the skeleton, which was the basis for their Centre of Mass estimate. Weirdly, they did not actually publish their '6-7 tonne' estimate in the paper itself, but have communicated to other palaeontologists since that that is what their model suggests for the largest specimen of Spinosaurus. Also note that their length estimate was 'over 15 meters'. What their estimate seems to be is a measurement in a straight line, not over the curves. For example, over curves Tyrannsaurus specimen 'Sue' measures 12.3 meters, but in a straight line it is only 11.7 meters. Likewise, over the curves Ibrahim et al's Spinosaurus is around 16 meters long. Note, however, that their 'largest specimen' is MSNM V4047, which cannot actually be referred to Spinosaurus. The Type specimen was maybe 9-11% smaller in linear terms, or 29-37% less massive. I consider the Ibrahim et al. estimate to be too low, due to the placement of some vertebrae making the tail too shallow, and the general under-fleshed nature of the model, but even then MSNM V4047 would not be 10 tonnes, never mind Spinosaurus itself. |
![]() |
|
| FishFossil | Nov 3 2015, 10:26 AM Post #4124 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@Dunk Your insistence that Spinosaurus was a 10 ton, bipedal, Dinosaur hunting superpredator, while ignoring all of the mountains of evidence against it, is actually more of a detriment to Spinosaurus, than a defense. Instead of holding to nonfactual personal biases, try to look for things Spinosaurus would actually be able to use to its advantage. Making things up is not helpful to the discussion whatsoever. Now, there are a lot of things Spinosaurus could have easily done in order to prolong the fight. In fact, I feel the lower, 5-7 ton weight estimates would support that. If it had anything, it was that bit more agile. Also, Spinosaurus would have been able to take advantage of its hand and claws, somethings T. rex does not have. If it was able to inflict wounds capable of causing significant blood loss, it could simply draw the fight out until the Tyrannosaur simply bled out. However, I see the chances of this being pretty slim. It is still a fairly close fight, as both are very capable. Even if Spinosaurus was largely piscivorous, it still had some massive fish to deal with. |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Nov 3 2015, 10:33 PM Post #4125 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, when push comes to shove (like in all the vs. scenarios on this forum), it's what can effectively drop another animal dead in its tracks or at least seriously injure it that counts here. Even if Spinosaurus did use its tail as a deterrent to other animals in agnostic situations, it won't get it so far against a similar-sized animal trying to kill it. Edited by Ausar, Nov 3 2015, 10:58 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 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