| 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 (459,376 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: | |
|---|---|
| KindRobot | May 22 2012, 02:41 AM Post #76 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I vote for T-rex due to the fact that there aren't a million assumptions about this creature,We know a reasonable amount about it (Unlike spinosaurus who's allegations regarding size,diet,ect.Are all blown out of proportion via post JP3 fanboyism) and the things we do know are enough proof that it would be victorious IMO |
![]() |
|
| TheROC | May 22 2012, 04:44 AM Post #77 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's more like the complete opposite of what you say--regarding the post-JP3 phenomena. It's been a constant recirculation of laymen produced myths and falsehoods regarding Spinosaurus that had no actual basis for claim, just a part of negative backlash. Claims of a weak skull (we now have reason to believe that it could handle a significant amount of stress), Claims of hollow teeth (this goes for any theropod and crocodilians too, new teeth need a space to grow in after all), a disdain for its piscivory included lifestyle (these fish had hard enamel coated armored scales or were 8 meter sawfish at least as heavy as ouranosaurus) and some strange belief that an 18 meter theropod weighed no more than a 12 meter one (which would literally mean that at equal lengths, the longer theropod would weigh less than 30% as much--which is obviously not correct, is it? As the weight estimates of an 11 meter Suchomimus and 11 meter Tarbosaurus would not show anywhere near such a difference--maybe more like 20% at best) |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jul 8 2012, 06:24 PM Post #78 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you sure about the 2,5t for the sawfish? 1,5t seem more likely. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jul 8 2012, 07:35 PM Post #79 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
2t seem to be evidenced for an 8m sawfish. Remember than a 6m GWS ocasinally weighs 3t. I don´t think that 2t or more are unlikely |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jul 8 2012, 07:54 PM Post #80 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But din't forget that the saw makes 1/4 of the body lengh of the fish, so it's around of the same size as the GWS. I don't believe a 6m GWS to weigh around of 6t. 2-2,5t are more likely. The sawfish is more slender so it would weigh around of 1t. We need a size scale, between Onchopristis and GWS. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jul 8 2012, 08:03 PM Post #81 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
the 2t are just scaled up from an extant sawfish. I think we can consider them valid, tough 2,5t is a bit too much. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jul 8 2012, 08:19 PM Post #82 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Still these animals seem very slender to me. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jul 8 2012, 08:27 PM Post #83 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Maybe they are only portrayed as very slender. The modern sawfish definitely isn´t as slender as the depiction of Onchopristis in Planet Dinosaur. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jul 8 2012, 08:30 PM Post #84 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Does anybody have any info about Onchopristis? Exept for PD wikis or something like that, I can't find much. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jul 8 2012, 08:34 PM Post #85 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I can´t find much either, only one abstract and a few results on google scholar that weren´t accessinle at all. |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jul 8 2012, 10:46 PM Post #86 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Seems like this animal is very unknown. At least it was in a documentation, so it should be much more popular than many of it's realtives. |
![]() |
|
| cougarlionlover45 | Jul 8 2012, 11:24 PM Post #87 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tyrannosaurus would win because the bite force the teeth and the Spino's height size isn't really a advantage cause rex could go up and bottom of his to it's throat and bite it so T-Rex |
![]() |
|
| Jinfengopteryx | Jul 8 2012, 11:50 PM Post #88 |
![]()
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spino had a bite force of more than 2t, this should be enough for the victory. And Size is an advantage, because this makes the Spino stronger. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Jul 9 2012, 01:32 AM Post #89 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There was a size comparison earlier on this tread. It made pretty obvious which one wins. |
![]() |
|
| Grey | Jul 9 2012, 02:22 AM Post #90 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Frankly poor description. How a 12 m predator could kill a 18 m one almost as dangerously armed at parity ? |
![]() |
|
| 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 |
2:24 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)



![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)





2:24 AM Jul 14