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 (459,301 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:
MysteryMeat
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Dec 26 2012, 11:22 PM
Clearly, Mortimer is known for greatly over exagerated estimates. Totally debunked, isn´t it? Only in your mind, in reality 16-18m remains a totally valid figure.

There is another way, and that is giving it the head-body proportions of Baryonyx or Suchomimus; the resulting animal would be 16,2m as a MINIMUM figure

I don't know about Suchomimus proportions.
Baryonyx though, has proximal caudals are much longer, than posterior dorsal, which is not the case in Spinosaurus holotype.
Baryonyx likely had a proportionally longer tail.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MysteryMeat
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lord of the Allosaurs
Dec 27 2012, 10:54 AM
Secondly, that sounds more accurate for the holotype juvenile than for a healthy adult.
Build me a 14.5 Spinosaurus using published images of the holotype.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
MysteryMeat
Dec 27 2012, 05:04 PM
Lord of the Allosaurs
Dec 27 2012, 10:54 AM
Secondly, that sounds more accurate for the holotype juvenile than for a healthy adult.
Build me a 14.5 Spinosaurus using published images of the holotype.

He doesn't need to, a skeletal already exists:

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
bone crusher
Dec 27 2012, 04:19 PM
Fragillimus335
Dec 27 2012, 10:13 AM
Here I go. Pining down the likely weight of a fully grown Spinosaurus shouldn't be to hard based on it's relatives. First, I will cover the possible lengths of Spinosaurus, ranging from 14.5 meters to 18 meters.

Using Suchomimus with a slightly liberal weight of ~4.2 tons for an 11 meter Suchomimus, due to Spinossurus being slightly more robust. Using isometric scaling 14.5/11=1.32 1.32^3=2.3 2.3*4.2=9.66 tons.

Using an 18 meter Spinosaurus the equation becomes 18/11=1.63 1.63^3=4.38 4.38*4.2=18.4 tons.

Using the same parameters with baryonyx I arrive at nearly the exact same numbers... Judging by these basic estimations, I find the weight range of Spinosaurus to be roughly 10-18 tons. IMHO I find values in the 15-17 range most likely.

These values indicate Spinosaurus's weight was comfortably twice as high as the next largest well known theropod, Tyrannosaurus, at 5.5-9.5 tons.
There's only one thing though, that you're not including the largest T Rex specimen UCMP137538. If we're all speculating on a 17-18m spino then why not speculating on that infamous Rex giant also? After all they are both fragmentary and theoretically possible. I feel like for the sake of this fight scenario we should at least pit those two together while leaving their actual size debate for another thread, or post pone it until more bones are found.

A 16.5 ton UCMP 137538 vs a 18 ton Spino should be the most epic battle in the history of theropod.
Agreed, it's not exactly fair to use the largest fictional size vs the largest known sizes there is actually information on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
bone crusher
Dec 27 2012, 04:19 PM
Fragillimus335
Dec 27 2012, 10:13 AM
Here I go. Pining down the likely weight of a fully grown Spinosaurus shouldn't be to hard based on it's relatives. First, I will cover the possible lengths of Spinosaurus, ranging from 14.5 meters to 18 meters.

Using Suchomimus with a slightly liberal weight of ~4.2 tons for an 11 meter Suchomimus, due to Spinossurus being slightly more robust. Using isometric scaling 14.5/11=1.32 1.32^3=2.3 2.3*4.2=9.66 tons.

Using an 18 meter Spinosaurus the equation becomes 18/11=1.63 1.63^3=4.38 4.38*4.2=18.4 tons.

Using the same parameters with baryonyx I arrive at nearly the exact same numbers... Judging by these basic estimations, I find the weight range of Spinosaurus to be roughly 10-18 tons. IMHO I find values in the 15-17 range most likely.

These values indicate Spinosaurus's weight was comfortably twice as high as the next largest well known theropod, Tyrannosaurus, at 5.5-9.5 tons.
There's only one thing though, that you're not including the largest T Rex specimen UCMP137538. If we're all speculating on a 17-18m spino then why not speculating on that infamous Rex giant also? After all they are both fragmentary and theoretically possible. I feel like for the sake of this fight scenario we should at least pit those two together while leaving their actual size debate for another thread, or post pone it until more bones are found.

A 16.5 ton UCMP 137538 vs a 18 ton Spino should be the most epic battle in the history of theropod.
16-18m spinosaurus isn't just a theoretically possible max figure, it is a published estimate for a complete rostrum, not an extrapolation for a single phalanx. it is actually clear which one has more cretentials. not tat I had any problems wi figures calcu
ated by amateurs, I'm one of these myself, but I have problems with extrapolating astronomical figures for remains that cannot even be diagnosed with any certainity and en comparing them in tzgheir credentials to published estimates that base on lated animals proportions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Dec 27 2012, 07:15 PM
bone crusher
Dec 27 2012, 04:19 PM
Fragillimus335
Dec 27 2012, 10:13 AM
Here I go. Pining down the likely weight of a fully grown Spinosaurus shouldn't be to hard based on it's relatives. First, I will cover the possible lengths of Spinosaurus, ranging from 14.5 meters to 18 meters.

Using Suchomimus with a slightly liberal weight of ~4.2 tons for an 11 meter Suchomimus, due to Spinossurus being slightly more robust. Using isometric scaling 14.5/11=1.32 1.32^3=2.3 2.3*4.2=9.66 tons.

Using an 18 meter Spinosaurus the equation becomes 18/11=1.63 1.63^3=4.38 4.38*4.2=18.4 tons.

Using the same parameters with baryonyx I arrive at nearly the exact same numbers... Judging by these basic estimations, I find the weight range of Spinosaurus to be roughly 10-18 tons. IMHO I find values in the 15-17 range most likely.

These values indicate Spinosaurus's weight was comfortably twice as high as the next largest well known theropod, Tyrannosaurus, at 5.5-9.5 tons.
There's only one thing though, that you're not including the largest T Rex specimen UCMP137538. If we're all speculating on a 17-18m spino then why not speculating on that infamous Rex giant also? After all they are both fragmentary and theoretically possible. I feel like for the sake of this fight scenario we should at least pit those two together while leaving their actual size debate for another thread, or post pone it until more bones are found.

A 16.5 ton UCMP 137538 vs a 18 ton Spino should be the most epic battle in the history of theropod.
Agreed, it's not exactly fair to use the largest fictional size vs the largest known sizes there is actually information on.
but that's exacty what he is doing!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Dec 27 2012, 07:15 PM
bone crusher
Dec 27 2012, 04:19 PM
Fragillimus335
Dec 27 2012, 10:13 AM
Here I go. Pining down the likely weight of a fully grown Spinosaurus shouldn't be to hard based on it's relatives. First, I will cover the possible lengths of Spinosaurus, ranging from 14.5 meters to 18 meters.

Using Suchomimus with a slightly liberal weight of ~4.2 tons for an 11 meter Suchomimus, due to Spinossurus being slightly more robust. Using isometric scaling 14.5/11=1.32 1.32^3=2.3 2.3*4.2=9.66 tons.

Using an 18 meter Spinosaurus the equation becomes 18/11=1.63 1.63^3=4.38 4.38*4.2=18.4 tons.

Using the same parameters with baryonyx I arrive at nearly the exact same numbers... Judging by these basic estimations, I find the weight range of Spinosaurus to be roughly 10-18 tons. IMHO I find values in the 15-17 range most likely.

These values indicate Spinosaurus's weight was comfortably twice as high as the next largest well known theropod, Tyrannosaurus, at 5.5-9.5 tons.
There's only one thing though, that you're not including the largest T Rex specimen UCMP137538. If we're all speculating on a 17-18m spino then why not speculating on that infamous Rex giant also? After all they are both fragmentary and theoretically possible. I feel like for the sake of this fight scenario we should at least pit those two together while leaving their actual size debate for another thread, or post pone it until more bones are found.

A 16.5 ton UCMP 137538 vs a 18 ton Spino should be the most epic battle in the history of theropod.
Agreed, it's not exactly fair to use the largest fictional size vs the largest known sizes there is actually information on.
You do realize that he is using a hypothetical freak Tyrannosaurus vs the only adult Spinosaurus ever found, right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
theropod
Dec 27 2012, 07:18 PM
bone crusher
Dec 27 2012, 04:19 PM
Fragillimus335
Dec 27 2012, 10:13 AM
Here I go. Pining down the likely weight of a fully grown Spinosaurus shouldn't be to hard based on it's relatives. First, I will cover the possible lengths of Spinosaurus, ranging from 14.5 meters to 18 meters.

Using Suchomimus with a slightly liberal weight of ~4.2 tons for an 11 meter Suchomimus, due to Spinossurus being slightly more robust. Using isometric scaling 14.5/11=1.32 1.32^3=2.3 2.3*4.2=9.66 tons.

Using an 18 meter Spinosaurus the equation becomes 18/11=1.63 1.63^3=4.38 4.38*4.2=18.4 tons.

Using the same parameters with baryonyx I arrive at nearly the exact same numbers... Judging by these basic estimations, I find the weight range of Spinosaurus to be roughly 10-18 tons. IMHO I find values in the 15-17 range most likely.

These values indicate Spinosaurus's weight was comfortably twice as high as the next largest well known theropod, Tyrannosaurus, at 5.5-9.5 tons.
There's only one thing though, that you're not including the largest T Rex specimen UCMP137538. If we're all speculating on a 17-18m spino then why not speculating on that infamous Rex giant also? After all they are both fragmentary and theoretically possible. I feel like for the sake of this fight scenario we should at least pit those two together while leaving their actual size debate for another thread, or post pone it until more bones are found.

A 16.5 ton UCMP 137538 vs a 18 ton Spino should be the most epic battle in the history of theropod.
16-18m spinosaurus isn't just a theoretically possible max figure, it is a published estimate for a complete rostrum, not an extrapolation for a single phalanx. it is actually clear which one has more cretentials. not tat I had any problems wi figures calcu
ated by amateurs, I'm one of these myself, but I have problems with extrapolating astronomical figures for remains that cannot even be diagnosed with any certainity and en comparing them in tzgheir credentials to published estimates that base on lated animals proportions.
Just because something was published doesn't mean the margin of error is any less than a figure that could be extrapolated using the actual skeleton that's more than 70% complete. Brachiossaurus was used to be 80 tons and now it's only a mere 22 tons. My point being your 18m Spino's credence is nothing more than an educated guess and it should not be treated in the same scientific status as say Sue's size. So let's play fair.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
maybe not, but it may jsut as well be 18m as 14m. what makes you think 14m has better credentials? The size is uncertain, but since when does that tell us we have to use lower figures, especially regaridng we are using sue, the largest of 31 T. rex specimens, agaisnt the only evidentially adult spinosaurus that has by one of only two published size estimates been said to eb 16-18m? As i wrote, there are clear indications for the Dal Sasso figure to be correct.

And was an 80t Brachiosaurus ever published? even more importantly, can an 80t totally overestimated Brachiosaurus seriously be compared to a size estimate for spinosaurus that bases on its relatives and that was published in 2005?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Lord of the Allosaurs
Dec 27 2012, 10:54 AM
LophoFan14
Dec 27 2012, 03:28 AM
Okay yea the fanboy war is back. Yet, I side with t-rex. Spino was only 14,5 meters in length.
Firstly, there is no such thing as a "t-rex".
Secondly, that sounds more accurate for the holotype juvenile than for a healthy adult.

I find it interesting that a number of people claim Cau's speculation as fact and refuse to accept studies that produce results in the range of 16-18 m, simply because they're a few years older.
Yet the most recent studies on Tyrannosaurus' bite suggest less than three tons, and I don't see anyone claiming they are correct because they are newer.
totally agreed!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SpinoInWonderland
The madness has come back...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Dec 27 2012, 09:14 PM
can an 80t totally overestimated Brachiosaurus seriously be compared to a size estimate for spinosaurus that bases on its relatives and that was published in 2005?
The obvious answer would be no
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gecko
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Lord of the Allosaurs
Dec 27 2012, 10:54 AM
Firstly, there is no such thing as a "t-rex".
Secondly, that sounds more accurate for the holotype juvenile than for a healthy adult.

I find it interesting that a number of people claim Cau's speculation as fact and refuse to accept studies that produce results in the range of 16-18 m, simply because they're a few years older.
Yet the most recent studies on Tyrannosaurus' bite suggest less than three tons, and I don't see anyone claiming they are correct because they are newer.
I find it funny you think the 14.5 meters sounds more accurate for the holotype. Did I miss something? Was the holotypes ashes put back together and measured? It's really hard to say 14 meters is more accurate when the remains are destroyed and the only thing left of it is a photograph and a few diagrams, and then on top of that the holotype wasn't very complete itself. So yeah it's really hard (nearly impossible) to say that 14.5 m is more accurate for the holotype.


Here let me show you something.

Suchomimus has a TL of 11 m and a SL of 1.19 m(I don't know what part of the skull this came from so the skull could be even longer, I have heard some websites claim 1.4 m but I won't go into that...). Spinosaurus has a 1.75 m skull
11/1.19=9.24369748
9.24369748*1.75=16.1764706 meters
So basing on Suchomimus Spinosaurus is 16.2 m using the bigger Spinosaurus specimen...

Baryonyx has had a few different TL estimates ranging from as low as 8 m to as high as 10 m. (The difference between these estimates is the tail length, short tail vs long tail) so I'll use 9 m as it's in the middle of the estimates. Baryonyx's skull is listed at .915 m for the partial skull, the complete skull is around 1.05 m.

9/1.05=8.57142857
8.57142857*1.75=15 meters
So basing on Baryonyx Spinosaurus is 15 m

An 18 m Spinosaurus is ridiculous, 17 m is on the liberal side, 16-15 m as a maximum sounds good, 14 is lower average, 13-12 m is conservative.

By the way MSNM V4047 is/would be the "Sue" of Spinosaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think with 14-16m I can agree, but I tend to 16m, because I don't think Spinosaurus with it's already more robust and massive head would have a relatively longer skull than Suchomimus, but 14-15m are too possible.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Gecko
Dec 28 2012, 03:11 AM
Lord of the Allosaurs
Dec 27 2012, 10:54 AM
Firstly, there is no such thing as a "t-rex".
Secondly, that sounds more accurate for the holotype juvenile than for a healthy adult.

I find it interesting that a number of people claim Cau's speculation as fact and refuse to accept studies that produce results in the range of 16-18 m, simply because they're a few years older.
Yet the most recent studies on Tyrannosaurus' bite suggest less than three tons, and I don't see anyone claiming they are correct because they are newer.
I find it funny you think the 14.5 meters sounds more accurate for the holotype. Did I miss something? Was the holotypes ashes put back together and measured? It's really hard to say 14 meters is more accurate when the remains are destroyed and the only thing left of it is a photograph and a few diagrams, and then on top of that the holotype wasn't very complete itself. So yeah it's really hard (nearly impossible) to say that 14.5 m is more accurate for the holotype.


Here let me show you something.

Suchomimus has a TL of 11 m and a SL of 1.19 m(I don't know what part of the skull this came from so the skull could be even longer, I have heard some websites claim 1.4 m but I won't go into that...). Spinosaurus has a 1.75 m skull
11/1.19=9.24369748
9.24369748*1.75=16.1764706 meters
So basing on Suchomimus Spinosaurus is 16.2 m using the bigger Spinosaurus specimen...

Baryonyx has had a few different TL estimates ranging from as low as 8 m to as high as 10 m. (The difference between these estimates is the tail length, short tail vs long tail) so I'll use 9 m as it's in the middle of the estimates. Baryonyx's skull is listed at .915 m for the partial skull, the complete skull is around 1.05 m.

9/1.05=8.57142857
8.57142857*1.75=15 meters
So basing on Baryonyx Spinosaurus is 15 m

An 18 m Spinosaurus is ridiculous, 17 m is on the liberal side, 16-15 m as a maximum sounds good, 14 is lower average, 13-12 m is conservative.

By the way MSNM V4047 is/would be the "Sue" of Spinosaurus.
Quote:
 
I don't know what part of the skull this came from so the skull could be even longer

or shorter, don´t forget that possibility!

Quote:
 
So basing on Suchomimus Spinosaurus is 16.2 m using the bigger Spinosaurus specimen...

does anyone notice I made the exact same calculation, and it perfectly supports the Dal Sasso estimate?

Quote:
 
Baryonyx has had a few different TL estimates ranging from as low as 8 m to as high as 10 m. (The difference between these estimates is the tail length, short tail vs long tail) so I'll use 9 m as it's in the middle of the estimates. Baryonyx's skull is listed at .915 m for the partial skull, the complete skull is around 1.05 m.
Where does that figure come from? I find it highly strange that there where figures for incomplete skulls repeated in scientific literature as total skull lenght.

Basing on Baryonyx as cited in papers and the theropod database Spinosaurus based on Dal Sassos skull size estimate was ~17,5m.

Quote:
 
By the way MSNM V4047 is/would be the "Sue" of Spinosaurus.

no, do you know how few spinosaurus specimens we have?

12m is very conservative and was basically only meant to show the uncertainity in these estimates
14-15m is pretty conservative and assuming a proportionally larger skull (or downsizing the skull which seems pretty unreasonable when based on other Spinosaurs)
16-18m is more or less conservative, normal or liberal

all in all 17m is still a reasonable figure if you ask me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MysteryMeat
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
brolyeuphyfusion
Dec 27 2012, 05:29 PM
He doesn't need to, a skeletal already exists
To clarify, I meant build me the holotype at 14.5 meters with the published drawings.
What you posted is MSNM V4047 sized Spino.

12m is utterly impossible unless SAM 124 really is an adult.
IMO it is less accurate to base the size estimate on Baryonyx. Baryonyx seems to have a very long tail, the anterior tail verts are much longer than dorsals.

Anyone has exact measurements of Suchomimus vertebra?
Edited by MysteryMeat, Dec 28 2012, 04:35 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.