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
Tyrannosaurus rex v Ankylosaurus magniventris
Topic Started: Jan 28 2012, 10:08 PM (48,656 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

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. 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

Ankylosaurus magniventris
Ankylosaurus is a genus of ankylosaurid dinosaur, containing one species, A. magniventris. Fossils of Ankylosaurus are found in geologic formations dating to the very end of the Cretaceous Period (about 66.5–65.5 Ma ago) in western North America. Although a complete skeleton has not been discovered and several other dinosaurs are represented by more extensive fossil material, Ankylosaurus is often considered the archetypal armored dinosaur. Other ankylosaurids shared its well-known features—the heavily-armored body and massive bony tail club—but Ankylosaurus was the largest known member of the family. In comparison with modern land animals the adult Ankylosaurus was very large. Some scientists have estimated a length of 9 meters (30 ft). Another reconstruction suggests a significantly smaller size, at 6.25 m (20.5 ft) long, up to 1.5 m (5 ft) wide and about 1.7 m (5.5 ft) high at the hip. Ankylosaurus may have weighed over 6,000 kilograms (13,000 lb), making it one of the heaviest armored dinosaurs yet discovered. The body shape was low-slung and quite wide. It was quadrupedal, with the hind limbs longer than the forelimbs. Although its feet are still unknown, comparisons with other ankylosaurids suggest Ankylosaurus probably had five toes on each foot. The skull was low and triangular in shape, wider than it was long. The largest known skull measures 64.5 centimeters (25 in) long and 74.5 cm (29 in) wide.

Posted Image

______________________________________________________________________________

Prehistoric Cat
 
Tyrannosaurus VS Ankylosaurus
Edited by Taipan, May 25 2018, 11:58 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Even if the tail is not moving, it will definitely be used as a weapon if necessary, in which case you'll need some luck if you want to try ripping it off.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dilophosaurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 05:13 AM
Dilophosaurus
Oct 20 2014, 04:26 AM
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 04:01 AM
rex would have a broken jaw before it could 'bite off' anky's tail.. that's at the opposite end of the herbivore wants to be.us Tyrannosaurus is going to attack the head - seeing how low ankylosaurus is to the ground- it's not going to bother going for the legs.
hypothetically, t.rex could bite the the base of tail and cush vertebrate, rendering the club useless, but it's certainly not biting it off. even then, the tyrannosaur would have to bite through thick armor, probably loosing a tooth or two in the process
Posted Image
Morphology of the tail.

As you can see, the vertebrae in the tail is not particularly thick. At least, we know tyrannosaurus has broken thicker bones than this just by biting it before. While the tail was slowed down just before or after a swing, or when it's winding up for another swing, tyrannosaurus could have bit the area with the fused vertebrate and broke or fractured it, rendering it either severed or useless. Not to mention that the tail could do no damage while it was in tyrannosaurus's mouth.

As for losing teeth, well, theropods often did lose them while attack or feeding. Good thing they grow back, eh?

Unless tyrannosaurus bit the knob of the tail while it was at full swing, I think biting the tail would have worked quite well for it.
i did not speak on how thick the vertebrate were, rather the armor of anky is thick.

i'm aware predators loose teeth when killing/feeding, i'm just covering all my bases here.

however, i don't know how you think tyrannosaurus is going to 'catch' the tail club of ankylosaurus without recieving a broken jaw
As far as we know, the tail was not particularly well armored, at least not compared to its body or head.

Additionally, it would have been easy for tyrannosaurus to bite the ankylosaurus's tail while it reached the extent of its swing and had slowed down, or when it was winding back up for another swing, and once it was in the tyrannosaurus's jaws it would have been impossible to use since it wouldn't have been able to gain momentum, since, well, it was in his jaws.

Edited by Dilophosaurus, Oct 20 2014, 05:31 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
proof for that? 'not well armored' is a subjective phrase.

anyway, like i stated above, tyrannosaurus is going to steer clear of the tail. the main target is going to be the head, and by no means is T.rex going to bite off ankys tail. in addition, i don't see the tyrannosaur biting through the armor at the base of the tail(which is wide and thick), let alone crush the vertebrate
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
It's absolutely not a wise move to try attacking the main weapon when you can just bite something like the head, which is undoubtedly a lot safer.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dilophosaurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 05:35 AM
proof for that? 'not well armored' is a subjective phrase.

anyway, like i stated above, tyrannosaurus is going to steer clear of the tail. the main target is going to be the head, and by no means is T.rex going to bite off ankys tail. in addition, i don't see the tyrannosaur biting through the armor at the base of the tail(which is wide and thick), let alone crush the vertebrate
If tyrannosaurus could target the head, it would. This was just a scenario of what might happen if it couldn't target the head.

Additionally, you are the only one who said anything about biting the base of the tail.
Edited by Dilophosaurus, Oct 20 2014, 05:43 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dilophosaurus
Oct 20 2014, 05:39 AM
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 05:35 AM
proof for that? 'not well armored' is a subjective phrase.

anyway, like i stated above, tyrannosaurus is going to steer clear of the tail. the main target is going to be the head, and by no means is T.rex going to bite off ankys tail. in addition, i don't see the tyrannosaur biting through the armor at the base of the tail(which is wide and thick), let alone crush the vertebrate
If tyrannosaurus could target the head, it would. This was just a scenario of what might happen if it couldn't target the head.

Dilophosaurus
 
Ankylosaurus's only weapon is its tail. A tail that could break bones, yes, but I do not think it would have been enough. Even assuming ankylosaurus was agile enough to keep its tail at a good angle against tyrannosaurus, the tyrannosaurus could have just bit the tail off, which was certainly possible and would have deprived ankylosaurus of its only weapon. And if it couldn't turn fast enough, the tyrannosaurus could simply crush its skull or neck.

Additionally, you are the only one who said anything about biting the base of the tail.
only to counter your claim Tyrannosaurus is going to catch the tail club in its jaws, and that it was going to bite the tail off. read my post carefully, i said hypothetically.
like i said in previous posts, the only reasonable target is the head.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dilophosaurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 05:46 AM
only to counter your claim Tyrannosaurus is going to catch the tail club in its jaws, and that it was going to bite the tail off. read my post carefully, i said hypothetically.
like i said in previous posts, the only reasonable target is the head.
I never said catch. That implies what he is biting would be moving.

Also, even though the main target would be the head, it doesn't mean it's the only place tyrannosaurus would attack. There's nothing unreasonable about trying to neutralize your opponent's weapon. A protoceratops was recorded in the fossil record biting a velociraptor's hand, for example.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
that protoceratops also had the velociraptors' sickleclaw imbedded in its chest.

there's nothing wrong with dispatching your opponents weapons, no. but, there's no way i see rex getting to ankys tail without getting clobbered, nor have i seen anything to suggest it would do so.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dilophosaurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 06:02 AM
there's no way i see rex getting to ankys tail without getting clobbered
Do you have any reason to believe that tyrannosaurus was incapable of biting an ankylosaurus's tail? Provided it was not being swung at force towards the tyrannosaurus, there would be little physical difficulty in doing so.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
most predators tend to stay away from their prey's defensive weaponry. when lion prey on lone cape buffalo for example, they do so with their numbers. one 'distracts' the bufallo, others leap onto it and bite/scratch at the hide. predators don't want to take the risk of getting gored by dangerous prey. i see no reason for tyrannosaurus to try to attack something that's going to do massive cranial damage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Dilophosaurus
Oct 20 2014, 05:53 AM
There's nothing unreasonable about trying to neutralize your opponent's weapon
So it's not unreasonable because it has been done? Ah, sure.

A predator will do its best to avoid being hurt, and in this case, that would be avoiding the tail most of the time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dilophosaurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 06:12 AM
most predators tend to stay away from their prey's defensive weaponry. when lion prey on lone cape buffalo for example, they do so with their numbers. one 'distracts' the bufallo, others leap onto it and bite/scratch at the hide. predators don't want to take the risk of getting gored by dangerous prey. i see no reason for tyrannosaurus to try to attack something that's going to do massive cranial damage.
Indeed, if tyrannosaurus had the option to avoid the tail, it would do so, as I have said before. However, that does not mean it wouldn't attack the tail if it couldn't avoid it, and certainly doesn't mean it was unable. There are fossils indicating that tyrannosaurus would bite the crest and horns of triceratops, as well, meaning tyrannosaurus wasn't above getting up close and dirty with dangerous anatomy.

Please note, I'm not arguing that the tyrannosaurus would want to, I'm just saying it could if it had to.
Edited by Dilophosaurus, Oct 20 2014, 06:18 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dilophosaurus
Oct 20 2014, 06:17 AM
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 06:12 AM
most predators tend to stay away from their prey's defensive weaponry. when lion prey on lone cape buffalo for example, they do so with their numbers. one 'distracts' the bufallo, others leap onto it and bite/scratch at the hide. predators don't want to take the risk of getting gored by dangerous prey. i see no reason for tyrannosaurus to try to attack something that's going to do massive cranial damage.
Indeed, if tyrannosaurus had the option to avoid the tail, it would do so, as I have said before. However, that does not mean it wouldn't attack the tail if it couldn't avoid it, and certainly doesn't mean it was unable. There are fossils indicating that tyrannosaurus would bite the crest and horns of triceratops, as well, meaning tyrannosaurus wasn't above getting up close and dirty with dangerous anatomy.

Please note, I'm not arguing that the tyrannosaurus would want to, I'm just saying it could if it had to.
anky and trike are anatomically different. yes, T.rex seemed to have taken trike occasionally by dispatching the horns..

but, these are completely different animals. Rex likely tackled them in a much different ways. for example, lions hunt zebra in a different way then they would go after cape buffalo. perhaps not the best example, but it was merely to show hunting habits differ depending on the prey species.
Edited by Ceratodromeus, Oct 20 2014, 06:28 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dilophosaurus
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 06:25 AM
Dilophosaurus
Oct 20 2014, 06:17 AM
Carnosaur18
Oct 20 2014, 06:12 AM
most predators tend to stay away from their prey's defensive weaponry. when lion prey on lone cape buffalo for example, they do so with their numbers. one 'distracts' the bufallo, others leap onto it and bite/scratch at the hide. predators don't want to take the risk of getting gored by dangerous prey. i see no reason for tyrannosaurus to try to attack something that's going to do massive cranial damage.
Indeed, if tyrannosaurus had the option to avoid the tail, it would do so, as I have said before. However, that does not mean it wouldn't attack the tail if it couldn't avoid it, and certainly doesn't mean it was unable. There are fossils indicating that tyrannosaurus would bite the crest and horns of triceratops, as well, meaning tyrannosaurus wasn't above getting up close and dirty with dangerous anatomy.

Please note, I'm not arguing that the tyrannosaurus would want to, I'm just saying it could if it had to.
anky and trike are anatomically different. yes, T.rex seemed to have taken trike occasionally by dispatching the horns..

but, these are completely different animals. Rex likely tackled them in a much different ways. for example, lions hunt zebra in a different way then they would go after cape buffalo. perhaps not the best example, but it was merely to show hunting habits differ depending on the prey species.
I am not arguing that, I am just saying that tyrannosaurus could and would attack the tail if it couldn't reach the ankylosaurus's vulnerable bits. Ignoring the tail would have been more dangerous than dispatching it if it couldn't outmaneuver ankylosaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
you appear to be missing the point.

predators are aware of potential prey's defensive weaponry. they employ tactics to get around them... be it ambush or whatever. tyrannosaurus is no exception to this, and attacking the tail would be extremely foolish. even if it couldn't get at the head or legs, it's better off not attacking the tail
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.