| 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: |
| Tyrannosaurus rex v Ankylosaurus magniventris | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 28 2012, 10:08 PM (48,650 Views) | |
| Taipan | Jan 28 2012, 10:08 PM Post #1 |
![]()
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. ![]() 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. ![]() ______________________________________________________________________________
Edited by Taipan, May 25 2018, 11:58 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Fist of the North Shrimp | Oct 18 2015, 03:37 PM Post #256 |
|
vá á orminum
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think there is ample photographic evidence of this conflict and we can determine the victor: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q6EoRBvdVPQ |
![]() |
|
| Jaws | Oct 18 2015, 03:51 PM Post #257 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I will edit my post |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Oct 18 2015, 10:46 PM Post #258 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Would you please stop including this freaking toebone in your T. rex specimens? |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Oct 19 2015, 01:47 AM Post #259 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not to mention the toebone that’s probably just about sue-sized. ![]() Credit dor the comparison goes to Spinodontosaurus. Outright excluding it may be too much too ask considering he loves this specimen so much, but writing its catalogue abbreviation correctly would be a start. It’s the University of California, not Salifornia… |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Oct 23 2015, 08:06 PM Post #260 |
|
Deleted User
|
I looked it up its about 5 tons vs 4 tons |
|
|
| Spinodontosaurus | Oct 23 2015, 08:57 PM Post #261 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nothing bar the very smallest of adult Tyrannosaurus specimens would weigh that little. The largest known specimen , nicknamed 'Sue', has been volumetrically estimated at 8.2, 8.4 and 9.5 tonnes within the last few years by Asier Larramendi, Scott Hartman and Hutchinson et al., 2011, respectively. We can use a sample of 20 specimens (listed in the table at the end of this post) known from femur lengths to estimate the size range of Tyrannosaurus as a whole. Of those 20 specimens only 4 of them can be estimated to weigh 5 tonnes or less using Scott Hartman's weight estimate, with the smallest specimen being ~4.1 tonnes. The mean and median femur lengths both lead to an estimate of ~6.5 tonnes for an 'average' specimen. Factoring in a further 6 specimens known only from skull remains (or where we don't know their femur length) may raise this average higher due to all of them seemingly being quite large specimens. In the post I linked above, I attempted to estimate this affect and tentatively estimated the median at ~7.5 tonnes when factoring in the 6 skull-only specimens. As for Ankylosaurus, just a couple of posts up from your own Blaze provides estimates for three different specimens of Ankylosaurus; 3.2, 4.2 and 5 tonnes, for a mean of ~4.1 tonnes. So using the smallest specimens, Tyrannosaurus was ~28% larger. Using average specimens, Tyrannosaurus was 59-83% larger. Using largest known specimens, Tyrannosaurus was ~68% larger. The Tyrannosaurus estimates are perhaps a bit more representative due to being based on a larger sample size; 20-26 specimens compared to just 3 for Ankylosaurus. |
![]() |
|
| Jaws | Oct 24 2015, 06:31 AM Post #262 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
nope it is 9.5 tons vs 2-4 tons all rex needs to do is bite the head |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Oct 24 2015, 07:01 AM Post #263 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
When you take such a gigantic T. rex you need to take a 6-7t Ankylosaurus. I think it's pretty obvious that Ankylosaurus would win at least often enough to make the risk of engaging it too big for T. rex, otherwise it would have been just a slowly walking meal. |
![]() |
|
| DarkGricer | Oct 24 2015, 08:45 AM Post #264 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
*Says that Ankylosaurus is 3 tons* *Is corrected by Blaze, who calculates it at 3.2-5 tonnes* *Admits to being corrected* *Goes back to saying Ankylosaurus is 2-4 tonnes 5 days later* It seems to me as if you are deliberately downplaying Ankylosaurus, especially seeing as you're also using a fat, 9.5 ton T.rex. |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Oct 24 2015, 08:52 AM Post #265 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A 9.5t Sue wouldn't be fat, it would just look like it's on steroids. |
![]() |
|
| The supersaurus | Oct 24 2015, 09:36 AM Post #266 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Even though i favor T rex in this fight, Ankylosaurus still has a high chance, it'll be like hard brick wall smashing your leg if that club tail smashed T rex's leg |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Oct 27 2015, 09:29 PM Post #267 |
|
Deleted User
|
Its head was armored and low to the ground if trex got that close ankylosaurus could smash its legs faster than trex could move its haed.
|
|
|
| Jaws | Oct 28 2015, 05:17 AM Post #268 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
its tail is actually pretty short and it can't send its tail flying over its head and the head armor is not protecting it from 46000 newtons plus the fact that rex is 2x bigger source for 46000 N: Jump to Navigation TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2015 AS OF 3:36 PM EDT SUBSCRIBE US EDITION| Make IBT your homepage HomePoliticsEconomyMarkets / FinanceCompaniesTechnologyMedia & CultureSportsVideo POLITICSSOCIETY T. Rex Bite Force Stronger Than Previously Calculated By Amir Khan on February 29 2012 5:19 PM EST Share on facebook 12 Share on twitterShare on linkedinShare on google_plusone_shareMore Sharing Services Tyrannosaurus rex may have been able to bite down with four times more force than previous estimates - making the king of dinosaurs even deadlier. Reuters The already fearsome Tyrannosaurus rex dinosaur may have been even deadlier than previously thought. The extinct T. rex bit 10 times harder than a modern alligator and four times harder than previously calculated, according to a computer model of the dinosaur generated by researchers from the University of Liverpool. ADVERTISING This newfound force means the T. rex had the strongest bite of any land animal ever. Getting bitten by one would have felt like being sat on by an elephant, the authors wrote. I have no idea what the bite would do to an animal beyond hurt a lot, Karl Bates, co-author of the study and post-doctoral researcher in biomechanics at the University of Liverpool, told Discovery News. The force is obviously much higher than alligators and lions and you wouldn't want to be bitten by either of those. The strength of the bite didn't start out that strong though. Juvenile T. rexes probably had a much weaker bite, making it likely that the dinosaur's diet changed over time, the authors wrote. Younger members of the species would eat smaller prey until their bite force became strong enough to puncture the skin of other dinosaurs. I think everyone expected T. rex to have a strong bite force, but it's even stronger than we expected, Bill Sellers, a computational zoologist at the University of Manchester who was not involved in the study, told BBC. And it gets stronger as it gets bigger, which is surprising. Bite force is measured in Newtons, a unit of measurement named after physicist Sir Issac Newton, famous for formulating the theory of gravity. A Newton is defined as the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram one meter per second squared. A T. rex would have been capable of biting down with a force of 35,000 to 57,000 Newtons with its back teeth, according to the study. Great white sharks can bite down with a force of 20,000 Newtons, according to a 2008 study published in the Journal of Zoology. Humans are capable of biting down with less than 1,000 Newtons. But even with that amount of crushing power, the T. rex doesn't hold the distinction for the most powerful jaws. That distinction belongs to the ancient megalodon sharks, according to National Geographic. Megalodons lived between 1.5 million and 28 million years ago, and may have grown to be 50 feet (16 meters) long. The extinct sharks could bite with a force three times stronger than that of a T. rex - 105,000 to 171,000 Newtons - according to National Geographic. Biology Letters published the study on Wednesday. Submit Correction Share on facebook 12 Share on twitter Share on linkedin Share on google_plusone_share More Sharing Services Sponsored by Revcontent Promoted Links 12 Reasons To Stop Drinking Soda Now Health Overload Controversial 'Genius Drug' Used by Rich People braindaily New Rule In Las Vegas, NV: HILDLIFE The Biggest Bankruptcy America Has Ever Seen? Casey Research You Won’t Believe What 84-Year-Old Warren Buffett Is Now Doing With His Money Casey Research ‘Oracle Of Omaha’ Stuns America With Investment Strategy Casey Research Hilariously Random Photos uberhavoc Trending: This Cash Advance Service is Trusted by Over 500,000 Americans USA Trust Loans Join the Discussion What To Watch For In Apple's Q4 Earnings The New Cigarette Is Apparently Bacon Federal Probe Requested In Assault On SC Student Q3 Corporate Earnings So Far: Better Than Expected YIFY Movies Becomes Third Movie Site To Hit Hard Times GOP Frets Over Nevada Senate Seat Share on facebook 12 Share on twitterShare on linkedinShare on google_plusone_shareMore Sharing Services IBTIMES TV Harnessing The Power Of Play October 09 2015 3:55 PM EDT2:12 Search Sponsored Content on IBTimes 10 Hacks For Effectively Cleaning Your House This Fall Sponsored by: The Home Depot Top Stories Donald Trump Offensive Iowa Tweet Update: Campaign Intern Denies Having Access T Sweden Opens World's First Rape Center For Men China Will Not ‘Recklessly’ Use Force In South China Sea, Wants To Avoid ‘ Election 2016: Mike Huckabee Says Poor Convicts Should Be Sold Into Slavery? by Revcontent Latest News Politics Federal Probe Requested In Assault On SC Student Politics Officials May Never Find MH370: Expert Politics Clinton Far Ahead Of Sanders In Iowa Poll Politics Hobby Lobby Owners Probed Over Bible Artifacts Most ReadMost Shared 1. What To Watch For In Apple's Q4 Earnings 2. The New Cigarette Is Apparently Bacon 3. Federal Probe Requested In Assault On SC Student 4. Q3 Corporate Earnings So Far: Better Than Expected 5. YIFY Movies Becomes Third Movie Site To Hit Hard Times 6. GOP Frets Over Nevada Senate Seat 7. Anti-Israel Activists Decry Boycott Ruling 8. Saudi Prince Arrested After Amphetamine Seizure 9. Mysterious Object On Collision Course With Earth 10. Moscow To Deliver Missiles To Iran Follow Us Home Politics Economy Markets / Finance Companies Technology Media & Culture Sports Video About Us Leadership Advertise with Us Media Kit Contact Careers Terms of Service Privacy IBT Media Press Releases Syndication EditionsAustralia China India Italy Japan U.K. U.S. © Copyright 2015 IBT Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. Edited by Jaws, Oct 28 2015, 05:18 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Maximus | Apr 10 2016, 09:39 PM Post #269 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ankylosaurus wins 55-60% of the time. |
![]() |
|
| Drift | Jun 9 2016, 03:33 PM Post #270 |
|
High Spined Lizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Excuse the off-topic that i refrain from but imo predator/prey relationships should be phased out of 1vs1,It's clear in this scenario the Tyrannosaur is taking this. |
![]() |
|
| 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)


) which is like having no character to some people, and I live in England in a tiny flat with my grandparents. btw the sequel; I this is stupid but are we allowed to do (Made scientifically accurate- by me
) pokemon vs dinosaurs here or pop culture stuff vs prehistoric animals? Why am I even saying all this stuff? I'm gonna get banned.)

2:24 AM Jul 14