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 (48,649 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:
Thalassophoneus
Member Avatar
Pelagic Killer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Jun 9 2016, 03:33 PM
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.
Agreed. Predator-prey relationship was never a good way to judge the outcome of a battle.
Spinodontosaurus
Oct 23 2015, 08:57 PM
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.
Quote:
 
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.


In order to estimate mass from volume you need a material to judge from its density. So have they kept in mind that dinosaurs had several cavities, such as the stomach or airsacs etc.?
Edited by Thalassophoneus, Jun 9 2016, 04:32 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wombatman
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Actually the average Ankylosaurus should be around 5 tons at least (huge and wide ribcage and heavy built) and the Tyrannosaurus 7-8 tons. So it is quite an interesting fight. Im not sure which animal would win
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
as impressive as ankylosaaurus is to me, i feel partially inclined to favor tyrannosaurus. we have two animals in the same ecosystem at the same time period, and the fact that we have an armored animal, living alongside a predator built to bite through armor. i personally think that if we have two of these creatures at their known weights together, this would be a predator/ dangerous prey relationship imo. i can't find a single reason as to why tyrannosaurus wouldn't be able to handle an ankylosaurus despite having the clear adaptions to do so.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
You can just as easily phrase it as "Ankylosaurus has the adaptations to defend itself against a T. rex".
Ankylosaurus wins this at least often enough to make it too risky for the theropod to attack an adult face to face since it could neither outrun the T. rex nor hide from it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carcharadon
Member Avatar
Shark Toothed Reptile
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
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.


Using the smallest specimens, Ankylosaurus should win.
Average specimens, at the 59% number I'm not sure, but the 83% number Tyrannosaurus should win.
Largest specimens, I hazardly favor Tyrannosaurus.

Ankylosaurus of course is a dangerous prey item, but I think at a certain enough size advantage T.rex can pull it off.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Spartan
Jun 17 2016, 01:43 AM
You can just as easily phrase it as "Ankylosaurus has the adaptations to defend itself against a T. rex".
Ankylosaurus wins this at least often enough to make it too risky for the theropod to attack an adult face to face since it could neither outrun the T. rex nor hide from it.
well, i don't care how to phrase it, because it has the same exact meaning.seriously, me saying that this would be a dangerous prey item and practically an arms race should have driven the point already.

at weight parity, i will favor the ankylosaurus. average against average, it is very, very close, but i do feel inclined to favor the slightly larger tyrannosaurus . and max against max, i would favor tyrannosaurus to a higher degree.

i agree that ankylosaurus would of win enough to make it a very risky animal for a tyrannosaur to even approach or thwart off an attack, but in a fight to the death, i am more incline to favor the predator.
Edited by spinosaurus rex, Jun 17 2016, 02:18 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
spinosaurus rex
Jun 17 2016, 02:15 AM
Spartan
Jun 17 2016, 01:43 AM
You can just as easily phrase it as "Ankylosaurus has the adaptations to defend itself against a T. rex".
Ankylosaurus wins this at least often enough to make it too risky for the theropod to attack an adult face to face since it could neither outrun the T. rex nor hide from it.
well, i don't care how to phrase it, because it has the same exact meaning.seriously, me saying that this would be a dangerous prey item and practically an arms race should have driven the point already.

Let me show it you this way:

"i can't find a single reason as to why tyrannosaurus ankylosaurus wouldn't be able to handle a ankylosaurus tyrannosaurus despite having the clear adaptions to do so."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Spartan
Jun 17 2016, 02:30 AM
spinosaurus rex
Jun 17 2016, 02:15 AM
Spartan
Jun 17 2016, 01:43 AM
You can just as easily phrase it as "Ankylosaurus has the adaptations to defend itself against a T. rex".
Ankylosaurus wins this at least often enough to make it too risky for the theropod to attack an adult face to face since it could neither outrun the T. rex nor hide from it.
well, i don't care how to phrase it, because it has the same exact meaning.seriously, me saying that this would be a dangerous prey item and practically an arms race should have driven the point already.

Let me show it you this way:

"i can't find a single reason as to why tyrannosaurus ankylosaurus wouldn't be able to handle a ankylosaurus tyrannosaurus despite having the clear adaptions to do so."
let me show you again

"predator/ dangerous prey relationship" and " predator/ prey arms race" and "at weight parity, i will favor the ankylosaurus" and "i agree that ankylosaurus would of win enough to make it a very risky animal for a tyrannosaur to even approach or thwart off an attack"

really, this is incredibly stupid. your just nitpicking a quote i stated and acting as if i'm not aware of the capability this animal can do. have i once stated that ankylosaurus was il equipped to deal with the tyrannosaurus? feel free to try to nitpick and quote me there cause i certainly can't find it. heck, i stated its practically a predator/ prey arms race. do you not know the meaning of that?

i'm also not sure where you going with this. i'm i wrong for stating that tyrannosaurus was built for taking such prey? that only ankylosaurus was built for the task and tyrannosaurus wasn't? that must be it, because i stated multiple times that ankylosaurus was a extremely dangerous animal to a tyrannosaurus. or you just feel incline to state the never ending claim that ankylosaurus was built to take on tyrannosaurus, even though at the same time it can be said that tyrannosaurus was built to take on ankylosaurus? because thats what i stated in the beginning, and its pretty moot to restate again with two coexisting animals that definitely have crossed paths with one another.

and being that i FAVOR the tyrannosaurus with a reasonable size advantage, of course i'm going to address to it and state my points for favoring it in a fight then the ankylosaurus.
Edited by spinosaurus rex, Jun 17 2016, 03:16 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Calm down. I was merely noting that this can be hardly used as an argument for either side here since both have the adaptations to deal with each other.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
calm down, dude, i'm perfectly calm. you never elaborated or made your intentions clear. you just nitpick a single quote from me and act like its a flaw to the entire statement without giving reason. honestly, what kept you from posting that sentence in your recent post from your last one? especially considering that i have clearly stated multiple times that they both are dangerous animals to eachother and stated the exact opposite of what you are insinuating from sed quote. reiterating that both sides have adaptions to deal with eachother is what i stated from the get go. i just find tyrannosaurus with a reasonable weight advantage able to win more often then not.

i really do want to drop this. this is just spam.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
spinosaurus rex
Jun 17 2016, 03:26 AM
calm down, dude, i'm perfectly calm. you never elaborated or made your intentions clear. you just nitpick a single quote from me and act like its a flaw to the entire statement without giving reason. honestly, what kept you from posting that sentence in your recent post from your last one? especially considering that i have clearly stated multiple times that they both are dangerous animals to eachother and stated the exact opposite of what you are insinuating from sed quote. reiterating that both sides have adaptions to deal with eachother is what i stated from the get go. i just find tyrannosaurus with a reasonable weight advantage able to win more often then not.

i really do want to drop this. this is just spam.
Agreed,the overabundance of spam is rather a growing problem.Tyrannosaurus was designed to bite through armor,imo this is a predator/prey relationship so it's moot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceratodromeus
Member Avatar
Aspiring herpetologist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Agreed,the overabundance of spam is rather a growing problem.

irony
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Drift
Jul 19 2016, 02:03 AM
Tyrannosaurus was designed to bite through armor,imo this is a predator/prey relationship so it's moot.
And Ankylosaurus was "designed" to resist crushing bites, this kind of argument still doesn't get us anywhere.
Edited by Spartan, Jul 19 2016, 04:57 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carcharadon
Member Avatar
Shark Toothed Reptile
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I just laughed that he replied to the spam, which was like a month old, addressing the spam.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drift
Member Avatar
High Spined Lizard
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Spartan
Jul 19 2016, 04:56 AM
Drift
Jul 19 2016, 02:03 AM
Tyrannosaurus was designed to bite through armor,imo this is a predator/prey relationship so it's moot.
And Ankylosaurus was "designed" to resist crushing bites, this kind of argument still doesn't get us anywhere.
I see no arguments,I do see denial that Tyrannosaurus was more effective at getting through this armor,Than the armor was as ensuring the survival of the Ankylosaur via Tyrannosaur attack.
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.