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
Giganotosaurus carolinii v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Jan 31 2012, 05:48 PM (110,346 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Giganotosaurus carolinii
Giganotosaurus ("giant southern lizard"), was a carcharodontosaurid dinosaur that lived 93 to 89 million years ago during the Turonian stage of the Late Cretaceous period. It is one of the longest known terrestrial carnivores, bigger than Tyrannosaurus, but in length and weight, smaller than Spinosaurus. Although longer than T. rex, G. carolinii was lighter and had a much smaller braincase that was the size and shape of a banana. A well-developed olfactory region means it probably had a good sense of smell. Titanosaur fossils have been recovered near the remains of Giganotosaurus, leading to speculation that these carnivores may have preyed on the giant herbivores. Fossils of related carcharodontosaurid fossils grouped closely together may indicate pack hunting, a behavior that could possibly extend to Giganotosaurus itself. he holotype specimen's (MUCPv-Ch1) skeleton was about 70% complete and included parts of the skull, a lower jaw, pelvis, hindlimbs and most of the backbone. The premaxillae, jugals, quadratojugals, the back of the lower jaws and the forelimbs are missing. Various estimates find that it measured somewhere between 12.2 and 13 m (40 and 43 ft) in length, and between 6.5 and 13.3 tons in weight. A second, more fragmentary, specimen (MUCPv-95) has also been identified, found in 1987 by Jorge Calvo. It is only known from the front part of the left dentary which is 8% larger than the equivalent bone from the holotype. This largest Giganotosaurus specimen is estimated to represent an individual with a skull length of 195 cm (6.40 ft), compared to the holotype's estimated at 1.80 m (5.9 ft) skull, making it likely that Giganotosaurus had the largest skull of any known theropod. Giganotosaurus surpassed Tyrannosaurus in mass by at least half a ton (the upper size estimate for T. rex is 9.1 t). Additionally several single teeth, discovered from 1987 onwards, have been referred to the species.

Posted Image

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

______________________________________________________________________________


Prehistoric Cat
Jan 31 2012, 04:53 PM
Giganotosaurus VS Tyrannosaurus
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It looks like the more slender animals are the denser ones (Allosaurus was also denser than Acro and T-rex).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Density always makes the weight higher relative to volume, I don't think there's much to misunderstand here. Of course if you are orders of magnitudes smaller in volume, being denser won't make up for that, but it can have significant impact among similar sized animals.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Giganotosaurus weighed more, at least from what I know. Tyrannosaurus had some hollow bones, to lighten the body mass.

(I read it on Wikipedia, I do not know if it's true)

However, Giganotosaurus could take this. A 8-9 tonnes, is heavier than Tyrannosaurus (which is 6-8 tons). In addition, it was bigger. The bite of Tyrannosaurus was stronger, but the bite of Giganotosaurus was larger (I read that it could widen to 2.5 meters wide).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
All theropods actually had hollow bones, but you are right that some were denser than the others.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 9 2013, 12:21 AM
Giganotosaurus weighed more, at least from what I know. Tyrannosaurus had some hollow bones, to lighten the body mass.

(I read it on Wikipedia, I do not know if it's true)

However, Giganotosaurus could take this. A 8-9 tonnes, is heavier than Tyrannosaurus (which is 6-8 tons). In addition, it was bigger. The bite of Tyrannosaurus was stronger, but the bite of Giganotosaurus was larger (I read that it could widen to 2.5 meters wide).
You mean a gape of 2,5m? That's possible, it may have had really long jaws, and probably a very wide gape.

All theropods have hollow bones and airsacks to some extend, however Tyrannosaurs appear to be less dense than others (in some specimens quite significantly).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 9 2013, 01:21 AM
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 9 2013, 12:21 AM
Giganotosaurus weighed more, at least from what I know. Tyrannosaurus had some hollow bones, to lighten the body mass.

(I read it on Wikipedia, I do not know if it's true)

However, Giganotosaurus could take this. A 8-9 tonnes, is heavier than Tyrannosaurus (which is 6-8 tons). In addition, it was bigger. The bite of Tyrannosaurus was stronger, but the bite of Giganotosaurus was larger (I read that it could widen to 2.5 meters wide).
You mean a gape of 2,5m? That's possible, it may have had really long jaws, and probably a very wide gape.

All theropods have hollow bones and airsacks to some extend, however Tyrannosaurs appear to be less dense than others (in some specimens quite significantly).
The gape of 2.5 meters is based on the assumption that Giganotosaurus could widen the jaws as Allosaurus. If it is true, had the largest bite among the Theropods.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
What about Mapusaurus? It had a longer skull and due being closely related to Giganotosaurus likely a similar flexible jaw.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jinfengopteryx
Jun 9 2013, 01:26 AM
What about Mapusaurus? It had a longer skull and due being closely related to Giganotosaurus likely a similar flexible jaw.
Actually, Mapu's skull is smaller. Mapu's skull is 1.56 meters, Giga's skull 1.65 meters.
Edited by Big G, Jun 9 2013, 01:28 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
^that likely isn't the largest Mapusaurus. We don't know it's exact proportions, but if it was proportioned like Giganotosaurus, it may have had a slightly longer skull, due to being slightly larger dimensionally. this is of course everything but sure, but it is the most likely.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big G
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
theropod
Jun 9 2013, 01:55 AM
^that likely isn't the largest Mapusaurus. We don't know it's exact proportions, but if it was proportioned like Giganotosaurus, it may have had a slightly longer skull, due to being slightly larger dimensionally. this is of course everything but sure, but it is the most likely.
I just saw your chart. However, Mapusaurus was not larger, but about the same size. 2% is not enough to be considered larger.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 9 2013, 01:27 AM
Actually, Mapu's skull is smaller. Mapu's skull is 1.56 meters, Giga's skull 1.65 meters.
That was theropod's reconstruction for the largest Mapusaurus skull where we have material of. We don't have skull material from the largest Mapusaurus specimen.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 9 2013, 02:08 AM
theropod
Jun 9 2013, 01:55 AM
^that likely isn't the largest Mapusaurus. We don't know it's exact proportions, but if it was proportioned like Giganotosaurus, it may have had a slightly longer skull, due to being slightly larger dimensionally. this is of course everything but sure, but it is the most likely.
I just saw your chart. However, Mapusaurus was not larger, but about the same size. 2% is not enough to be considered larger.
If it had the same proportions as Giganotosaurus, its skull would be a few cm longer. That's a more or less irrelevant difference, but when searching for the longest skull, you have to take it into account. We also consider tigers larger than lions even tough the difference is a minor one.

1,56m is probably far from the maximum skull lenght, which is at least 1,63m and may be ~1,8m. The specimen I used (the dentary) is merely the largest one with cranial remains known.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Carcharodontosauridae
Jun 9 2013, 12:21 AM
Giganotosaurus weighed more, at least from what I know. Tyrannosaurus had some hollow bones, to lighten the body mass.

(I read it on Wikipedia, I do not know if it's true)

However, Giganotosaurus could take this. A 8-9 tonnes, is heavier than Tyrannosaurus (which is 6-8 tons). In addition, it was bigger. The bite of Tyrannosaurus was stronger, but the bite of Giganotosaurus was larger (I read that it could widen to 2.5 meters wide).

Pretty strenuous, given Sue is just as large in lateral view as MUCPv-95, and most likely wider.

The difference between the two probably wouldn't be much more than a couple hundred kilo's or so (in favour of which I don't know), which is essentially nothing in animals that weighed 8 tonnes. This pretty much applies to Mapusaurus and Carcharodontosaurus too, imo.

BTW the estimated gape of 2.5 meters was something former Topix/Carnivora user 'Big Al' once carried out, assuming it could open it's jaws at an angle of 90 degrees as per Allosaurus, and based on the old elongated skull reconstructions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A gape in that general range isn't too outlandish imo

Let's take MUCPv-95 at 1,75m and assume the jaw opening will behave exactly like an isosceles triangle (cartilage and minor shift between the articular and the quadrate will only be an approximation of course).
(taking c as the gape and a and b as the upper and lower jaw)
we know all the angles (γ is 100°, the other two are each 40° since both are the same and the sum of all angles in a triangle must be 180°)*
c/sin100=1,75/sin40
c=gape=1,75/sin40*sin100
gape=2,69m

Of course it gets lower if you make the jaws shorter, but you yourself didn't want to do that the last time we discussed...
Or did I make some mistake? Hint: It is always better to check yourself whenever I post something related to maths...

*
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Allosaurus_Jaws_Steveoc86.jpg
If this is correct, the gape angle is about 100° in Allosaurus, which is absolutely reasonable if you ask me. This taxon shows very strong adaptions for a wide gape and an angle similar to extant sharks is no problem at all. The image had a source, but it isn't accessible any more.
Of course Carcharodontosaurs may have had a lower gape angle, compensating for that with their longer jaws, but how much? Anyway, this is only a rough figure.
Edited by theropod, Jun 9 2013, 04:47 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
theropod
Member Avatar
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I measured both their torsos in Hartman's scale (FMNH PR 2081 and MUCPv-CH1), from the first dorsal vertebra to the end of the ilium and ischium. Sue ends up at 81885px, the Giganotosaurus holotype at 78186px, making MUCPv-95 84440px at 8% bigger, and I'll wager in absolute terms it would be marginally, if at all, narrower, since it is larger overall. On the other hand, it is probably about 12% denser. If sue was 7t, it would be above 8.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.