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
Ekrixinatosaurus novasi v Suchomimus tenerensis
Topic Started: Aug 25 2012, 10:47 PM (8,949 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Ekrixinatosaurus novasi
Ekrixinatosaurus (Explosion-Born Reptile) is a genus of dinosaur which lived during the Late Cretaceous. It was a theropod believed to be one of the abelisaurs. Its fossils have been found in Argentina. The type species, Ekrixinatosaurus novasi, was first described in 2004 by Argentinian paleontologist Jorge Calvo, and Chilean paleontologists David Rubilar-Rogers and Karen Moreno. Ekrixinatosaurus is perhaps the largest abelisaurid known to date, estimated as 10 to 11 metres (33 to 36 ft) long. Most recently, a 2016 study again found Ekrixinatosaurus novasi to be smaller (7.4 m) than Carnotaurus (7.8 m). It was also particularly robust and had a relatively large head, suggesting that it was a powerful predator or scavenger, able to scare other predators away from their kills.

Posted Image

Suchomimus tenerensis
Suchomimus ("crocodile mimic") is a genus of large spinosaurid dinosaur with a crocodile-like mouth that lived between 121–112 million years ago, during the late Aptian stage of the Cretaceous period in Africa. Unlike most giant theropods, Suchomimus had a very long, low snout and narrow jaws studded with some 100 teeth, not very sharp and curving slightly backward. The tip of the snout was enlarged and carried a "rosette" of longer teeth. The animal is reminiscent of crocodilians that eat mainly fish, such as the living gharial, a type of large crocodile with a very long, slim snout, from the region of India. Suchomimus also had a tall extension of its vertebrae which may have held up some kind of low flap, ridge or sail of skin, as seen in much more exaggerated form in Spinosaurus. The length of the type specimen of Suchomimus, a subadult, was initially estimated at 10.3–11 m (34–36 ft). Its weight was estimated at between 2.7 and 5.2 tonnes (2.7 and 5.1 long tons; 3.0 and 5.7 short tons). In 2010, Gregory S. Paul gave lower estimations of 9.5 metres and 2.5 tonnes. The overall impression is of a massive and powerful creature that ate fish and presumably other sorts of meat (carrion, if naught else) more than 100 million years ago, when the Sahara was a lush, swampy habitat.

Posted Image

_________________________________________________________________________

Dark allosaurus
 
Suchomimus vs Ekrixinatosaurus

Edited by Taipan, Feb 26 2018, 03:34 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
blaze
Jan 30 2014, 02:28 AM
Hartman gives it a longer tail than past reconstructions, that's it, he doesn't reconstruct an animal 5% larger, in fact if he had given it a tail as proportionally long as his Suchomimus and Spinosaurus (50-50.5% of total length), his Baryonyx will only be 9.3m.
Which is not drastically different from 9.5 metres.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 30 2014, 02:37 AM
blaze
Jan 30 2014, 02:28 AM
Hartman gives it a longer tail than past reconstructions, that's it, he doesn't reconstruct an animal 5% larger, in fact if he had given it a tail as proportionally long as his Suchomimus and Spinosaurus (50-50.5% of total length), his Baryonyx will only be 9.3m.
Which is not drastically different from 9.5 metres.
It makes it ~200kg smaller, also funny enough that's from the person who mentions size advantages in small size advantage matches. You even tried making the immature specimen 100kg larger, without a source.
Edited by Hatzegopteryx, Jan 30 2014, 03:10 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
blaze
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
They are reconstructions of the same individual, and we don't know how long is the tail in those other reconstructions, why assume that scaling down is the best course of action? if 9.5m comes from a longer tail, having a tail 20cm shorter is not going to decrease the weight by 200kg.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
No, I was talking about the whole animal being 20 centimetres shorter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
And thats your mistaken. You asumed when the creature was made shorter, the entire porportions shrinked. Were using the same creature, just with a shorter tail. I doubt it will loose 200 kg from having a tail 20 cm shorter
Edited by spinosaurus rex, Jan 30 2014, 04:59 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
blaze
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yes, if it was 20cm shorter isometrically but we are dealing with two reconstructions of the same individual, all preserved material should be the same size between both so differences in them should be attributed to different proportions, this might impact the mass of both models if say, the difference is in the torso, but we don't know where the difference comes from, if it comes from the tail the 9.5m one will weight at most a couple of kg more.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
spinosaurus rex
Jan 30 2014, 04:58 AM
And thats your mistaken. You asumed when the creature was made shorter, the entire porportions shrinked. Were using the same creature, just with a shorter tail. I doubt it will loose 200 kg from having a tail 20 cm shorter
Yes, but I was never talking about the tail. I only did an estimate for the series "for whatever it's worth", I am very aware that a tail ~200mm shorter wouldn't make it ~200kg smaller.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Just wanted to make sure. You did assumed so in your previous post
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 30 2014, 03:05 AM
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 30 2014, 02:37 AM
blaze
Jan 30 2014, 02:28 AM
Hartman gives it a longer tail than past reconstructions, that's it, he doesn't reconstruct an animal 5% larger, in fact if he had given it a tail as proportionally long as his Suchomimus and Spinosaurus (50-50.5% of total length), his Baryonyx will only be 9.3m.
Which is not drastically different from 9.5 metres.
It makes it ~200kg smaller, also funny enough that's from the person who mentions size advantages in small size advantage matches. You even tried making the immature specimen 100kg larger, without a source.
Without a source? I told you what the source was, it was mentioned by Spinodontosaurus on Allosaurus vs Baryonyx thread. And anyways, being 20 cm shorter is not going to make a theropod 200kg lighter, it is not '100kg per 10 cm'.
Edited by TheMechaBaryonyx789, Jan 30 2014, 05:13 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Did HE have a source?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 30 2014, 05:13 AM
Did HE have a source?
Ask him. Spinodontosaurus is usually factual, so I am inclined to believe him.
Why are we discussing Baryonyx anyway, this is Suchomimus VS Ekrixinatosaurus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hatzegopteryx
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Jan 30 2014, 05:14 AM
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 30 2014, 05:13 AM
Did HE have a source?
Ask him. Spinodontosaurus is usually factual, so I am inclined to believe him.
Why are we discussing Baryonyx anyway, this is Suchomimus VS Ekrixinatosaurus.
We are making comparisons...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jinfengopteryx
Member Avatar
Aspiring paleontologist, science enthusiast and armchair speculative fiction/evolution writer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If the differences are only tail length, how would it make it 200 kg lighter?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spinosaurus rex
Member Avatar
Carnivore
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I beleived he already acknowlage he was wrong
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daspletosaurus
Member Avatar
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Hatzegopteryx
Jan 30 2014, 01:43 AM
It wasn't even 2 tons if I am not mistaken.
I would say that Ekrixinatosaurus, could have reached weights comparable to Daspletosaurus, so between 2 and 3 tonnes. Ekrixinatosaurus has a robust build to its bones and even the lighter built Abelisaurs are robust compared to other theropod of similar size.
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.