| 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: |
| Saurophaganax maximus v Tyrannosaurus rex | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM (59,194 Views) | |
| DinosaurMichael | Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM Post #1 |
|
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Saurophaganax maximus Saurophaganax ("lizard-eating master") is a genus of allosaurid dinosaur from the Morrison Formation of Late Jurassic Oklahoma (latest Kimmeridgian age, about 151 million years ago). Some paleontologists consider it to be a species of Allosaurus (A. maximus). Saurophaganax represents a very large (13 metres (43 ft) long). Saurophaganax was one of the largest carnivores of Late Jurassic North America. Ray even gave an estimate of the body length of fifteen metres and Chure of fourteen, though later estimations have been lower. The fossils known of Saurophaganax (both the possible New Mexican material and the Oklahoma material) are known from the latest part of the Morrison formation, suggesting that they were either always uncommon or appeared rather late in the fossil record. Saurophaganax was large for an allosaurid, and bigger than both its contemporaries Torvosaurus tanneri and Allosaurus fragilis. Being much rarer than its contemporaries, making up one percent or less of the Morrison theropod fauna, not much about its behavior is known. Stovall in Oklahoma also unearthed a considerable number of Apatosaurus specimens, a possible prey for a large theropod. ![]() 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.[1] 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.
Edited by DinosaurMichael, Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| blaze | Apr 24 2013, 05:06 AM Post #271 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's harder to explain how Smith measured the real bone wrong then, also, measure the tibia, none of the measurements you get from the scalebar approach what Mortimer lists on The theropod database (955mm), the femur also goes from 1m (spot on) to 1.17m or something like that. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 25 2013, 12:13 AM Post #272 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Christiansen, 2008, PLOS Just a short comparison of one of the few mammalian taxa that used a slicing bite. In this case, morphologically there are huge differences of course, attributable to mammalian and reptilian jaw anatomy and tooth replacement, and generally I would assume sabre toothed cats relied on precise bites to the neck much more than carnosaurs, but a slicing bite is not necessarily slow, as you can also see in monitpr lizards. I have little doubt a large carnosaurs bite to the neck would have similar effects on the well-being of another theropod. |
![]() |
|
| 7Alx | Apr 29 2013, 02:02 AM Post #273 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It seems me that Big Al would be from lower Morrison formation, if the Turner and Peterson's stratigraphic are right. Ps. Fixed Edited by 7Alx, Apr 29 2013, 03:30 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| blaze | Apr 29 2013, 02:46 AM Post #274 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You can't say "medium Morrison" based on age, the dates vary between dating analysis, specially the old ones, which stratigraphic position was it found? From Christiansen & Tschopp (2004)
If I remember correctly that's at the very top of the saltwash member while most of the known fauna comes from the Brushy Basin Member Edited by blaze, Apr 29 2013, 02:47 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 7Alx | Apr 29 2013, 04:26 AM Post #275 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
To be honest i wasn't sure about it. And thanks for correcting me. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 29 2013, 06:14 AM Post #276 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
dunno how I could overlook that, but according to the theropod database DINO 2560 has been designated the neotype. |
![]() |
|
| blaze | Apr 29 2013, 12:40 PM Post #277 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Madsen tried to do that but is not recognized by the ICZN, specially because it doesn't comply with the rules to designate a neotype in this cases eg. it has to come from the same quarry. EDIT. it was Madsen not Paul. Edited by blaze, Apr 30 2013, 02:27 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 30 2013, 01:38 AM Post #278 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There were several attempts? And why did Mortimer accept it then? Damn, this is such a problematic animal even tough it is so well-known and could easily be so well-studied! |
![]() |
|
| blaze | Apr 30 2013, 02:26 AM Post #279 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ups, I got it wrong, it was Madsen, in its osteology of Allosaurus from Cleveland Lloyd from 1976 who designated DINO 2560 as the neotype. Quoting Chure (2000)
Why Mortimer has DINO 2560 as the neotype I don't know. You can't just designated a neotype if the holotype still exists (along with other rules of course) that's why a case had to be presented to the ICZN to make USNM 4734 the neotype. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 30 2013, 02:30 AM Post #280 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
yes I see. What I would be bothered by would be a neotype that isn't even from the type locality if there are specimens from that locality. What I do not understand is why these lazy people need years to decide "well, ok, that holotype isn't diagnostic so lest agree to make the topotype the neotype!" |
![]() |
|
| blaze | Apr 30 2013, 02:47 AM Post #281 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes, but is more or less understandable with old taxa, at the time, their features were diagnostic but new discoveries proved them wrong, take for example Giganotosaurus, if I remember correctly Carrano et al. (2012), none of the postcranial features given by Coria & Salgado (1995) are diagnostic now, and this taxon was only erected less than 15 years ago. |
![]() |
|
| theropod | Apr 30 2013, 05:47 AM Post #282 |
|
palaeontology, open source and survival enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't have the impression they gave many features anyway, considering they claim their skeleton to be reasonably complete. They published only a fraction of the information that was available... |
![]() |
|
| Temnospondyl | Apr 30 2013, 08:46 PM Post #283 |
|
Stegocephalia specialist.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't remember, but I heard of a 15 m. s. Maximus specimen. |
![]() |
|
| SpinoInWonderland | Apr 30 2013, 09:04 PM Post #284 |
|
The madness has come back...
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The 15-meter figure was an old estimate. There is a possibility that large Saurophaganax individuals may have reached this size, however... |
![]() |
|
| Big G | Apr 30 2013, 10:53 PM Post #285 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Old estimate - a range of 12-13 meters is more likely to Saurophaganax. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Dinosauria light | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:26 AM Jul 14
|
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


)


![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)






2:26 AM Jul 14