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
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 28
Saurophaganax maximus v Tyrannosaurus rex
Topic Started: Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM (59,184 Views)
DinosaurMichael
Member Avatar
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.

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.[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.

Posted Image
Edited by DinosaurMichael, Dec 15 2012, 10:02 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Black Panther
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
What is franoys backing and proof for his claims? I cant open the links cause I have faeces wifi right now.


I finally manages to open the Tyrannotitan links, what is the proof for the weight figure? All it is is a skeletal and just a weight number.
Edited by Black Panther, May 11 2017, 11:58 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
bone crusher
May 11 2017, 10:36 PM
In length sure, but not in weight, not even close. The largest reliable specimen from those are actually well under 7 tons by using GDI calculation.
carcharadontosaurus "6325 kg"
http://franoys.deviantart.com/journal/Mathematical-analysis-on-Carcharodontosaurus-mass-661837965

Tyrannotitan "6400 kg"
http://sta.sh/02g14hls5mf7

Giganotosaurus "6838 kg"
http://franoys.deviantart.com/journal/A-mathematical-analysis-on-Giganotosaurus-mass-659861738

Mapusaurus from the look of things don't weigh any heavier either.
http://franoys.deviantart.com/art/Mapusaurus-roseae-skeletal-diagram-665544500

How can you pit those 6.3-6.8 t underweights against 8.2-8.4 t t rex specimens such as Sue, Trix or Scotty? Even the holotype 7.5 t would wipe the floor with them. Perhaps the amnh 5027 specimen at 6.5- 6.8 t could be more suitable.
The largest Tyrannotitan is more like 7600kg based on the size of its femur. For Sauroniops and Carcharodontosaurus the more recent estimates are 7200kg. We also have evidence for individuals of Mapusaurus and Giganotosaurus reaching 8000kg and more.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
The proof is that he actually went and did the exact same 3d volume measurement aka. GDI that Scott Hartman has done for his measurements. The results turned out to be almost exactly the same as Hartman's, so it gives him great credential and accuracy, not just some arbitrary number he pulled out of his rear. You can clearly see how he's calculated each individual body parts with drawings based on Scott Hartman's of course.


Spartan
May 12 2017, 01:03 AM
bone crusher
May 11 2017, 10:36 PM
In length sure, but not in weight, not even close. The largest reliable specimen from those are actually well under 7 tons by using GDI calculation.
carcharadontosaurus "6325 kg"
http://franoys.deviantart.com/journal/Mathematical-analysis-on-Carcharodontosaurus-mass-661837965

Tyrannotitan "6400 kg"
http://sta.sh/02g14hls5mf7

Giganotosaurus "6838 kg"
http://franoys.deviantart.com/journal/A-mathematical-analysis-on-Giganotosaurus-mass-659861738

Mapusaurus from the look of things don't weigh any heavier either.
http://franoys.deviantart.com/art/Mapusaurus-roseae-skeletal-diagram-665544500

How can you pit those 6.3-6.8 t underweights against 8.2-8.4 t t rex specimens such as Sue, Trix or Scotty? Even the holotype 7.5 t would wipe the floor with them. Perhaps the amnh 5027 specimen at 6.5- 6.8 t could be more suitable.
The largest Tyrannotitan is more like 7600kg based on the size of its femur. For Sauroniops and Carcharodontosaurus the more recent estimates are 7200kg. We also have evidence for individuals of Mapusaurus and Giganotosaurus reaching 8000kg and more.

Posted Image
7200kg -7600kg is still nowhere near 8400kg. As for the paratype Giga specimen it's still only based on one fragment chin bone that's 10% deeper which could translate to just a large headed specimen. Like I said, if we're going by fragment specimens then we should also include t rex fragment specimens and that's not a realm we should so casually dwell without more complete bones.
Edited by bone crusher, May 12 2017, 01:16 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
7200kg -7600kg is still nowhere near 8400kg.


No, but we have much more specimen for T. rex than for the others. There are only two known Tyrannotitan specimens or so and they fall neatly into the average range for T. rex.

Quote:
 
Like I said, if we're going by fragment specimens then we should also include t rex fragment specimens and that's not a realm we should so casually dwell without more complete bones.


There are no T. rex fragment specimens bigger than Sue.
Edited by Spartan, May 12 2017, 04:12 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Spartan
May 12 2017, 04:12 AM
Quote:
 
7200kg -7600kg is still nowhere near 8400kg.


No, but we have much more specimen for T. rex than for the others. There are only two known Tyrannotitan specimens or so and they fall neatly into the average range for T. rex.

Quote:
 
Like I said, if we're going by fragment specimens then we should also include t rex fragment specimens and that's not a realm we should so casually dwell without more complete bones.


There are no T. rex fragment specimens bigger than Sue.
The average range of t rex means nothing at this point since there are only a handful of adults and even less Sue aged adults, we are a long way away from determining anything meaningful for an average weight for any of those species. As I said earlier I only listed specific specimens and those larger t rex specimens are still untouchable, I never said they are untouchable on a species level.
Also that toe bone fragment t rex and C rex are likely to be much larger t rexes than Sue.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Well, we're discussing it on a species level here, so I don't see the problem.

Quote:
 
Also that toe bone fragment t rex and C rex are likely to be much larger t rexes than Sue.


The toe bone T. rex is likely smaller than Sue. See this reply from Eric Snively to user Grey:


Quote:
 
It turns out that the skeptics were right! The abstract’s mass estimate was based on Longrich et al.’s (2010) measurement of 13 cm. When I examined the phalanx again to make a 3D model, I realized that it was slightly smaller than the same phalanx in Sue. I noted the correction on the poster, and will soon publish the updated estimates.


And on C. rex we really have nothing at all but a field guess by Horner.
Edited by Spartan, May 13 2017, 02:54 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
First of all thanks for the link to the clarification, just can't keep everything up to date these days. The problem with discussing on a species level is that we simply don't have enough complete specimens to draw any conclusions. It would be disingenuous to say either of them is heavier than one another without going through a sample of hundreds if not thousands. I think it would be far more scientific and meaningful just to discuss revolving what suitably complete and reliable data that we have, not just based on a single bone or two. But if you must, then the best case scenario for that hypothetical 10% bigger giga specimen is still 200 kg lighter than Sue but even Scott Hartman is skeptical on if it really achieved that weight at all, he's more partial to the 10% bigger head scenario.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spartan
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
but even Scott Hartman is skeptical on if it really achieved that weight at all, he's more partial to the 10% bigger head scenario.


Can you link me the source to this?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Spartan
May 13 2017, 10:15 PM
Quote:
 
but even Scott Hartman is skeptical on if it really achieved that weight at all, he's more partial to the 10% bigger head scenario.


Can you link me the source to this?
Here from the original Scott Hartman analysis.
Quote:
 
7) I must reiterate, the lower jaw fragment of MUCPv-95 does not come from an animal that is 8% larger than the type. In fact it honestly could be from an identically-sized animal that just has a more robust dentary, so scaling it up 6.5% (in linear dimensions) should if anything be seen as the upper bounds.

http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/mass-estimates-north-vs-south-redux772013
If you disregard my previously stated figure 10% larger (due to bad memory), the rest is in line with what he's proposing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Teratophoneus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
bone crusher
May 11 2017, 02:57 AM
At this point T Rexes like Sue, Trix and Scotty are all 8.something tonne monsters that belong in a league of their own, I don't see any other theropod of the non fragment specimen come close to challenge them. As for Saurophaganax, maybe a sub adult rex in the 3-4 tonne range could be more equal.
That may be a bit stretched. While it's true that large T. rex specimens (i.e. 'Sue') aren't matched in weight only by fragmentary Carcharodontosaurids specimen (i.e. MUCPv-95), I believe that there's no motivation to assume that a 7 ton Carcharodontosaurid like Giganotosaurus holotype would pose no treat to large T. rex specimens. After all, they were quite similar in linear dimension, and Giganotosaurus' bite wasn't less deadlier than T. rex's. Of all known Theropods, Giganotosaurus and Mapusaurus seem good opponents to large T.rex specimens, standing at roughly 12.5 m and 7000 kg - 'Sue' is like one ton heavier, not very much in such big animals. 'Sue' may have an edge due to its superior bulk, but I wouldn't label the aforementioned specimens as no treat to large T. rexes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bone crusher
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Teratophoneus
May 17 2017, 03:10 AM
bone crusher
May 11 2017, 02:57 AM
At this point T Rexes like Sue, Trix and Scotty are all 8.something tonne monsters that belong in a league of their own, I don't see any other theropod of the non fragment specimen come close to challenge them. As for Saurophaganax, maybe a sub adult rex in the 3-4 tonne range could be more equal.
That may be a bit stretched. While it's true that large T. rex specimens (i.e. 'Sue') aren't matched in weight only by fragmentary Carcharodontosaurids specimen (i.e. MUCPv-95), I believe that there's no motivation to assume that a 7 ton Carcharodontosaurid like Giganotosaurus holotype would pose no treat to large T. rex specimens. After all, they were quite similar in linear dimension, and Giganotosaurus' bite wasn't less deadlier than T. rex's. Of all known Theropods, Giganotosaurus and Mapusaurus seem good opponents to large T.rex specimens, standing at roughly 12.5 m and 7000 kg - 'Sue' is like one ton heavier, not very much in such big animals. 'Sue' may have an edge due to its superior bulk, but I wouldn't label the aforementioned specimens as no treat to large T. rexes.
Sue at 8400 kg is more like 1.5 ton heavier at least and that's a fairly big difference to me, T Rex Trix could weigh more or less the same, Scotty may be a bit lighter but still well over 8000 kg. I might be over exaggerating a bit earlier saying they're untouchable, I'm sure a well placed bite to the neck from a large 7 ton Carcharodontosaurid would cause massive damage but the weight advantage here does tip the odds quite a bit to those large Rexes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Soopairik
Carnoferox's sex toy
[ *  *  *  * ]
I would back T Rex in this. Although the former might be larger, Rex has the stronger bite and a more robust build to help itself in combat.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheBatmeme368
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Soopairik
Oct 15 2017, 08:15 AM
I would back T Rex in this. Although the former might be larger, Rex has the stronger bite and a more robust build to help itself in combat.
See Blaze's thoughts on this, I think he summarises it pretty well: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9784433/3/

Bite force isn't everything though, a slashing bite can be just as effective as a crushing one, more or less depending on the victim.
Edited by TheBatmeme368, Oct 21 2017, 07:12 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ferreomus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
The Bulky Head and those jaws would be too hadarduous for the allosaurid to handle,smaller but only taller and has striking claws and feet, but the trexs bulk takes it all
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thalassophoneus
Member Avatar
Pelagic Killer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
TheBatmeme368
Oct 21 2017, 07:11 PM
Soopairik
Oct 15 2017, 08:15 AM
I would back T Rex in this. Although the former might be larger, Rex has the stronger bite and a more robust build to help itself in combat.
See Blaze's thoughts on this, I think he summarises it pretty well: http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9784433/3/

Bite force isn't everything though, a slashing bite can be just as effective as a crushing one, more or less depending on the victim.
Slashing and crushing bite aren't very different when the jaws have the same shape. They are mostly an excuse for favoring one animal over another.

Soopairik, Saurophaganax isn't bigger. It is about 11 m. long and its mass would be 4,3 tons. I have estimated it myself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Dinosauria Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 28

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.