Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
draconic chronicler

TRex loses title again with another new dino

36 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Does anyone know if they ever named this Dino yet? It probably would have gotten more publicity if it wasn't for the new Supersize Spinosaursus that "won" the title back again.

On March 10th Dr. Phillip Currie of the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology and Dr. Rodolfo Coria of the Museo Carmen Funes in Argentina announced the ...

www.geocities.com/stegob/bigargentinatheropod.html - 9k - Cached - Similar pages

GIGANTIC THEROPOD DISCOVERED IN ARGENTINA

Not only is is larger than T. rex, but it also hunted in packs!

A Tyrannosaurus rex at the Carnegie Museum in Pittsburgh.

In an evolutionary sense, size does matter, and nowhere was this more present than in Cretaceous Argentina, an environment which hosted 41-foot long predator Giganotosaurus, 100-foot long sauropod Argentinosaurus, and a newly discovered 110-foot long sauropod. Now add to that mix a new, ferocious speices of theropod dinosaur which may have grown in the upwards of 45 feet and given T. rex a good scare!

On March 10th Dr. Phillip Currie of the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology and Dr. Rodolfo Coria of the Museo Carmen Funes in Argentina announced the discovery of a new species of carnivorous dinosaur from the Cretaceous of Argentina, dating to about 100 million years ago. The initial discovery was made by Coria's team in 1997, but Coria spent the better of three years determining if the discovery represented a new species or a version of the beast he named in 1996-Giganotosaurus, the first carnivorous dinosaur discovered that was larger than Tyrannosaurus rex. On March 10 Coria and Currie finally made their announcement of the currently unnamed find at the Riverfront Arts Center in Wilmington, Delaware.

Not only is this find importance because of its size, but Currie and Coria believe that the discovery has very important social and ecological significance as well. During their 1997 dig Coria discovered the remains of six individuals of this species, ranging from youth to adult, which has led him to hypothesize that the fearsome beasts traveled in hunting packs, which would make them even more menacing to their prey. This fact is regarded as surprising to paleontologists, who have largely considered large predators to be solitary hunters.

"The bigness of it - well obviously it gets headlines - but scientifically, it's not that important. But the fact that they traveled together, that's very interesting," said Dr. Jack Horner, a Montana paleontologist who earlier this decade led a team that uncovered a nearly complete Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton and has publicized the notion that T. rex may have been a scavenger.

The individual of this species would have been characterized by a long, narrow skull and a jaw shaped like scissors. According to Currie, this suggests that it could have dissected its prey with almost "surgical precision." Currie estimates this new dinosaur at about 45 feet in length, while Giganotosaurus was approximately 41 feet long and the familiar North American Tyrannosaurus rex exhibiting a length of roughly 40 feet. Although T. rex will most likely remain the most popular dinosaur in the media and with children, Currie commented that he would much rather run into T. rex than this new dinosaur.

"I think it would look just as nasty, if not worse (than T. rex),'' Currie said. ``This guy has a long snout, long skull, incredibly sharp teeth - I think it would have been terrifying."

At the Wilmington, Delaware exhibit, which focused on the career findings of Dr. Currie, the Canadian scientist commented on the family relationships of this new dinosaur. He stated that the new species is apparently related to Giganotosaurus, or about as closely related as a dog and a fox. He also commented that this new dinosaur is much farther removed from T. rex, making the two about as close as a dog and a cat.

Paleontologist and theropod expert Tom Holtz, of the University of Maryland, believes that researchers are not likely to come upon carnivorous dinosaurs much larger than Currie and Coria's new discovery.

"I think we're getting close to the size limit you could be and still be an effective meat-eater,'' said Holtz, who has documented theropod evolution over his career. ``If you get too large, you won't be able to hunt down prey because you'll simply be too ponderous.''

The March 10 comments by Currie were only a preliminary announcement, and a scientific research paper describing the dinosaur will not be published for quite some time. In their paper Currie and Coria will apparently give the dinosaur a South American Indian name, but any details about the name have not yet been announced, according to Holtz. So, as with most paleontological discovery, stay tuned!

Edited by draconic chronicler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VERY nice find draconic, very nice find indeed.

Could u give me the link to the source of info please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, more evidence to support my thinking of Allosaurus hunting in packs. Now, I think there have been a couple exceptional 45-foot T-Rexs, but if this thing regularly grew to 45, it's a monster. So, I take it it's an Allosaurid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im only going to say one thing,The day the the tyrannosaurus is re-named is the day it loses its title and along with that it would have to lose its name.So topics like this one with the name that makes one assume that it allready lost its title is just wrong 110%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im only going to say one thing,The day the the tyrannosaurus is re-named is the day it loses its title and along with that it would have to lose its name.So topics like this one with the name that makes one assume that it allready lost its title is just wrong 110%.

Title and name are two different things. By title as the article states, it that T-Rex can no longer claim to be the largest meat eating dino by a longshot. Now there are several contenders ahead of it, and Spino is so much huger that any of the others. I just saw a reference to Jack Horner stating there is evidence for a 75 foot Spino in West Africa, possibly a new species. More to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, more evidence to support my thinking of Allosaurus hunting in packs. Now, I think there have been a couple exceptional 45-foot T-Rexs, but if this thing regularly grew to 45, it's a monster. So, I take it it's an Allosaurid?

It sounds like something completely different becasue they imply it has no relation to Gigantosaurus, who is an Allosauride. With the long scissor like skull, it almost sounds like another spino! Or maybe another giant raptor as these also have long low skulls.

There is a jaw fragment that suggests T Rex coulld get almost to 50 feet but it is just one small piece postulated to be from a much bigger rex. Now I have to find out about this rumor of an even bigger Spino in West Africa. If real, it might be able to swallow your average T Rex whole! Certainly a Komodo dragon could swallow one that much smaller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- Post deleted -

What it wrong with you? Don't you know anything about living animals? What is this fixation on eating fish, and why would that make it less of a hunter? In fact this proves it was an active hunter and not a possible scavenger like the T Rex. Have you ever heard of the the Nile Crocodile? Yes, they eat fish, but they also eat just about every other animal in africa including humans, buffalos and lions. We know spinos smaller cousin Baryonyx ate other dinosaurs, and we know spino ate pterosaurs, and only a fool would think that it wouldn't eat other dinosaurs, we just don't have any stomach content fossils yet. And crocodiles have the strongest bite force of any living animal, and spinos have the same kind of jaws. No scientist would question that spino with a seven foot long head would have less bite force than a rex with a four foot head. What are you thinking? The new Spino is almost TWICE as big as the biggest T Rex. Seriously, it could probably swallow an adult T-Rex whole with such a great size disparity. How do you figure a 60 to 80 foot animal is "allosaurus size"? And this animal probably weight many tons more than a T Rex, but was still a more gracile built, and undoubtedly a faster and more maneuverable animal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i will comment once again on the bite force thing

the nasals [of T. rex] were fused, all of the bite force was transmitted to the food instead of some of the force being distorting the skull. The T. rex especially had a very strong skull and jaw muscles that would turn it into a zoological superweapon." Snively said.

It was calculated that a medium-sized T. rex had a more powerful bite than larger carnivorous dinosaurs, like Carcharadontosaurus saharicus, with a head about 1.5 times longer than that of T. rex and this results even from conservative estimates.And if the spinos jaw is larger as the carcharas is than it makes no difference because the size dosnt matter even if the rex was medium and it was in fact smaller it still had a stronger bite.

If it had stronger bite and its head was that much smaller,than it would no doubt have a stronger bite when fully grown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok i will comment once again on the bite force thing

the nasals [of T. rex] were fused, all of the bite force was transmitted to the food instead of some of the force being distorting the skull. The T. rex especially had a very strong skull and jaw muscles that would turn it into a zoological superweapon." Snively said.

It was calculated that a medium-sized T. rex had a more powerful bite than larger carnivorous dinosaurs, like Carcharadontosaurus saharicus, with a head about 1.5 times longer than that of T. rex and this results even from conservative estimates.And if the spinos jaw is larger as the carcharas is than it makes no difference because the size dosnt matter even if the rex was medium and it was in fact smaller it still had a stronger bite.

If it had stronger bite and its head was that much smaller,than it would no doubt have a stronger bite when fully grown.

But you seem to forget that when they they are both adults, the spino's head is twice as big. The whole head could fit in spinos mouth. I never disagreed that equal sized spinos and rexes would be a fairly even match, but the point is that a 70 foot spino would have all the advantages against a 42 foot Rex, the biggest known right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And as for Spino being a fish eater, to a 75 footer, a T-Rex would be swallowed whole without much of a struggle like any big fish. Since it has virtually no arms, would would be almost like swallowing a big fish. Burp. End of story.

I started this thread and it is about the largest known theropods. As a courtsey please refrain from mentioning that little dino again here since it has nothing to do with the Thread's subject. This thread is about the "BIG" carnivorous theropods, not slow plodding, virtually arm-less medium-sized scavengers.

What an image. I can practically see the tiny arms trying to arrest the downward slide towards doom. It is interesting that more theropod forms are still being discovered. This was clearly a very successful evolutionary niche, it is somewhat surprising that mammals or birds did not develop a parallel.

I have seen a skeleton of a gigantosaurous in comparison to a skeleton of T-Rex. The thought of a 75 foot long theropod gets the imagination going.

Thanks for the info DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What an image. I can practically see the tiny arms trying to arrest the downward slide towards doom. It is interesting that more theropod forms are still being discovered. This was clearly a very successful evolutionary niche, it is somewhat surprising that mammals or birds did not develop a parallel.

I have seen a skeleton of a gigantosaurous in comparison to a skeleton of T-Rex. The thought of a 75 foot long theropod gets the imagination going.

Thanks for the info DC.

Yep, it seems the majority of these dino artists and animators do not know enough about real reptiles, or the way Theropod skulls are designed to realize these creatures, exactly like modern archosaurs (crocs and birds), only tear their prey into smaller pieces if they cannot swallow it whole. They have the mindset they eat like lions and tigers, which, of course, is false.

It would be great to see a talented artist or animator realistically depict the biggest known spino swallowing an adult T Rex. It is very possible. The "reptilan feeding rule" seems to be " If the head fits..... you can swallow it" (meaning the rest of the animal)

Edited by draconic chronicler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought the title was lost couple of months ago to spinosaurs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's another t rex & spino chart I made. a 60 ft spino vs a 40 ft T Rex

linked-image

Ol' T Rex doesnt stand a chance against this spino

Edited by KillerOrca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I changed the size. the Spino in JP3 was smaller than average ,it was 50 ft. Spino really averaged 60 ft

So this is the real size

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not buying it

Spino was actually 60 ft on average

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both Friedrich von Huene[11] and Donald F. Glut,[12] decades apart, listed it as among the most massive theropods or the most massive in their surveys, at upwards of 6 tons in weight and 15 meters (50 feet) in length. In 1988, Gregory S. Paul also listed it as the longest theropod at 15 meters (50 feet), but gave a lower mass estimate.

Recent estimates, based on new specimens, list Spinosaurus at 16 - 18 metres (53.3 to 60 feet) long and 7 - 9 tonnes in weight (7.7 to 9.9 tons)

François Therrien and Donald Henderson, in a recent paper using scaling based on skull length, have challenged previous estimates, finding the length too great and the weight too small. Their estimates include a length of 12.6 to 14.3 meters (41.3 to 47.0 ft) and a mass of 12.0 to 20.9 tonnes (13.2 to 23.0 tons)

Click

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Draconic, could you include a source link with the article in your first post please.

Always include a source link, unless it's your article then not doing so constitutes plagiarism.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Draconic, could you include a source link with the article in your first post please.

Always include a source link, unless it's your article then not doing so constitutes plagiarism.

Thanks.

Sorry, I have edited the first post with the link at the top.

And below is the link of the official paper describing the animal, now named Mapusaurus roseae printed in the journal Geodiversatas.

It is a Charcodonosauride. so really not as exciting as the first article, but this is an excellent full report available free, unlike so many on the internet.

http://www.mnhn.fr/museum/front/medias/pub...653_g06n1a4.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive been thinking,What if the king was a sauropod?But that will never happen because people want to see bloodthirsty beast that could rip a bull apart,I think it would be cool to make apatosaurus.

It said in the article that medium sized rex would have a stronger bite than a Carchara that has a head 1.5 times longer than that of T. rex,But if you size the t-rex up to its max average size it would have doubled the bite that it had priviously.So even if the spinos head was larger than a 1.5 spino skull it would have to be triple in order for it to be stronger than a rexs bite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the ORIGINAL article, there is a possibility that the new theropod is just a subspecies of Giganotosaurus. Saurophaganax, the 50+ ft. theropod is now believed to be a subspecies of super-sized Allosaurus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About the ORIGINAL article, there is a possibility that the new theropod is just a subspecies of Giganotosaurus. Saurophaganax, the 50+ ft. theropod is now believed to be a subspecies of super-sized Allosaurus.

No, its Mapusaurus before they named it. It is the same team, same circumstances, but the description of the head is misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, ok. Didn't see your previous post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By title I assume you mean largest. T. rex has not been the largest or longest carnivorous dinosaur for a long, long while. However, it is one of the more intelligent (I'm too lazy to look up the documentary) of the carnosaurs and I don't believe that an allosaur would have been able to compare. Prove me wrong.

I want some sources for these apparent 75-ft Spinosaurs. I haven't heard a single peep about them, and from past research on Spinosaurus I think Jurassic Park 3 gave it far too much credibility. Such a long, thin neck would not have the muscles to support the incredible jaw power that carnosaurs such as T. rex and Giganotosaurus could have attained. Spinosaurs would be relegated to much smaller, one-snap prey (See here) whereas T. rex (despite that dinosaur document on television that everyone is obsessing over) could easily have ambushed creatures around its own size. See here.

At 75 feet I'd imagine the weight of the creature would be so sheer as to be ridiculous. Spinosaurs were lightly built and at that weight only pillars of legs like those of the large sauropods could support them. Show me what journal you read that in and maybe I'll listen, but at this point that sounds as ridiculous as the "facts" people gleaned from the Jurassic Park movies.

Edit: A paleontologist I consulted said that the Wikipedia section that Raptor x& posted was the latest information on Spinosaur size. No 75-footers. -.- /endrant

Edited by WraithGod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

t-rex would get owned lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.