|
Triceratops
|
  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Triceratops is a genus of herbivorous ceratopsid dinosaur that first appeared during the late Maastrichtian stage of the late Cretaceous period, about 68 million years ago (mya) in what is now North America. Individual Triceratops are estimated to have reached about 7.9 to 9.0 m (25.9–29.5 ft) in length, 2.9 to 3.0 m (9.5 to 9.8 ft) in height, and 6.1–12.0 tonnes (13,000–26,000 lb) in weight. The most distinctive feature is their large skull, among the largest of all land animals. The largest known skull (specimen MWC 7584, formerly BYU 12183) is estimated to have been 2.5 metres (8.2 ft) in length when complete, and could reach almost a third of the length of the entire animal. A specimen of T. horridus named Kelsey measured 7.3 metres (24 ft) long with a 1.98 metres (6.5 ft) skull, stood about 2.3 metres (7.5 ft) tall, and was estimated by the Black Hills institute to weight nearly 6 tonnes (5.9 long tons; 6.6 short tons). A Triceratops 8 metres (26 ft) long has been estimated by Gregory S. Paul to have massed 9.3 tonnes (9.2 long tons; 10.3 short tons). Pictures of Triceratops horridus displayed in American Museum of Natural Hstory in New York City, USA.  
I liked the triceratops very much too when I was kind. I believed they were the invincible herbivores, like the ankylosaurus, except that the ankylosaurus was only able to defend itself, not to attack. And I must admit to have been disappointed when I learned their horns weren't as sturdy as we thought.
During my childhood too, I really believed that the tyrex was the most nightmarish predator that ever lived on land, and I imagined that the triceratops was the only beast able to stand up against it, one versus one. Since then I have learnt to put into perpectives the predatory capacities of the former and the defensive capacities of the latter. Tyrex is perhaps not the performing predator that we imagined, and the triceratops is, first of all, an herbivore that lived in herds. 
My favorite dinosaur was the theropod Giganotosaurus, but Triceratops was close up there as well.
I used to also believe that the Tryannosaurus was the nemesis of Triceratops, similar to Amur Tiger vs Brown Bear and Lion vs Hyena, similar to those two. There's also been a controversial debate a couple of years ago where a few scientists (Longrich and Field, 2012?) theorized that Triceratops was just a young Torosaurus, and many opposing studies stated that Triceratops was indeed a separate species from Torosaurus. The debate in 2012 made me a bit spooked as to how "the infamous Triceratops" could be considered as its smaller, less-famous relative.
@Polar :
About #6: They were very numerous species of ceratopsids that were a very prosperous family of dinosaurs. And, in my opinion, triceratops and torosaurus were simply the biggest known forms of ceratopsids. I couldn't believe either that triceratops was a juvenile form of torosaurus. As concerns their dimensions I consider it's not possible. Perhaps I'm wrong... I know that Horner too has considered that several dinosaurs species formed in fact one single specy depending on the external complexity form... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GrqB09hL5k&t=83s May be yes, it's true, but this is a very bold interpretation.
Spiclypeus shipporum: Late Cretaceous of Montana. 4m50 to 6m long, and weighing 3-4 tons...
Two depictions of styracosaurus: lived on Earth 75 millions years ago (Campanian stage) in Alberta (Canada). 5m50 long, 1m80 height, 3 tons weight. 4 to 6 long parietal spykes extending from its neck frill. Certainly an herd animal.
A very beautiful depicton of styracosaurus... The same animal like at the previous post.
 (08-19-2017, 04:53 AM)Polar Wrote: There's also been a controversial debate a couple of years ago where a few scientists (Longrich and Field, 2012?) theorized that Triceratops was just a young Torosaurus, and many opposing studies stated that Triceratops was indeed a separate species from Torosaurus. The debate in 2012 made me a bit spooked as to how "the infamous Triceratops" could be considered as its smaller, less-famous relative. Don't worry about that @Polar, that idea was discarted already by serious investigators. In fact, it was not even a "theory", but just something that has no sence at all. Imagin this, how is going to be posible that an adult animal will be smaller than the subadult? It is well know that Torosaurus latus is smaller than Triceratops horridus/prorsus and we know young and old specimens for both species. With all respect, Jack Horner was crazy when he proposed this idea, probably just to gain attention (and I was not the only one that especifically said that). It is really sad that a previous good investigator like him finished with such a silly ideas. Dinosaurs are NOT Pokemons! Just in case, if someone is saying that I am exagerating again, check these two post and AAALLLLLLL the information on them, that destroy (literrally speaking  ) the idea that Triceratops was Torosaurus:http://paleoking.blogspot.com/2017/05/to...ively.html https://paleoking.blogspot.com/2017/05/a...t.html?m=1 PLEASE, read them all. By the way, here is a comparative image of all the specimens known of Torosaurus latus/utahensis from "GetAwayTrike", including old and young specimens,  *This image is copyright of its original author Interestingly, the specimen MOR 981 and MOR1122 were labeled as "the biggest skulls found for any land animal ever", but it seems that a new skull from the "Pentaceratops" OMNH 10165 (now known as Titanoceratops ouranus) owns the new title:  *This image is copyright of its original author
The two species togheter by "GetAwayTrike", sorry for the quality of the image, I could not found one of higher resolution:
 *This image is copyright of its original author What Dr Bob Bakker says about these animals is incredible: "This defensive master-machine alive and in action must has been a sight to behold, its eight-foot skull pivoting easily left and right, its neck frill swinging in wide arcs". This is the biggest skull found for these species, the specimen MWC_7584 with measure about 2.5 m:  *This image is copyright of its original author A magnificent animal, by any standard!!!  *This image is copyright of its original author
About the skull of Titanosaurus ouranus, it seems that Lehman (1998) exagerated a little in his estimation of over 3 meters long.
According with Longrich (2010) the skull would measured 2.65 m in total length, check the full image:  *This image is copyright of its original author This is the figure 4:  *This image is copyright of its original author So, it seems that with 2,77 m, the skull of Torosaurus latus MOR 981 still hold the title..... for the moment.  After all, where we left the huge Eotriceratops xerinsularis? *This image is copyright of its original author Accrording with Wu et al. (2007) they estimated a total skull length of about 3 meters long, but as we can see in the reconstruction of "GetAwayTrike" the skull is even more fragmentary than Titanoceratops ouranus, so its real size is an educated guess. Check the reconstruction and a compared with a human.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author As we can see, the world of the giant ceratopcids is incredible, and it seems that Triceratops is not the only giant in the family. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 7 Guest(s) |