There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tyrannosaurus rex

China Smilodon-Rex Offline
Regular Member
***
#31

(11-29-2018, 08:02 PM)chaos Wrote:
(11-29-2018, 07:38 PM)Smilodon-Rex Wrote:
(09-16-2018, 01:01 PM)GuateGojira Wrote: Sadly, Jack Horner is not a good source, he said that he had another T. rex named "Celeste" years ago (at the 90's) and that was "10% larger than Sue", but since then nothing has been published. In fact, this is the only information available of this specimen:

*This image is copyright of its original author


This is from the book "Tyrannosaurus rex: the tyrant king". So no, there is not a larger specimen from the part of Horner.

However, while for the moment there is not a T. rex "longer" than Sue - FMNH PR 2081, there is a heavier one. The specimen RSM P2523.8 know as "Scotty" was apparently heavier than Sue with more robust bones despite its similar length (c.12 m.). This is a picture of Scotty:

*This image is copyright of its original author


These are the known bones of this specimen:

*This image is copyright of its original author


The study of Campione et al. (2014) "Body mass estimation in non-avian bipeds using a theoretical conversion to quadruped stylopodial proportions" calculate a weight of  8,004 kg (6,000 - 10,007) for Scotty compare with Sue at 7,377 kg (5,531 - 9,224). Another study of Scott Harman from 2013, calculated a weight of 8,400 kg for Sue, this means that Scotty was heavier than that, probably around 9 tons.

An amateur investigator at DevianArt named "Franoys" made abother study with Sue and he calculated a body mass of 8,830 kg, check this image from him:

*This image is copyright of its original author


So if Sue weighed 8,839 kg, Scotty weighed more than 9 tons! From my point of view the maximum size of the Tyrannosaurus rex, for the moment, is 12.3 m long and a weight of c.9 tons.
Guate, have you heard about the UCMP 137538?it's said it would be the biggest T-rex individual according to calculation

*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author

 The UCMP 137538 specimen's photo

*This image is copyright of its original author

 In fact, ucmp 137538'body-size is based on sue or stan to calculate and estimate

*This image is copyright of its original author

The size comparison between different T-rex individuals
When and where was this UCMP found? Ever since my childhood I've been fascinated by the T-Rex, as have millions of others. It amazes me as to what new discoveries will eventually be un-earthed.
Great topic!
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A1-A...2_47545561
 Here is the UCMP 137538 research link
2 users Like Smilodon-Rex's post
Reply

Malaysia johnny rex Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
***
#32
( This post was last modified: 11-30-2018, 09:01 AM by johnny rex )

Most adult Tyrannosaurus rex specimens discovered so far were around 38-40 feet long (with FMNH PR 2081 "Sue" at 40.5 feet long) and weigh around 6-10 tonnes. I assumed this is the average adult size for Tyrannosaurus rex.
3 users Like johnny rex's post
Reply

China Smilodon-Rex Offline
Regular Member
***
#33

(11-30-2018, 09:00 AM)johnny rex Wrote: Most adult Tyrannosaurus rex specimens discovered so far were around 38-40 feet long (with FMNH PR 2081 "Sue" at 40.5 feet long) and weigh around 6-10 tonnes. I assumed this is the average adult size for Tyrannosaurus rex.
The biggest T-rex's population in Montana may could up to 11 tones average weight, while the small population in mexico may just 5 tones average weight
2 users Like Smilodon-Rex's post
Reply

Guatemala GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#34

(11-29-2018, 07:38 PM)Smilodon-Rex Wrote: Guate, have you heard about the UCMP 137538?it's said it would be the biggest T-rex individual according to calculation

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author
 The UCMP 137538 specimen's photo

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author
 In fact, ucmp 137538'body-size is based on sue or stan to calculate and estimate

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author
The size comparison between different T-rex individuals

I think that the firs estimation of that huge size for UCMP 137538 was made by Dr Gregory Paul (don't remember exactly when) but it was discarded because is based in a single toe bone.

There is also the specimen UCMP 118742, also presente by Dr Paul in his book "Predatory Dinosaurs of the World" and in page 343 he estimated this T. rex at c.13.6 m long and c.12 tones, but again new studies shows that the maxilia is no larger than the one from "Sue", so is not a giant. This is a draw of the fossil:

*This image is copyright of its original author


This compared with "Sue":

*This image is copyright of its original author


The problem to calculate the size in such small or fragmentary bones is that there is a huge range of variations in the living animals that UCMP 137538 could be just a T. rex with relatively large feet and that's it. Also, as we don't have a direct modern reference, it will be a huge speculation to estimate the size of an animal with such a small bones.

From my part the T.rex FMNH PR 2081 - "Sue" is still the largest one, although RSM P2523.8 - "Scotty" may be slightly heavier.
3 users Like GuateGojira's post
Reply

India brotherbear Offline
Grizzly Enthusiast
*****
#35

Jack Horner had me convinced that T-rex was a scavenger, although I never accepted that he could have been 100% scavenger. I figured a scavenger who could displace raptors from a kill and one who would hunt and kill on occasion ( rather like a typical grizzly ). But there is a problem with this idea. If tyrannosaurs were pack-hunters, living in a group would be counter productive for a scavenger. So it must therefore be the other way around. If T-rex lived in groups, then he must have been a hunter who, like nearly all hunters, scavenged occasionally. 
-Just getting my thoughts together.
 Grizzly  - Boss of the Woods.
        
  
             
1 user Likes brotherbear's post
Reply

Switzerland Spalea Offline
Wildanimal Lover
*****
#36

@brotherbear:

About #35: I also read than T-rex would have hunt in prides, with the youngest ones, swifter and faster could chase the prey, and finally nab it. Waiting for the adults came to kill it.

It's an hypothesis...

Having read from T. Bakker, the dinosaur heresies, in which one he stated that the proportion between number of T-rex fossils and Dinosaurs hunted (ornithopods and triceratops) was the same as observed in Serengeti national Park between the lions and preys of lions (antelopes and buffalos), he stated that the T-rex would have been an active predator like the extant lions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_T._Bakker
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dinosaur_Heresies
2 users Like Spalea's post
Reply

China Smilodon-Rex Offline
Regular Member
***
#37

(12-02-2018, 12:18 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:
(11-29-2018, 07:38 PM)Smilodon-Rex Wrote: Guate, have you heard about the UCMP 137538?it's said it would be the biggest T-rex individual according to calculation

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author
 The UCMP 137538 specimen's photo

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author
 In fact, ucmp 137538'body-size is based on sue or stan to calculate and estimate

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author
The size comparison between different T-rex individuals

I think that the firs estimation of that huge size for UCMP 137538 was made by Dr Gregory Paul (don't remember exactly when) but it was discarded because is based in a single toe bone.

There is also the specimen UCMP 118742, also presente by Dr Paul in his book "Predatory Dinosaurs of the World" and in page 343 he estimated this T. rex at c.13.6 m long and c.12 tones, but again new studies shows that the maxilia is no larger than the one from "Sue", so is not a giant. This is a draw of the fossil:

*This image is copyright of its original author


This compared with "Sue":

*This image is copyright of its original author


The problem to calculate the size in such small or fragmentary bones is that there is a huge range of variations in the living animals that UCMP 137538 could be just a T. rex with relatively large feet and that's it. Also, as we don't have a direct modern reference, it will be a huge speculation to estimate the size of an animal with such a small bones.

From my part the T.rex FMNH PR 2081 - "Sue" is still the largest one, although RSM P2523.8 - "Scotty" may be slightly heavier.
FMNH PR 2081(Sue) has different body-size estimations, if we use the biggest version that sue's body-weight could up to 12tones, and the total length could up to 12.8 meters

*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author

As matter of fact, The female Tyrannosaurs-rex in 《Jurassic Park II》is based on "Sue"(total length 12.8 meters), while the male T-rex called Buck is based on "Stan"(BHI 3033), Buck's total length is 12.1 meters as long as Stan

*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author

 Even the teeth also with a same sequence when you compare Buck and Stan

*This image is copyright of its original author
3 users Like Smilodon-Rex's post
Reply

Guatemala GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#38
( This post was last modified: 12-03-2018, 08:41 AM by GuateGojira )

Interesting, I did not knew that "Rexy" was based in "Sue" and that "Buck" from The Lost World was based on "Stan", good information!

I don't think that "Sue" or even "Scotty" were over 9 tons, that figures is probaby the maximum for T. rex

Also the biggest Giganotosaurs found was not as heavy as the biggest T.rex, probably about 8 ton at the most, but with only two specimens (only one more or less complete and the other only a fragment of mandible) this is still not sure. By the way Scott Harman retracted from his previous estimation of up to 13.2 meters for the large Giganotosaurus mandible, as with only an small fragment, this specimen could be just an specimen of the same size then the holotype (12.3 - 12.5 m long) but with a bigger head, just that. 

Spinosaurus was not even close to the T. rex figures, with that body probably was much lower than 8 tons, maybe 7 at the most.
2 users Like GuateGojira's post
Reply

Guatemala GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#39
( This post was last modified: 12-03-2018, 09:06 AM by GuateGojira )

(12-02-2018, 05:24 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Jack Horner had me convinced that T-rex was a scavenger, although I never accepted that he could have been 100% scavenger. I figured a scavenger who could displace raptors from a kill and one who would hunt and kill on occasion ( rather like a typical grizzly ). But there is a problem with this idea. If tyrannosaurs were pack-hunters, living in a group would be counter productive for a scavenger. So it must therefore be the other way around. If T-rex lived in groups, then he must have been a hunter who, like nearly all hunters, scavenged occasionally. 
-Just getting my thoughts together.

Forget Jack Horner, his "hypothesis" that T. rex was a 100% scavenger is a great fallacy with no head! Better read Dr Bob Bakker, he is a genius and probably one of the BEST Paleontologists in history!

T. rex was an animal that evolve to explote all the carnivorous potential like any other animal on land. It focus in evolve what is probably the most perfect predatory head, a mix of binocular vision, extraordinary olfact, an acute earing, all this togheter with a large brain and the most powerfull bite in any land animal. A creature don't evolve such a marvelous killing tool just to eat dead animals. 

T. rex also had longer legs in comparison with other carnivore dinosaurs, which allowed it to make faster turns and have a more cursorial living. Its long legs, muscular tail and balanced body with a huge hip bone, made an animal or perfect proportions, not as fast as modern predators but fast enough to captures the prey of its time, probably by ambush. Small arms were not a problema, specially when all the other body parts were well balanced.

Finally, there is a theory that T. rex  lived/hunted in group, but to be honest there is no direct evidence, just circunstancial evidence based in some groups of Albertosaurus (or Gorgosaurus, I don't remember) found by Dr Currie, but that is all. So I still inclined to belive that an animal like the T. rex was not necesary "grupal", but like some modern eagles, they probably lived in pairs for the raise of the offspring.

In a form, I see the T. rex like a tiger in India, most of its prey was smaller than it, with the exception of the biggest Triceratops and Edmontosaurus and probably the big sauropods like Alamosaurus. (sambar, nilgai, wild buffalo and gaur are the only prey that surpass the tiger in size in India). Its best (and only) competitors were the big Dakotaraptors which were like dholes. Now, IF we belive that Nanotyrannus was a valid taxon, then it would be like the leopards. Great coincidence, don't you think.

I will finish with the words of Dr Henry Orborn in 1916: "Tyrannosaurus is the most superb carnivorous mechanism among the terrestrial Vertebrata, in which raptorial destructive power and speed are combined".
4 users Like GuateGojira's post
Reply

Malaysia johnny rex Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
***
#40

Regarding whether the females are much larger than the males is unknown, there's no conclusive demonstration of sexual dimorphism in Tyrannosaurus rex despite Larson's statements in his 2008 book. The only specimen which was discovered to be a female is the B-rex or MOR 1125 if what was discovered in its femur was indeed a medullary bone, and it is smaller than most adult Tyrannosaurus rex specimens.
2 users Like johnny rex's post
Reply

China Smilodon-Rex Offline
Regular Member
***
#41

(12-03-2018, 08:39 AM)GuateGojira Wrote: Interesting, I did not knew that "Rexy" was based in "Sue" and that "Buck" from The Lost World was based on "Stan", good information!

I don't think that "Sue" or even "Scotty" were over 9 tons, that figures is probaby the maximum for T. rex

Also the biggest Giganotosaurs found was not as heavy as the biggest T.rex, probably about 8 ton at the most, but with only two specimens (only one more or less complete and the other only a fragment of mandible) this is still not sure. By the way Scott Harman retracted from his previous estimation of up to 13.2 meters for the large Giganotosaurus mandible, as with only an small fragment, this specimen could be just an specimen of the same size then the holotype (12.3 - 12.5 m long) but with a bigger head, just that. 

Spinosaurus was not even close to the T. rex figures, with that body probably was much lower than 8 tons, maybe 7 at the most.
Rexy in 《Jurassic Park》was based on "Stan" and AMNH 5027, while in 《Jurassic World》was based on "sue" but also continued AMNH 5027

*This image is copyright of its original author

In fact, the T-rex skull which on the Jurassic Park is AMNH 5027!!!

*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author

The AMNH 5027, T-rex in 《Jurassic Park III》also based on AMNH 5027

*This image is copyright of its original author
2 users Like Smilodon-Rex's post
Reply

Guatemala GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#42

Interesting, the skull of "Rexy" is the same than that of AMNH 5027. So this means that "Rexy" was about 12 meters long, which is large for any predator is just slighty smaller than "Sue". 

I don't see any change in "Rexy" in Jurassic World (except from the scars), so probably is just lightly larger as is older, like "Sue", but that is it, as its skull is still like AMNH 5027. 

AMNH 5027 is not as small, as the skull is just about 15 cm less and its total length is about 30 cm less, no big deal. I think that the diference is more in robusticity, as "Sue" is heavier.
1 user Likes GuateGojira's post
Reply

China Smilodon-Rex Offline
Regular Member
***
#43

(12-03-2018, 09:01 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:
(12-02-2018, 05:24 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Jack Horner had me convinced that T-rex was a scavenger, although I never accepted that he could have been 100% scavenger. I figured a scavenger who could displace raptors from a kill and one who would hunt and kill on occasion ( rather like a typical grizzly ). But there is a problem with this idea. If tyrannosaurs were pack-hunters, living in a group would be counter productive for a scavenger. So it must therefore be the other way around. If T-rex lived in groups, then he must have been a hunter who, like nearly all hunters, scavenged occasionally. 
-Just getting my thoughts together.

Forget Jack Horner, his "hypothesis" that T. rex was a 100% scavenger is a great fallacy with no head! Better read Dr Bob Bakker, he is a genius and probably one of the BEST Paleontologists in history!

T. rex was an animal that evolve to explote all the carnivorous potential like any other animal on land. It focus in evolve what is probably the most perfect predatory head, a mix of binocular vision, extraordinary olfact, an acute earing, all this togheter with a large brain and the most powerfull bite in any land animal. A creature don't evolve such a marvelous killing tool just to eat dead animals. 

T. rex also had longer legs in comparison with other carnivore dinosaurs, which allowed it to make faster turns and have a more cursorial living. Its long legs, muscular tail and balanced body with a huge hip bone, made an animal or perfect proportions, not as fast as modern predators but fast enough to captures the prey of its time, probably by ambush. Small arms were not a problema, specially when all the other body parts were well balanced.

Finally, there is a theory that T. rex  lived/hunted in group, but to be honest there is no direct evidence, just circunstancial evidence based in some groups of Albertosaurus (or Gorgosaurus, I don't remember) found by Dr Currie, but that is all. So I still inclined to belive that an animal like the T. rex was not necesary "grupal", but like some modern eagles, they probably lived in pairs for the raise of the offspring.

In a form, I see the T. rex like a tiger in India, most of its prey was smaller than it, with the exception of the biggest Triceratops and Edmontosaurus and probably the big sauropods like Alamosaurus. (sambar, nilgai, wild buffalo and gaur are the only prey that surpass the tiger in size in India). Its best (and only) competitors were the big Dakotaraptors which were like dholes. Now, IF we belive that Nanotyrannus was a valid taxon, then it would be like the leopards. Great coincidence, don't you think.

I will finish with the words of Dr Henry Orborn in 1916: "Tyrannosaurus is the most superb carnivorous mechanism among the terrestrial Vertebrata, in which raptorial destructive power and speed are combined".

*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author

T-rex was a super massive predator and it may the greatest land live carnivore in earth history, not only the enormous body-size and awesome power, but also had the most excellent eyes and nose in all the gigantic theropods , it could observed over 5 kilometers far by eyes and smelled any potential prey nearly 10 kilometers far by excellent nose

*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author
3 users Like Smilodon-Rex's post
Reply

China Smilodon-Rex Offline
Regular Member
***
#44

(12-03-2018, 09:39 AM)GuateGojira Wrote: Interesting, the skull of "Rexy" is the same than that of AMNH 5027. So this means that "Rexy" was about 12 meters long, which is large for any predator is just slighty smaller than "Sue". 

I don't see any change in "Rexy" in Jurassic World (except from the scars), so probably is just lightly larger as is older, like "Sue", but that is it, as its skull is still like AMNH 5027. 

AMNH 5027 is not as small, as the skull is just about 15 cm less and its total length is about 30 cm less, no big deal. I think that the diference is more in robusticity, as "Sue" is heavier.
Rexy in Jurassic World was 13.4 meters, but in Jurassic Park just 12.1 meters

*This image is copyright of its original author




*This image is copyright of its original author


*This image is copyright of its original author

Rexy's head looks really huge especially when you see the 《Jurassic World II》, it may 1.8 meters long as a T-rex maximum length 

*This image is copyright of its original author
2 users Like Smilodon-Rex's post
Reply

Guatemala GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#45

(12-03-2018, 10:52 AM)Smilodon-Rex Wrote: Rexy in Jurassic World was 13.4 meters, but in Jurassic Park just 12.1 meters

13.4 meters is an exageration and probably based in the incorrect previous length of AMNH 5027. The length of 12.1 m is the accurate one. In fact, as far I remember, the huge animatronic of "Rexy" measured 12 meters.
1 user Likes GuateGojira's post
Reply






Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB