What the title says.
T-Rex in this battle is a 40 feet long adult in good physical shape, hungry. Battles take place in a jungle, starting a mile and a half apart.
Keep in mind that though some other therapods may be bigger, it does not mean they are more powerful. Use valid information. (JP3 is not valid info)
@ShootingNova said:
Spinosaurus, Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus.
The middle one is the only one who would stand a realistic chance against a T-Rex .
As far as Spino goes , here's a comparison of their skulls :
This shows how pathetically weak and fragile the skull of Spinosaurus looks next to a T.rex's even though the former is longer .
This is from Mega Beasts episode "Biggest Killer Dino"
Giganotosaurus had teeth more adapted for slicing flesh of prey , rather than crushing it(like T-Rex) . According to Francois Therrien , the Gigan had a bite force roughly 3 times weaker than a T-Rex's .
I dunno, the size difference here still seems too vast. Especially with the largest Spino holotype.
@Killemall said:
@Hyper_God said:
The middle one is the only one who would stand a realistic chance against a T-Rex .
As far as Spino goes , here's a comparison of their skulls :
This shows how pathetically weak and fragile the skull of Spinosaurus looks next to a T.rex's even though the former is longer .
This is from Mega Beasts episode "Biggest Killer Dino"
Giganotosaurus had teeth more adapted for slicing flesh of prey , rather than crushing it(like T-Rex) . According to Francois Therrien , the Gigan had a bite force roughly 3 times weaker than a T-Rex's .
I dont think anyone would disagree that T-rex has a much powerful biteforce than anyone here, Spino has the weakest bite for of them all. But biteforce is hardly the most important factor in a fight, not to mention since Spino's teeth are sharp and long while T-rex teeth are thick and hard, either can kill the other in but one bite.
The only advantage Spino has over anyone here is it has a free arm and giant meat hooks that is built for slashing which can be pretty powerful weapon. That would be hard to avoid in a fight. Look at any lion vs lion, or a tiger vs tiger fight and its the claws that is most frequently used rather than bite force, its just more easily to swipe someone with your paws than bite its head off.
These aren't mammalian big cats that we are talking about . And no , a T-Rex's neck is thicker and more robustly built than a Spino's .
These are some of the common misconceptions that people can have regarding the Spino VS Rex debate . All of them are addressed in the following in the same bullet points :
1. As to scavenger, Gregory S. Paul, an expert on dinosaurs in general, stated the following:
In the optimistic hope of putting the scavenging myth to rest, let me present the facts. Tyrannosaurus rex did not have 6- to 8-inch serrated teeth and an arc of D-cross-sectioned teeth set in a massive, powerful skull just to consume rotting carcasses!
He has a point. Rex was certainly well armed for a scavenger.
2. As to slow, as slow as it was, it was the FASTEST ANIMAL IN ITS ENVIRONMENT. It was certainly faster than any other 6+ ton theropod!
3. As to more agile, I doubt it. To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence at all for that statement. If there is, I would certainly like to see it.
4. As to arms for holding, while I don't doubt that those could be useful, it isn't like they could reach beyond the snout of spinosaurus. And they certainly couldn't be used to push the tyrannosaurus's head and break its neck like in jurassic park.
5. As to pure hunter, I have to disagree for several reasons. First, the larger, slower spinosaurus would be more prone to kleptoparasitism than any tyrannosaur. That sail would come in handy for making spino look larger, meaning an animal would be more prone to run away. However, more importantly than the inaccuracy of the pure hunter statement, it should be noted that spinosaurus WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR TAKING PREY ITEMS OF ANYTHING NEAR SIMILAR SIZE, BUT INSTEAD FOR CRUSHING ADVERSARIES THAT COULD BE SWALLOWED WHOLE.
A scientific article to bring further facts regarding Spinos :
23 gennaio 2009 23 January 2009
Spinosaurid paleobiology, more than just “croc-mimic” Spinosaurid paleobiology, more than just "croc-mimic"
Why are so spinosauri "bizarre"? There is no doubt that their peculiarities compared to other theropodi indicating a specific environment, different from those of other forms. The fact that spinosauri are often portraits as part of the crocodiles is a sufficient and comprehensive comparison? This post aims to explore the ecology of spinosauri, not just the usual question of the elongated snout and conical teeth (important details but not the only ones to see these animals).
I do not deny that there are obvious similarities between some spinosauridi and crocodiles, particularly nell'allungamento of the rostrum, in the form "a rosette spatolato" premascellare of the area, in the form of teeth (tapered, slightly curved, with serration vestigiale if not absent). These characters suggest a reduced ability lacerating teeth, replaced by a better ability to pierce and "impaling" prey size medium to small.Although the first interpretation of the craniofacial anatomy and the dental piscivoria, it is noted that the spinosauridi should not be solely piscivori, as indicated by the remains of ornithopode average size of the stomach contents Baryonyx (Charig & Milner, 1997) and the tooth spinosaurino sticking in a series of cervical pterosauro (see related post).
How does the jaw of a spinosauride? Recent findings from Morocco (explained in SVPCA 2008) show that the square (the bone of the skull that articulates the mandible) of spinosauri had conformed to the expansion in width of mouth. This adjustment allowed the ingestion of relatively large prey, like fish and vertebrate small-medium size, almost without the assistance of chewing. In previous post I argued that the morphology of the posterior region of the skull spinosauride be better understood by reconstructing a posture of the head, not horizontal, but rostroventrale with the opening facing jug partially down.If you look at the picture below, you will see that swinging the skull with such a posture, we have the main axis of the maxillary teeth, the axis of the lacrimal and dell'Orbo that have vertically (blue lines), as in most theropodi. An interesting consequence of this morphology is that the act of closing the mouth automatically pushes the prey to their teeth and jaw, at the same time, towards the inside of the mouth (green arrow). This posture also has the honor of unlocking the visual field of spinosauro dall'ingombro given by its rostrum, stereoscopy any better (but this can only determine this with skulls and articulated deformable).
The result is a bite "Impaler" that pushes the prey directly into the conical teeth, where it is literally pierced. Moreover, the fact that the main jaw tooth, the one who first impact with the prey, is parallel to the lines of muscle strength is a clear adaptation to maximize the effectiveness of the bite.
How powerful was that fish? A precise quantification is not possible, however, it should be noted that with increasing length of the rostrum, increases the moment of force exerted by the muscles at the mandibular rostrum. The skull of a long spinosauro was adapted to withstand the forces exerted by the same bite? The cross section of the rostrum, triangular, the presence of the long dorsal nasal crest that served as a point of discharge of the forces and the presence of long secondary palate (a mechanical contrivance to resist twisting), all adjustments are designed to support the intense stress caused from powerful bites. A further indication of this capacity is, at least in Spinosaurus, the rearward position of the nostrils: this meant that the entire region prior to the post nostrils were formed only by compact bone, with no holes or soft part, and then allowed to exercise its level of the rostrum of the considerable pressures without the risk of damaging vital parts such as the nostril. A demonstration of the incredible strength of the rostrums spinosauro is the tafonomia: the rostrums of spinosauro, as the example of Milan, it is often found still articulated after a hundred million years, while much of the skeleton is lost.
The move spinosauri as their bizarre skull? The anatomy of occipital Irritator (Sues et al., 2002) is very instructive: unlike allosauroidi in this condition, in which the muscle processes are specialized to enhance the ability to lower his head and shake sideways (adaptation brontof*gico "to tear the deep side of a prey size medium-large: red areas in the skull of Allosaurus below), are absent in spinosauri muscle listings specifically adapted to increase the lateral motion of the head, or push powerfully downwards (as basal tubers, which are important include the ventral muscles of the neck).
Then, the skull shows no adaptations to violently shake the prey, which was probably killed by the bite and teeth. The skull and jaw muscles and suggests that spinosauri have evolved a mechanism of"impaling" of medium-sized prey, seized with a relatively quick bite and powerful, deeply pierced with the rostral teeth and swallowed almost whole.
The anatomy dell'arto earlier Baryonyx known and probable spinosauroide Megaraptor, is in line with this hypothesis: as I wrote recently, Megaraptor shows that the earlier adjustments dell'arto suggest a technique based on hunting "impaling" of prey to operates the huge first unguale falciforme hand, moved by powerful pectoral muscles. Therefore, it is likely that the spinosauri they were "opportunistic Impaler", theropodi specialized for catching medium-sized prey (fish and terrestrial vertebrates), which were seized by mouth and pierced the concerted action of the teeth and the hypertrophic dell'unguale hand.Obviously, given the amount of Spinosaurus, it is possible that in his case they were also prey of medium size, as ornithopodi or young sauropodi.
Now, I feel the following factors about the fight can be gathered from the article.
-Spinosaurus had non-serrated teeth, making its bite in general about as effective for laccerating as a crocodile's.
-Spinosaurus's jaw was designed to impale small-medium prey items. It probably couldn't kill anything more than half a ton.
-Spinosaurus would have had difficulty moving its head from side to side. So, unlike a crocodile, it would have been effectively incapable of tearing flesh off of an adversary.
-Spinosaurus, since it had zero flesh-tearing ability, would have been unable to eat prey items it couldn't swallow whole. As such, it likely never bothered killing anything that didn't fit into its mouth.
So, because Spino was a small-game hunter with zero ability to tear or laccerate with its jaws, I give the fight to T-rex.
Log in to comment