#00be0f
3
0
1
Feb 24, 2019 19:15:10 GMT
415
themechabaryonyx789
Bowie Dave
4,993
October 2013
themechabaryonyx789
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Baryonyx
Tings
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Dec 18, 2013 8:19:42 GMT
T-Rex - 8 tonnes Allosaurus - 2 tonnes Siats - rumored as 4 tonnes? I don't believe them, a 13 meter carnivore would of been 6 - 8 tonnes at fully grown adult. Baryonyx - 5 tonnes Spinosaurus 11 - 14 tonnes The 4 ton estimates for Siats were originally given to the 'juvenile 9 metre long Siats'. First of all, 4 tons is weigh too much for a juvenile 9 metre long Neovenatorid. Second of all, it appears that the specimen of Siats was actually a 11-12 metre long sub-adult. 6-8 tons seems about right for a 13 metre long adult Siats.
|
|
#00be0f
10
0
1
140
thesporerex
"May the flames guide thee"
2,872
October 2013
thesporerex
Example 4
|
Post by thesporerex on Dec 19, 2013 21:46:00 GMT
Siats is probably 12 metres, I am trying to be abit conserative on this one because I kinda doubt it being 13 metres.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Dec 19, 2013 22:07:14 GMT
Yeah probably 11-12 metres I would say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0 Likes Received:
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 18:27:06 GMT
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
37
0
Apr 19, 2024 18:27:06 GMT
Deleted
0
Apr 19, 2024 18:27:06 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2013 2:34:10 GMT
What it said on Wikipedia that Spinosaurus is 16 meters long, 17 meters is suitable.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Dec 23, 2013 16:00:57 GMT
What it said on Wikipedia that Spinosaurus is 16 meters long, 17 meters is suitable. "Wikipedia"
|
|
ornitholestes
Yutyrannus
Posts: 69 Likes Received: 15
Joined: Apr 20, 2014 8:31:00 GMT
inherit
91
0
15
ornitholestes
69
April 2014
ornitholestes
|
Post by ornitholestes on Apr 22, 2014 17:20:10 GMT
Tyrannosaurus (sensu stricto): known size range ~10-12.3m average probably somewhere between 11 and 11.5m (based on femur lenghts from Larson 2008)
Body mass for sue is imo most likely ~7.3t, but volumetric estimates have been as high at 9.5t (Hutchinson et al. 2011) and 8.4t (Hartman 2013) and as low as 6.1t (Paul 2011) and 5.5t[?!] (Stevens et al. 2008 in Larson & Carpenter 2008), so there is considerable room for error here.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 22, 2014 17:22:49 GMT
5.5 tons for FMNH PR2081? I find that highly unplausible. The specimen is fairly complete, and I can't see it weighing as much as an African Bush Elephant.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 22, 2014 17:24:13 GMT
I would also like to note that the ~9 metre tyrannosaurines and albertosaurines were often said to be 2 tonnes around here, but they are in fact about 3 tonnes.
|
|
ornitholestes
Yutyrannus
Posts: 69 Likes Received: 15
Joined: Apr 20, 2014 8:31:00 GMT
inherit
91
0
15
ornitholestes
69
April 2014
ornitholestes
|
Post by ornitholestes on Apr 22, 2014 17:45:57 GMT
5.5 tons for FMNH PR2081? I find that highly unplausible. The specimen is fairly complete, and I can't see it weighing as much as an African Bush Elephant. Me too. That’s about the same as estimates derived from femur circumference, which are known to produce significant underestimates (although sue, having particularly thick femora, will probably not be as strongly affected by this as many other specimens and species) Stevens et al. stated their model of stan weighed 4.4t, and that that was ~80% as much as their unpublished mass for sue. I think Hartman’s GDI is the best data there is to date, however the density he used was imo a bit high, so that the mass, using the same volumetric data, could also be about a ton less.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 22, 2014 17:49:43 GMT
5.5 tons for FMNH PR2081? I find that highly unplausible. The specimen is fairly complete, and I can't see it weighing as much as an African Bush Elephant. Me too. That’s about the same as estimates derived from femur circumference, which are known to produce significant underestimates (although sue, having particularly thick femora, will probably not be as strongly affected by this as many other specimens and species) Stevens et al. stated their model of stan weighed 4.4t, and that that was ~80% as much as their unpublished mass for sue. I think Hartman’s GDI is the best data there is to date, however the density he used was imo a bit high, so that the mass, using the same volumetric data, could also be about a ton less. I also agree that Hartman does very reasonable mass estimates. What was the density he used though?
|
|
ornitholestes
Yutyrannus
Posts: 69 Likes Received: 15
Joined: Apr 20, 2014 8:31:00 GMT
inherit
91
0
15
ornitholestes
69
April 2014
ornitholestes
|
Post by ornitholestes on Apr 22, 2014 17:57:31 GMT
Mature Allosaurus are about 7.5-10m long, some a little smaller or larger, and up to about 11.8-12m if we take into account Epanterias. Bates et al. 2009 estimated MOR 693 at 1.5t. Due to the problems inherent to laser-scanned skeletons (spine too straight, ribs too vertical), that’s a tad high, their more conservative 1.3-1.4t models are better imo. Unfortunately the model is not easy to measure, it lacks a scalebar and its bones are partly obscured by the soft tissue mesh, so I couldn’t find out how long exactly it was.
Hartman’s skeletal is slightly over 7.2m long in axial lenght, but that’s because he restores the tail somewhat shorter than in A. fragilis. The post-iliac lenght in DINO 2560 (at 8.5m TL) is 54%, but its only 52% in Big Al. In other words, when scaling it we should do so by snout-ventral lenght, or assume Big al’s tail was longer accordingly. Either way, we get about 2t for DINO, which is a typical specimen sizewise.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 22, 2014 18:05:05 GMT
I agree. I also had posted something about Tyrannotitan chubutensis, regarding its size, I'll try to find that.
|
|
ornitholestes
Yutyrannus
Posts: 69 Likes Received: 15
Joined: Apr 20, 2014 8:31:00 GMT
inherit
91
0
15
ornitholestes
69
April 2014
ornitholestes
|
Post by ornitholestes on Apr 22, 2014 18:07:23 GMT
Me too. That’s about the same as estimates derived from femur circumference, which are known to produce significant underestimates (although sue, having particularly thick femora, will probably not be as strongly affected by this as many other specimens and species) Stevens et al. stated their model of stan weighed 4.4t, and that that was ~80% as much as their unpublished mass for sue. I think Hartman’s GDI is the best data there is to date, however the density he used was imo a bit high, so that the mass, using the same volumetric data, could also be about a ton less. I also agree that Hartman does very reasonable mass estimates. What was the density he used though? 0.913kg/l (8400kg/9200l) That seems a little high for my taste. By comparison, Hutchinson et al. arrived at a total density of 0.791 for the same specimen, tough of course with a different model. I think that’s mainly because he assumed the torso and neck to have a specific gravity of 0.9. By comparison, the Bates et al. model of Allosaurus has the thorax at a density of 0.715 when an abdominal airsack is assumed (and T. rex did have abdominal airsacks, judging by the pneumatisation of its sacrum and posterior dorsal vertebrae), and even when the tigh is included it is still 0.778. If anything, T. rex would have been less dense, considering it was way more pneumatised than Allosaurus. So I think a net density close to 0.8 is saver to assume for a T. rex like sue.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 22, 2014 18:12:08 GMT
I also agree that Hartman does very reasonable mass estimates. What was the density he used though? 0.913kg/l (8400kg/9200l) That seems a little high for my taste. By comparison, Hutchinson et al. arrived at a total density of 0.791 for the same specimen, tough of course with a different model. I think that’s mainly because he assumed the torso and neck to have a specific gravity of 0.9. By comparison, the Bates et al. model of Allosaurus has the thorax at a density of 0.715 when an abdominal airsack is assumed (and T. rex did have abdominal airsacks, judging by the pneumatisation of its sacrum and posterior dorsal vertebrae), and even when the tigh is included it is still 0.778. If anything, T. rex would have been more pneumatic, considering it is more pneumatised than Allosaurus. So I think a net density of 0.8 is saver to assume T. rex. Oh, okay. Thanks. I also do agree that nearly 1kg/l sounds a bit too high, and 0.8 sounds quite better.
|
|
ornitholestes
Yutyrannus
Posts: 69 Likes Received: 15
Joined: Apr 20, 2014 8:31:00 GMT
inherit
91
0
15
ornitholestes
69
April 2014
ornitholestes
|
Post by ornitholestes on Apr 22, 2014 18:51:44 GMT
These are the measurements from Hartman’s comparison of Allosaurus: Specimen | TL | Rostroiliac | Postiliac | DINO 2560
| 972 | 446=45.9% | 526=54.1% | MOR 693 | 825 | 393=47.6% | 432=52.4% |
The scalebar was 114px So, if we give big al a longer tail to accommodate for this (which I think is the case in some restorations, if not even the mount itself), its TL is 7.36m (its even bigger in a different skeletal that I saw).
|
|