Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]






Shoot a firework rocket ~ Winners!
Make a forum zoo!

Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Extinct Animal Questions
Topic Started: Nov 26 2013, 10:24 PM (193,386 Views)
Furka
Member Avatar


Helryx
Jul 10 2015, 10:47 PM
3)One more thing, is it possible for Velociraptors to also inhabit the Nemegt Formation?
I personally doubt that, since the environment of the Nemegt was more wet, not ideal for a desert dweler like Velo.
Of course I could be wrong and Velo might have been a very adaptable animal, but there's still the time lapse ...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Bill
Jul 11 2015, 05:42 AM
Saurian's Tylosaurus have this tiny little fin on it's back, something i don't see in others reconstruction

Posted Image

and the Saurian guys usually do a hell of a good job on making accurate reconstructions so i wonder what are the evidence we got that support this.
I think it's speculative.

But given the presence of a tail fluke, their shark-like skin texture, and how far gone mosasaurs were in their evolution as marine animals as a whole, it's totally within the realms of scientific reason to give them a tiny dorsal ridge like that. That said, I'd be more skeptical if they gave it a full sized, triangular dorsal fin.

Just because you intend to stick with the science doesn't mean you can't have fun with it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Posted Image Guat
No Avatar


I know this Tyrannosaurus is pretty inaccurate and ugly but is its diagonal posture as accurate as the typical horizonatal posture?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mathius Tyra
Member Avatar
Rat snake is love... Rat snake is life

Edit: Ooopps... Wrong topic
Edited by Mathius Tyra, Jul 13 2015, 07:58 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BossMan, Jake
Member Avatar
Son of God

How likely was it for the Haggerman Horse to have been striped like a zebra?
And also, despite the lack of fossil evidence what would be the true size for the Ankylosaurus 10 feet high and 33 feet long or 5 feet high and 20 feet long?
Personally I like to believe in a bigger size because if it was any shorter you think the T Rex could kill it with ease by flipping it over with its foot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Furka
Member Avatar


Not really, it could also mean that rexy had a harder time getting past that tail (smaller animal would turn faster, and "safe" areas to hit were reduced in size).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinoBear
Member Avatar


The largest skull seems to show a length of roughly 25 feet and around 6 feet at the highest point on the back, so somewhere in between. Also important to note is how insanely wide ankylosaurs are, which may make it heavier than a side view would suggest.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Never underestimate the mobility of an enraged ankylosaur.

Seriously, thyreophorans can turn on a dime. And ankylosaurids woulda been surprisingly quick on the run too. They weren't like stegosaurids which had specialised, column like legs. They could actually trot.

Yeah, it'd look silly given how wide and rather flat bodied they are, but even a large specimen would have no trouble positioning itself for an awesome defense if you pissed one off.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BossMan, Jake
Member Avatar
Son of God

Incinerox
Jul 14 2015, 05:29 PM
Never underestimate the mobility of an enraged ankylosaur.

Seriously, thyreophorans can turn on a dime. And ankylosaurids woulda been surprisingly quick on the run too. They weren't like stegosaurids which had specialised, column like legs. They could actually trot.

Yeah, it'd look silly given how wide and rather flat bodied they are, but even a large specimen would have no trouble positioning itself for an awesome defense if you pissed one off.
Ok I'm just not used to seeing one like that as no documentary has displayed them in that fashion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Helryx
Member Avatar
bean

So,did Deinocheirus had a hump or a sail?

It'll make so much sense for it to have a hump though due to the climate in it's habitat.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Actually, Scott Hartman posted his own ideas on what it was for on his Skeletal Drawings blog.

In short, he suggested that given the position of the ridge and the posture of the back and hips, and the fact the thing had a fairly heavy skull for a long, skinny necked animal, it was likely that the back had evolved specifically to support enlarged ligaments and muscles that ran down the neck and back.

Not unlike Andrea Cau's idea for Spinosaurus's neck and sail, although I personally find that it makes more sense mechanically speaking when applied to Deinocheirus. It works in the same way as how mammals with heavy heads often have huge neural spines over their shoulders. Except in their case, they don't have to worry about being front heavy. Deinocheirus did. So it anchored its muscles over its main pivot point - the hips.

So externally, it'd look like a hump. But it wasn't made of fat. It was muscle.

Posted Image

http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/home/deinocheirus-therizinosaur-or-hadrosaur-mimic7102015
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DinoBear
Member Avatar


Incinerox
Jul 14 2015, 05:29 PM
Never underestimate the mobility of an enraged ankylosaur.

Seriously, thyreophorans can turn on a dime. And ankylosaurids woulda been surprisingly quick on the run too. They weren't like stegosaurids which had specialised, column like legs. They could actually trot.

Yeah, it'd look silly given how wide and rather flat bodied they are, but even a large specimen would have no trouble positioning itself for an awesome defense if you pissed one off.
AFAIk the forelimbs of stegosaurids were better adapted for the turning thing, although the point still applies somewhat to ankylosaurids.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Helryx
Member Avatar
bean

@Incinerox - Thanks for the answer.

Anyways,here are a few questions regarding Tarbosaurus and Tyrannosaurus.

1. Is Tarbosaurus slightly faster than T.rex?

2. How much would Tarbosaurus's bite force differ from T.rex's?

3. Can anyone explain how this 'locking mechanism' for Tarbosaurus's jaw work and what it's adapted to hunt with the 'locking mechanism'?


Edited by Helryx, Jul 14 2015, 10:14 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Incinerox
Member Avatar
Āeksiot Zaldrīzoti

Helryx
Jul 14 2015, 10:09 PM
@Incinerox - Thanks for the answer.

Anyways,here are a few questions regarding Tarbosaurus and Tyrannosaurus.

1. Is Tarbosaurus slightly faster than T.rex?

2. How much would Tarbosaurus's bite force differ from T.rex's?

3. Can anyone explain how this 'locking mechanism' for Tarbosaurus's jaw work and what it's adapted to hunt with the 'locking mechanism'?


1) Probably. It was smaller and less robust, but had overall similar limb proportions, so I'd imagine it was a bit swifter than everybody's favourite tyrant brawler.

2) It was significantly weaker than T. rex's bite. Its skull was narrower and it lacked the flared, muscle anchoring jugals that T. rex had. It was also less flexible, but I'll cover this in the next answer. As a side note, the lack of flared jugals and narrower skull also meant that Tarbosaurus lacked T.rex's unique degree of binocular vision.

3) Ok so, the locking mechanism comes in two parts. When T. rex bit down on something, the force of the bite would be transmitted up through its maxillae, up to the nasals, and from the nasals to the lacrimals, which were connected to each other with interlocking bony struts to help distribute forces. In Tarbosaurus, their nasals were relatively flimsy, so forces were transmitted backwards straight into the lacrimal and into the prefrontals and frontals (all of which were even more firmly connected by bony struts). Overall, Tarbosaurus's upper jaw was more rigid. In the lower jaw, more of these bony struts were found between the dentary and the bones at the back of the lower jaw. The locking mechanism is what locks each bone in place to create a more rigid set of jaws. It's not literally locking the jaws in place.

What this means is that Tarbosaurus wasn't using its jaws to crunch struggling prey in a single bite. And if it was, the prey it was doing that to wasn't as strong as whatever T. rex was biting down on. It's PROBABLY a result of coexisting with sauropods instead of large ceratopsians.
Edited by Incinerox, Jul 15 2015, 08:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Urufu
No Avatar


In the German Version of Wikipedia it is written there are two Species of Deinosuchus
(Deinosuchus rugosus) and (Deinosuchus riograndensis). The Deinosuchus from Zoo Tycoon 2 is the Species Deinosuchus hatcheri, for which of this two Species is Hatcheri a Synonym?
Edited by Urufu, Jul 15 2015, 09:50 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
3 users reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Extinct Animals & Evolution · Next Topic »
Add Reply