Large new Tyrannosaurus accidentally ...

Large new Tyrannosaurus accidentally discovered in a research paper.

Posted in the Dinosaur Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Illiterate Scholar

Brooklyn, NY

#1 May 20, 2011
I was reading the paper on Tyrannosaur cannibalism and suddenly something caught my eye.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F1...

"Of these sixteen specimens, four represent Tyrannosaurus [Fig. 2]. The first is UCMP 137538, a large (13 cm long) pedal phalanx found in isolation (Fig. 2A). It is identified as a theropod by the gynglymous articular surfaces and deep collateral ligament pits, and is referred to Tyrannosaurus on the basis of its large size, robust construction, and provenance. Comparisons with FMNH PR 2081 [3] show that the bone is a left pedal phalanx IV-2 from a large, adult animal."

For the record, the same bone on Sue is only 11.1 cm where as this Rex is 13 cm. You need a big foot to carry the weight of a big body. Sue is around 12.8 meters, so this sucker should be near 14 meters.

I don't have the math to estimate how big a it could be based on just the pedal phalanx. Maybe celestial emperor fang will pop up and give us an estimate. His math is much much better than mine.

“Superevolved KingoftheMonster s”

Since: May 11

Freeport

#2 May 20, 2011
They need to call it Terry.
Razor Jaws

Sarasota, FL

#4 May 20, 2011
Illiterate Scholar wrote:
I was reading the paper on Tyrannosaur cannibalism and suddenly something caught my eye.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F1...
"Of these sixteen specimens, four represent Tyrannosaurus [Fig. 2]. The first is UCMP 137538, a large (13 cm long) pedal phalanx found in isolation (Fig. 2A). It is identified as a theropod by the gynglymous articular surfaces and deep collateral ligament pits, and is referred to Tyrannosaurus on the basis of its large size, robust construction, and provenance. Comparisons with FMNH PR 2081 [3] show that the bone is a left pedal phalanx IV-2 from a large, adult animal."
For the record, the same bone on Sue is only 11.1 cm where as this Rex is 13 cm. You need a big foot to carry the weight of a big body. Sue is around 12.8 meters, so this sucker should be near 14 meters.
I don't have the math to estimate how big a it could be based on just the pedal phalanx. Maybe celestial emperor fang will pop up and give us an estimate. His math is much much better than mine.
Oh yeah, one freakin' inch on its leg is gonna make it 4 feet longer!

“N/A”

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#5 May 20, 2011
It will troll, if its proportions are the same on this specimen that are in Sue, it will. You see my equation I posted above? I used simple division and multiplication to get that answer - the size estimate being over two meters longer than in FMNH PR2081 "Sue".
THE COMPLETE IDIOT

Sarasota, FL

#6 May 20, 2011
ZEBRAS! WEASELS ARE SICK.:D :(

“Superevolved KingoftheMonster s”

Since: May 11

Freeport

#7 May 20, 2011
THE COMPLETE IDIOT wrote:
ZEBRAS! WEASELS ARE SICK.:D :(
Troll
Anonymous

Sarasota, FL

#8 May 20, 2011
D: MY EYEBALLZ ARE MELTING :(

“C'mon bro, I got TIGER BLOOD”

Since: Apr 09

IN UPENDI!

#9 May 21, 2011
Illiterate Scholar wrote:
I was reading the paper on Tyrannosaur cannibalism and suddenly something caught my eye.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F1...
"Of these sixteen specimens, four represent Tyrannosaurus [Fig. 2]. The first is UCMP 137538, a large (13 cm long) pedal phalanx found in isolation (Fig. 2A). It is identified as a theropod by the gynglymous articular surfaces and deep collateral ligament pits, and is referred to Tyrannosaurus on the basis of its large size, robust construction, and provenance. Comparisons with FMNH PR 2081 [3] show that the bone is a left pedal phalanx IV-2 from a large, adult animal."
For the record, the same bone on Sue is only 11.1 cm where as this Rex is 13 cm. You need a big foot to carry the weight of a big body. Sue is around 12.8 meters, so this sucker should be near 14 meters.
I don't have the math to estimate how big a it could be based on just the pedal phalanx. Maybe celestial emperor fang will pop up and give us an estimate. His math is much much better than mine.
That is quite a find! Though I doubt this'll pick up in the dinosaur hype machine considering its just a toe bone. Fanboys don't dig things like that.:P

Have you gone to the DML with this? I'm sure they'd offer much more than we could.

“C'mon bro, I got TIGER BLOOD”

Since: Apr 09

IN UPENDI!

#10 May 21, 2011
Taylor Reints wrote:
It will troll, if its proportions are the same on this specimen that are in Sue, it will. You see my equation I posted above? I used simple division and multiplication to get that answer - the size estimate being over two meters longer than in FMNH PR2081 "Sue".
Gimme the equation, I wanna try!:P
Other Lizard

San Francisco, CA

#11 May 21, 2011
Very interamesting!
Illiterate Scholar

Brooklyn, NY

#13 May 21, 2011
Razor Jaws wrote:
<quoted text>Oh yeah, one freakin' inch on its leg is gonna make it 4 feet longer!
Actually, yes, it does. That's 20% bigger. Biggest Tyrannosaurus MOR 008 is bigger by an inch or so bulking its size to 13 meters. Chances are it can't be scaled in such a linear fashion, but the foot is for carrying the animal. Low estimates should be around 13 meters and max should be in the mid 14 meters for this beast.
Altanative Sillosuchus

Cinisello Balsamo, Italy

#14 May 22, 2011
@ILLITERATE SCHOLAR
Mortimer wrote
http://home.comcast.net/~eoraptor/Tyrannosaur...
How big was T. rex and which specimen is largest? There have been several contenders for the title of largest Tyrannosaurus- MOR 008, UCMP 118742, FMNH 2081 (Sue), MOR 980 (Rigby rex or Peck's rex) and MOR 1126 (Celeste or C-rex). Only FMNH 2081 is known from a fairly complete skeleton, and only it has been extensively described and illustrated in the technical literature (although MOR 008 and UCMP 118742 have both been mentioned in reviews of Tyrannosaurus morphology- e.g. Molnar, 1991; Currie, 2003; Carr, 2005). The mounted skeleton of FMNH 2081 is 12.8 meters long, and less complete specimens are scaled to it on this website. MOR 008's skull is stated to be 1.5 m, compared to FMNH 2081's 1.394 m. If the skeleton were in proportion, it would be 13.8 meters long. However, the maxilla is only 84% as long, with a toothrow 90% as long. The dentary is 87% as long with a toothrow 90% as long. These measurements suggest a total length of 10.8-11.5 meters. UCMP 118742's maxilla was said to be 29% longer than AMNH 5027 by Paul (1988), but is actually only 14% longer, with a toothrow 18% longer (Larson, 2008). If the skeleton were in proportion to FMNH PR2081 (which has a 861 mm long maxilla and 645 mm toothrow), it would be 12.1-12.4 meters long. MOR 980's mounted skeleton is said to be 12.8 meters long, although its pubis was reportedly 8% longer than FMNH PR2081's. The skull as reconstructed for sale on its website is slightly smaller than FMNH PR2081. Finally, no measurements have been made for MOR 1126, merely Horner's estimate that it is 10% longer than FMNH PR2801, which would make it 14.1 meters. One point which needs to be made is that Tyrannosaurus individuals did not all have the same proportions. For instance, FMNH PR2081's maxilla is 25% longer than the holotype's. The scapula is 20% longer, the dentary 15% longer, metatarsal IV 4% longer, the femur 3% longer, the sacrum 1% longer, the tibiae are equal in length, and metatarsal II is actually 5% shorter. This brings some perspective to the potentially confusing MOR 980 measurements noted above. It also suggests caution when estimating the total length of fragmentary individuals. If only FMNH PR2081's maxilla were known, we might suggest it was 25% larger than the holotype, or 15.5 meters! Yet it was <5% larger, as the skeleton shows. So maybe MOR 008 and UCMP 118742 had smaller bodies than their cranial remains would suggest as well. As for MOR 1126, Horner's guess has little value until measurements are taken

“C'mon bro, I got TIGER BLOOD”

Since: Apr 09

IN UPENDI!

#15 May 22, 2011
Altanative Sillosuchus wrote:
@ILLITERATE SCHOLAR
Mortimer wrote
http://home.comcast.net/~eoraptor/Tyrannosaur...
How big was T. rex and which specimen is largest? There have been several contenders for the title of largest Tyrannosaurus- MOR 008, UCMP 118742, FMNH 2081 (Sue), MOR 980 (Rigby rex or Peck's rex) and MOR 1126 (Celeste or C-rex). Only FMNH 2081 is known from a fairly complete skeleton, and only it has been extensively described and illustrated in the technical literature (although MOR 008 and UCMP 118742 have both been mentioned in reviews of Tyrannosaurus morphology- e.g. Molnar, 1991; Currie, 2003; Carr, 2005). The mounted skeleton of FMNH 2081 is 12.8 meters long, and less complete specimens are scaled to it on this website. MOR 008's skull is stated to be 1.5 m, compared to FMNH 2081's 1.394 m. If the skeleton were in proportion, it would be 13.8 meters long. However, the maxilla is only 84% as long, with a toothrow 90% as long. The dentary is 87% as long with a toothrow 90% as long. These measurements suggest a total length of 10.8-11.5 meters. UCMP 118742's maxilla was said to be 29% longer than AMNH 5027 by Paul (1988), but is actually only 14% longer, with a toothrow 18% longer (Larson, 2008). If the skeleton were in proportion to FMNH PR2081 (which has a 861 mm long maxilla and 645 mm toothrow), it would be 12.1-12.4 meters long. MOR 980's mounted skeleton is said to be 12.8 meters long, although its pubis was reportedly 8% longer than FMNH PR2081's. The skull as reconstructed for sale on its website is slightly smaller than FMNH PR2081. Finally, no measurements have been made for MOR 1126, merely Horner's estimate that it is 10% longer than FMNH PR2801, which would make it 14.1 meters. One point which needs to be made is that Tyrannosaurus individuals did not all have the same proportions. For instance, FMNH PR2081's maxilla is 25% longer than the holotype's. The scapula is 20% longer, the dentary 15% longer, metatarsal IV 4% longer, the femur 3% longer, the sacrum 1% longer, the tibiae are equal in length, and metatarsal II is actually 5% shorter. This brings some perspective to the potentially confusing MOR 980 measurements noted above. It also suggests caution when estimating the total length of fragmentary individuals. If only FMNH PR2081's maxilla were known, we might suggest it was 25% larger than the holotype, or 15.5 meters! Yet it was <5% larger, as the skeleton shows. So maybe MOR 008 and UCMP 118742 had smaller bodies than their cranial remains would suggest as well. As for MOR 1126, Horner's guess has little value until measurements are taken
That makes sense, especially considering gracile and robust morphs (there's also tyrannosaurus "x" that larson was touting, but that was a while ago)

“N/A”

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#16 May 22, 2011
Illiterate Scholar wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, yes, it does. That's 20% bigger. Biggest Tyrannosaurus MOR 008 is bigger by an inch or so bulking its size to 13 meters. Chances are it can't be scaled in such a linear fashion, but the foot is for carrying the animal. Low estimates should be around 13 meters and max should be in the mid 14 meters for this beast.
My estimates are really high, approaching 15 m (14.99 m).
Sillosuchus iz 10 m

Milan, Italy

#17 May 22, 2011
Taylor Reints wrote:
<quoted text>
My estimates are really high, approaching 15 m (14.99 m).
YOU iz really HIGH, not ur estimates

“N/A”

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#18 May 22, 2011
Jeez, what's YOUR problem?
Razor Jaws

Sarasota, FL

#19 May 22, 2011
Illiterate Scholar wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, yes, it does. That's 20% bigger. Biggest Tyrannosaurus MOR 008 is bigger by an inch or so bulking its size to 13 meters. Chances are it can't be scaled in such a linear fashion, but the foot is for carrying the animal. Low estimates should be around 13 meters and max should be in the mid 14 meters for this beast.
I got owned :(.
Sillosuchus iz 10 m

Milan, Italy

#20 May 22, 2011
Taylor Reints wrote:
Jeez, what's YOUR problem?
Mine is dat YOU IZ HIGH

“N/A”

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#21 May 23, 2011
Troll

“C'mon bro, I got TIGER BLOOD”

Since: Apr 09

IN UPENDI!

#22 May 23, 2011
...Did you just call Al a TROLL? Al is da exact APPOSSITE OF DA TROLOL.

He's a contributer. Bitch.:P

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Dinosaur Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Spinosaurus would easily beat T rex in a fight (Jun '14) Aug 27 Kid rex 293
Is Tyrannosaurus team or solo Aug 27 tyrano spino fan- 2
Return of the Emperor Aug 26 1def-ghd 6
what is the largest tyrannosaurus rex specimen? Aug 26 tyrant-spino-fan 3
Tell me a animal that can beat megalodon. No ar... (Jan '13) Aug 25 tyrant-spino-fan 61
Tiger population on the rise at last ! Aug 25 1def-ghd 10
Poll which is the worse fanboy? (Feb '13) Aug 24 fanboy 32
More from around the web