Did dilophosaurus have venom?

It's entirely possible. I know another member believes Dilo's crests contained venom and it had a poisonous bite.

Well in the book version, Michael Crichton made the Dilophosaurus spit venom and have a frill just to show that if we DID clone dinosaurs, we would have NO IDEA what to expect.Basically, it was just added to give the BOOK more use of the theme, which I personally think is that we will never hhave power over things we can't control. Also in the movie, they did it just to make the movie more interesting.

I can, Most certainly assure you, 99.99% Dilo did not have venom.

Heres the film cannon on it.

The Dilos, should not have venom, however, much like the breeding mutation it developed this through the frog DNA. They could not remove the venom from the dilos, They attempted over 4 times with no sucess, management would not allow one to be put down for an autopsy. 

Now, following the film cannon, Its venom is secreted in tubes running along the bottem of its tounge. Where the venom sack actually is, you got me there...

This was one of the earliest dinosaurs in history, (Not by discovery, in the timeline.) It was believed it spat venom because of its small teeth. Later studies reveals that it doesnt spit venom. 

due to jurassic park, everyone thinks they spit venom and are only three feet tall.

WRONG

Dilos were actually quite big, Considering the normal dino was as big as a pony. Now, these are rough estimates so take it with a grain of salt, 16 Feet Long, followed by six feet or so tall. 

So kinda in terms as big as an allosaurus (Remember rough estimates)

Forgot that too, Paden. Welcome back, it seems like you were gone for 2 weeks.

It's entirely possible. A gland wouldn't fossilize like the rest of the animal.

As for the notch in the upper jaw, it's reminiscient of Baryonyx's jaw.

The Dilo skull has some artificial similarities to some spinosaur skulls, has any one ever thought it might have been an early piscivore?

Possible, but the fangs (teeth) have to be entirely hollow. And to be injected there needs to be a space near the teeth for the venom to transferred into the teeth through tubes leading to the root. As for the notch, it is found in spinosaurs and weak jawed dinosaurs, because instead of slashing or crushing, it acts similar to scisssors, and grabs on to get a firm hold. Although this may not be the case, and Dilophosaurus may have had a different system, its unlikely, albeit possible...

not necessarily, i mean the gila monster doesn't have hollow teeth. Venom simply flows into the wound once the lizard punctures the skin.

That's interesting about the notch thing, Primal. I've never heard that before. I think Dilos teeth and jaws would be too weak for that though..it's teeth are extrmely slender, wouldn't they break off?

The Gila Monster is a special case in which the venom coats the teeth, giving them their famous and creepy looking "black fangs". Snakes and almost all other venomous animals (including Sinornithosaurus) have at least mostly hollow teeth for the venom. Trust me on this, I work at a zoo as well as a museum.

Strong enough to puncture skin though. And possibly strong enough to at least hold on.

*The teeth need to be strong enough to function. So scavenging, picivorous, or gripping prey, it would be strong enough to grip. Especially with partially curved partially conical teeth it possessed

Was Diloposaurus poisonous? No, I don't believe so. It didn't exactly live alongside giant prey animals that would have required it to have a strong bite. Plus with a long, slender neck and the ability to close it's jaws quite quickly, it would make a good fish eater. 

PS- Because the idea of Sinornithosaurus being venomous is contraversial itself, I personally don't use it as an example.

exactly, it could have killed the prosauropods it lived with, but i see it as mainly a fish eater myself.

Michael Crichton made the dino poisonous just to prove that we have no idead what would happen if we cloned dinosaurs.

I believe Sinornithosaurus was venomous. It had gaps where the glands would go, the oral tubes, and hollow teeth. It just adds up. As for Dilo, I agree its unlikely. I was just stating both sides of an argument. Its very unlikely, and I dont believe it though,

Carnosaur, you mentioned prosauropods. Even they weren't even that big at the time. Anchisaurus for example was 10 feet long at the most. Most of the others weren't much bigger.

As far as Sinornithosaurus, goes, I remain skeptical. Here's why...

In 2009, a team of scientists led by Empu Gong examined a well-preserved Sinornithosaurus skull, and noted several features suggesting it was the first-identified venomous dinosaur. Gong and colleagues noted that the unusually long and fang-like mid-jaw (maxillary) teeth had prominent grooves running down the outer surface, towards the rear of the tooth, a feature seen only in venomous animals. They also interpreted a cavity in the jaw bone just above these teeth as the possible site for the soft-tissue venom gland. Gong and colleagues suggested that these unique features indicated that Sinornithosaurus may have specialized in hunting small prey such as birds, using its long fangs to penetrate feathers and envenomate and stun the prey, like a modern snake. They also suggested that the short, slightly forward-pointing teeth at the tip of the jaw could have been used to strip feathers from birds.

However, in 2010, another team of scientists led by Federico Gianechini published a paper casting doubts on the claim that Sinornithosaurus was venomous. They noted that grooved teeth are not unique to this genus, and in fact grooved teeth are found in many other theropods, including other dromaeosaurids. They also demonstrated that the teeth were not abnormally long as Gong and his team claimed, but rather had come out of their sockets, a preservational artifact common in crushed and flattened fossils. Finally, they could not independently verify the presence of supposed chambers for venom glands cited by Gong's team, finding only the normal sinuses of the skull.

In the same journal issue, Gong and his team submitted a reassessment of the 2010 study, casting doubt on their findings. They admitted that grooved teeth were common among theropods (though they suggested they were really only prevalent among feathered maniraptorans), and hypothesized that venom may have been a primitive trait for all archosaurs if not all reptiles, which was retained in certain lineages. They also disputed the claim that the teeth were significantly out of their sockets in the holotype specimen of Sinornithosaurus, though they admitted that they were not in a completely natural position. Gong's reassessment also claimed that certain undescribed specimens had fully articulated teeth showing a similar length.

That's why. Just saying and I'm not trying to convince anyone.

the reason I believe it was venomous was not the abnormally long teeth, it was the hollow-ness, structure of the jaw, and the actual anatomy which is similar to rattlesnakes and cobras we have in the zoo. Just because its teeth werent abnormally large, doesn't mean that it wasn't venomous. If you compared the mouth's roof structure interior to a rattlesnakes, it would be remarkably similar.

it sounds like gong was trying to Create the first find of a venomous dinosaur?

also, Paden, Allosaurus sized? are you sure..?

But I thougt Dilophosaurus was ten feet long...

I dont believe he was making it up. Look at my earlier comments

maybe the film dilophosaurus, raptor. The real animal was a great deal larger, not allosaurus sized, but pretty large

I know, but I thpought it was like 10 feet long, right?

The JP dilophosaur? or the actual one?

The actual one.

nope, common misconception. It was much larger then you would think..

Dilo link..

Oh yeah, 20 feet long, I forgot!

Yes, Allosaurus, 'Big AL' (25 ft long) to be exact, I go off the smallest in my scaling system, should've used a different example

Anyways, like I said, 99.99% possible in real life. However, The 0.01% is the unknown, we're so limited in our knowlege its scary. 

Im just saying, it was believed prior to the mid 80's is that they didn't believe dilo could actually take down prey, so they thought it had venom. Studies show it doesnt, however im not going to 100% say it didn't because of our knowlege.

yah. Even the CHinese thought the dinosaur fossils were dragon remains.

Dilophosaurus was large enough to support its diet without the aid of venom.  It lacked the hollowed out teeth to actually inject venom.  As for venom spitting, the crests are bony, rigid, and thin.  They probably wouldn't be large enough to contain venom glands.