Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-17-2014 9:20 AMHello there.
Over the past few weeks, I've had the time to consider the implications of the new hypothesis that suggests Spinosaurus Aegyptiacus was a functioning quadruped that spent a considerable amount of time in the water, to wit the revisions that would have to be applied to its ecology. Gazing upon Stromer's Riddle, we can easily see that there is still so much we don't yet fully understand about these immense, beautiful theropods; a fact that becomes glaringly obvious when we focus upon their life cycles - most importantly their manner of procreation. Taking a more traditional standpoint, we could easily envision Spinosaurus laying clutches of eggs within large, dome-like nests upon the shores of their watery domain, much in the same fashion as modern day crocodiles. One or both of the parents would undoubtedly keep a sharp watch over the nest from the water's edge, driving away or outright killing anything foolish enough to encroach upon the sanctuary of their unborn children (an act that would almost certainly be tantamount to suicide, in my opinion). Upon hatching, nestling Spinosaurs would likely take to the water with their parents, perhaps staying within shallow lagoons and estuaries while they refined their ability to swim and hunt (I imagine Spinosaurus babies were utterly adorable, perhaps chirping to procure their parents' attention).
Of course, there is another route we can take when looking at Spinosaurus and attempting to surmise the manner by which it conceived and reared young - one that is far less orthodox than the aforementioned theory and requires a slightly more critical and open-minded view of this magnificent animal's physiology. Basing details upon the assumption that Spinosauerus Aegyptiacus was in fact an aquatic animal, there is a question that can be posed which at first might seem a bit outlandish. What if this animal had "live" births? Is such a thing even possible? Throughout the world, there are many examples of water-borne life-forms giving birth to live young. One only has to look to dolphins, other comprable cetacean and even certain species of shark. Could it have been that Spinosaurus protected its unborn children within so dangerous a world by carriying them within a womb rather than laying eggs? Such a concept bears weight in that it would be an excellent manner by which to safeguard one's young. When children are gestating within a 50ft-long, 8 ton leviathan whose claws and teeth can rip just about any contender to bloody shreds, they tend to be safe from the predations of animals who've adapted to pillaging nests for eggs. Looking upon Spinosaurus Aegyptiacus from this percpective, it is quite easy to wonder if this remarkable creature might have been even more amazing than we first assumed - representing a uniquely adapted physiology for its era.
I certainly hope this segment of my theoretical thinking has been interesting and/or thought-provoking for you. As always, your thoughts and conjecture on this topic are most appreciated - even if you choose to keep them to yourself. :)
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-17-2014 4:34 PMGOJIRA2K - You've a fine premise there! Indeed, such a site would be terrifying in the extreme! :)
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusOct-17-2014 4:36 PMI would definitely be scared if I ever saw a 40 foot, brightly colored, sail that is a couple feet high.
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-17-2014 5:27 PMTYRANT KING - You're spot-on with that assessment! I'd likely ruin one of my favorite skirts were i to behold such a site! On a brighter note, however, I'd likely also be fascinated to see the animal's agility and grace as it powered through the water! :)
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-17-2014 5:55 PMAs an aside for my curiosity, I wonder if Spinosaurus - assuming it was aquatic in nature - could remain submerged beneath the water for extendid periods of time. Such a trait would ensure a broader range for its versatility as a hunter and would have given it the ability to retire from the land during crises such as forest fires and powerful storms. Something to definately consider! :)
Carnosaur
MemberCompsognathusOct-17-2014 11:10 PMNature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-18-2014 1:46 AMCARNOSAUR - I'm extremely pleased that you've enjoyed this bit of conjecture! The insights and counter-points you've provided are extremely interesting and most appreciated! Thank you ever so much for your feedback! :)
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusOct-18-2014 4:17 AM@ carnosaur, I just now realized my fatal error of putting oranosaurus with spinosaurus since it lived a million or two years ago. Sacrosuchus lived with suchomimus and when suchomimus died out spinosaurus arose to fill the niche. Sacrosuchus and spinosaurus saw each other only occasionally. Sacrosuchus was dying out at that time so it wasn't a huge compitition between the two as you purpose. I know that the predators outnumber the herbivores 3:1. I have been thinking and researching this mysterious mystery for a whole now and have come to the conclusion that the present herbivores( paralatitan, hadrosaurid) were extremely plentiful and probably had many individuals.and thlo predators would have hunted, dun dun dun..... EACHOTHER. Since there are so few prey species they would probably hunt, kill,and eat smaller predator. Now I saw smaller cause if the predator was to big it could kill the hunter.@ something real, I think that spinosaurus could stay submergean anywhere from 45 minutes to 2 hours. Ths sail would be a decoy to destract unwary animals who have come for a drink.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusOct-18-2014 11:29 AMI agree with Carnosaur on the Spinosaurus/Sarcosuchus relationship. Sarcosuchus lived 112 million years ago and Spinosaurus lived 97-112 million years ago. In the grand scheme of things, a few million years isn't that much and I bet there was some overlap(same with Spinosaurus and Ouranosaurus). Suchomimus actually lived 113-121 million years ago, just to point that out.
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-18-2014 12:38 PMTYRANT KING - Hmm, the sail as a decoy? That's an incredibly interesting hypothesis - and very much outside the norm! I like it a great deal! Thank you for providing such an "outside of the box" notion! :)
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusOct-18-2014 1:40 PM@ rex fan, how do not agree with me????? I said the same thing that you just said. And sonethi real, thanks what are your thoughts on its sail?
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexOct-18-2014 1:53 PMTYRANT KING - With regards to the animal's sail, I've a loose theory that it might have been utilized in a fashion similar to a rudder - providing greater control int he water. A structure that large is going to produce a great deal of wind/water resistance if turned broad-side toward incoming currents or wind. However, if faced directly at incoming currents/wind, the sail provides aerodynamic flow - allowing the animal to "cut" through both water and wind! :)
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusOct-18-2014 2:07 PMI can agree with that and I think that it would be a truly scary yet impressive sight.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusOct-19-2014 10:15 AMTK, what I was saying was that Sarcosuchus probably competed with Spinosaurus more than you say it did. It may have competed with Spinosaurus more than Suchomimus.
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusOct-19-2014 5:06 PMi know it competed with spino, just a little bit tough.
