Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-08-2014 7:14 PMI'm back, and since there have been a lot of new things during last months, I think it's time to update my top 10 largest Theropods list. You may find some big surprises:
#1. Tyrannosaurus rex
Everybody's favourite meat eater. Called "the absolute wardlord of the Earth" by New York Times in 1905, it's the most famous dinosaur in this list. This guy is pretty big: the largest specimen in called FMHN PR2081, or "Sue", and it's the largest good Theropod specimen: it was around to 3.5 meters tall, with a lenght of 12.3 m. This guy wasn't the longest meat-eaters but, due to its massive built, it was likely among the heaviest. Estimates for "Sue" range from as little as 5.6 t to over 9.5 t. Hartman recently proposed a lower estimate, wich puts this animal at over 8 t. It can beat any other Theropods in my list in terms of weight and since this ranking is about the largest (=heaviest), it earned the first place.
#2, #3, #4: Mapusaurus rosae, Giganotosaurus carolinii, Carcharodontosaurus saharicus
The three largest Carcharodontosaurids are very similar in size, so they share a common place.
Mapusaurus is often thought to be just 10-11 m long. Actually, that's just a myth. Coria & Curria, Mapusaurus's describers, mentioned some specimens comparable in size with Giganotosaurus carolinii's holotype. There is also a specimen wich is 110 % the size of Giganotosaurus carolinii's holotype. That's just a piubic shaft, so we cannot give a precise estimate for this animal. If it was really 110 % the size of G.carolinii's holotype, it was 13.6 m long, but as this is a fragmentary specimen, we don't know if it really was that large. A wiser 12-13 m range is better for large Mapusaurus specimens. A weight range similar to that of Giganotosaurus is also feasible.
One of the well know guys is Giganotosaurus carolinii. This south american Carcharodontosaurid was discovered back in 1993, and it was one of the largest Theropods. The first specimen is a uncomplete skeleton (around to 50-70 % complete), wich is longer than "Sue" (at 12.2-12.4 m), but lighter (at 6-7 t). A second specimen has been discovered. It's a piece of dental, and it's estimated to be 6.5 % larger than the first specimen. If it was really that big, it was 13.2 m long, but again this specimen is very fragmentary, and precise estimates aren't safe. A 12-13 m range for this specimen is pretty good. Weight estimates ranges from 5 to 14 t, but something like 7-8 t is supported by most of the paleontologist.
Carcharodontosaurus saharicus is the most fragmentary of the three. It's been discovered back in 1927, but only recently we realized how big it really was. Its size strongly depends on its proportions: if it was small-headed, like Acrocanthosaurus, well, the largest speimen, SMG-din 1, would have been a huge behemot, at almost 14 meters long. However, a such build is pretty unlikely, as Acrocanthosaurus is a less derivated Carcharodontosaurid. The much closer Giganotosaurus is a big-headed Theropod, so a big-headed build is likely for Carcharodontosaurus saharicus, too. If it was big headed, it would end up between 12 and 13 meters. Again, 12-13 m is the best range for a such fragmentary beast. A weight similar to that of other giant Carcharodontosaurids is likely.
#5: Spinosaurus aegyptiacus
Once regarded as the biggest Theropod, something changed during last months. In fact, Ibrahim et. al proposed a new recostruction based on new materials. This time, the animal was much closer to the ground than before, and it had a much less deep chest, thus the animal would be lighter. There is no official estimate for the new recostruction, but Andrea Cau mentioned a 6-7 t figure, wich would fit perfectly for a such gracile animal. Spinosaurus aegyptiacus still holds the record as longest Theropod though, at 12-15 meters long.
#6: Tyrannotitan chubuitensis
This guy may not be that well know among the public, but it would definitely deserve to: it's got an epic name, rivalling Tyrannosaurus rex itself. Joking aside, Cau called it "the Cinderella of Giant Theropods", because it's often forgotten, when it's the largest Theropod know from good specimens along with T.rex. Its lenght was estimated at 12.2 m, and that's the only estimate I found. There's even a 13 meters one by GSP, but seems to be based on a 13 m Giganotosaurs holotype, wich is doubtfull. The largest specimen is around as big as Giganotosaurus holotype - so, between 6 and 7 t - making it one of the largest Theropod.
#7: Deinocheirus mirificus
This guy is a new entry. Once an unsolved puzzle, today the most depicted dinosaur on Deviant Art. Only recently we realized how much strange (and big) it was; we've new materials, wich includes two new very good preserved skeletons. This animal was in the 6-6.5 t range, according to new estimates based on new specimens, so it was almost as big as Spinosaurus. Its lenght is measured at 11 m long, thus it was pretty long as well. It may hold the record as the tallest Theropod, at over 4 meters tall.
#8: Acrocanthosaurus atokensis
This guy is easily recognizable due to its muscolar ridge on its back. Even though it isn't always mentioned, it's earned its place here, as it's one of the largest Theropod, as well as apex predator of its ecosystem. The largest specimen is called "Fran", and it's indeed pretty big; it's measured to reach 11,5 meters long over the curves. Weight estimates rage between 5 and 6 t, even though Mazzetta proposed a higher weight of 7 t. Cau said that this Theropod was much more gracile than Tyrannosaurus rex, so a 5-6 t range can be good.
#9: Therizinosaurus cheloniformis
This guy isn't mentioned everywhere, but it should. It's the most massively built Theropod, even more than Tyrannosaurus rex, thus it was among the heaviest. This guy is the only herbivore in my ranking, but it was a Theropod, so I included it. I've found a lot of estimates for this animal, but a 10 meters estiamte for lenght appears to be good. This animal could have weighted around to 5 t. It may have been the tallest Theropod, only rivalled by Deinocheirus.
#10: Suchomimus tenerensis
You weren't expecting to find it here, were you? Actually, even though it's often forgotten, it definitely deserves to be there. Suchomimus's type specimen is a sub adult, yet it's very big: it was originally estimated at 11 meters, but GSP later gave a 9.5 m estimate. However, hartman recently made a skeletal of this specimen, wich is 12 meters long. And it even wasn't an adult. Weight estimates rage from 4 to over 5 tonnes, thus a 4-5 t range can be good.
Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 6:01 AMThe problem is we have just a small sample of specimens of some of the guys there, like Giganotosaurus. We cannot say what was Giganotosaurus average, it may have been 7 t or even as huge as 10 t.
Hiphopananomus
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 7:47 AMNice list!
Although I myself few giganotosaurus as a larger dinosaur then Mapusaurus but that's just me.
P.S my reason for this is because while Mapusaurus is Possibly (not confirmed) longer then giganotosarurus, Giganotosaurus appears more robust, which in turn would make it heavier.
"Somewhere on this island is the greatest predator that ever lived. Second greatest predator must take him down."Roland Tembo"
"Jurassic park: The Lost World"
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 7:55 AMBased on these skeletals(the first by Ibrihim and the second by Hartman), Spinosaurus looks pretty gracile...
But being gracile can be good in an aquatic lifestyle. It'd make the animal faster overall since it'd have less mass to move through the water.
Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 8:43 AMHiphopananomus, it's hard to determinate wich animal is the animals are based on incomplete specimens. We don't really know if Mapusaurus is more slender, as the femoral that are 83 and 87 % the thickness of Giganotosaurus' holotype comes from anima, wich likely were smaller than Giganotosaurus' holotype, so I'd assume an equal bulk, and therefore an equal size, at least as long as we have just fragmentary specimens.
Carnosaur
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 8:44 AMNature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 8:50 AMWhere did I claim that those are averages? I never clamed that this list is base on averages.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 9:13 AMOk, so technically I used the wrong term, but still. For one thing, Hartman also elongated the legs a bit. It's not quite as quadrupedal. Also, while a frontal view does help in determinging if an animal is robust, a side view can also help to a degree. These show how shallow the ribcage is. You can't fit a whole lot in that somewhat shallow area, so there'd be less weight there.
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 11:53 AMWell, giga you should have specified. And you should use averages in size lists cause it is more commonly used and better to understand.
rexfan, many aquatic/semi aquatic animals are quite bulky. Spinosaurus certainly would be no exception.
long time no see HPP.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 12:00 PMAnd TK, many aquatic/semi-aquatic animals aren't, so Spinosaurus certainly could be too. Mosasaurs for example were apex predators, but had somewhat slender designs...
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 12:07 PMI am ranking about semi aquatic. Many semi aquatic animals such as crocs are quite bulky and since spinosaurua is semi aquatic and clislet related to crocs it eouldwould be a fairly robust animal.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 12:10 PMNot based on the new skeleton it wouldn't be. Keep in mind this new one is 40 percent complete(not too bad), but combined with Stromers and any other fragments, it would be 60 percent complete. Now, that's not an exact science, but it'd helpful.
Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 12:39 PMAs I've already explained, using averages isn't wiser, as we don't know the average size ofa couple of animals from this list.
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 12:44 PMI completely understand. But the maxses are even more unknown.
Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 2:03 PMNot really, when we have just 2 specimens, like in Giganotosaurus. We cannot size what average size was with 2 specimens, but we can say what max. confirmed lenght was (by giving a range, wich includes even smaller adults size)
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexNov-11-2014 5:42 PMGIGADINO, REX FAN 684 and TYRANT KING - Out of curiosity, since I know the three of you are quite knowledgeable within the field of paleontology, what is the largest known specimen of Carcharodontosaurus? :)
Carnosaur
MemberCompsognathusNov-11-2014 5:59 PMNature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
Gigadino
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 3:39 AMThe largest Carcharodontosaurus is SMG din-1. Its size is unknow, as it's really fragmentary, but, if we assume that it was big-headed like Giganotosaurus, I estimated it at 12,4-12,6 m long, so, considering the margin of error, the individual variability etc a good size range is 12-13 m and 7-8 t If it was small-headed like Acrocanthosaurus, it could reach 13,9 m long (so 13-14 m), but a such build isn't so likely, as Acrocanthosaurus is less close than Giganotosaurus to Carcharodontosaurus, plus Acrocanthosaurus wasn't a derivated Carcharodontosaurid, while Giganotosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were. Carnosaur, I specified somewhere that I was talking about max sizes. For example, when I talked about T.rex, I said 'estimates for Sue', wich is the largest T.rex. However, I'll change it, and I'll write nax sizes.
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexNov-12-2014 5:04 AMCARNOSAUR - Thank you so very much! I was having trouble with the estimates online and yours falls within the spectrums very nicely! I greatly appreciate this data! :)
GIGADINO - The information you've provided is quite nice! I like the comparisons you made between other animals! :)
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 12:53 PMCarnosaur, snakes may be somewhat robust in someways, but they have to have extra muscles along their bodies to move because they don't have arms or legs. Spinosaurus did, so it's body overall could be more gracile(and mosasaurs were fully aquatic and could simply swim).
Spinosaurus Rex
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 3:09 PMI dont remember it being proven to have an elongated ribcage in the first place, so whats the point in that being your arguement towards why you think it was a pushover?
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 3:38 PMNever said it was a pushoever, but the new skeleton(which can't be denied) suggests it...
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 4:08 PM@ spino rex, what does that mean?
rex fan, the real spino had longer limbs and could rear up to slash. and it dosent look like a pushover to me.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 4:38 PMTK, it means he's in denial.
And TK, Hartman did a skeleton model(bottom) in which he gave it slightly longer legs...
And, as I said, it isn't a pushover.
Lord Vader
MemberTyrannosaurus RexNov-12-2014 4:50 PM*grabs popcorn*
Jack of all trades. Master of none
Spinosaurus Rex
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 4:56 PMGracile is the definition of pushover i will add. I do not agree with this thing one bit nor your assumption, so ill leave it at that.
Tyrant king
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 4:57 PMwell i guess i am in denial because i dont trust he new models. there is no true,legit evidence to back it up. and you did say that the new model suggests it was a pushover. but i am not trying to fight.
Rex Fan 684
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 4:59 PMA 6-7 ton animal is not a pushover. Go up to any elephant and see if you can overpower it.
Also, considering the new material is 40 percent complete, and when combined with the holotype and other finds it measures 60 percent complete, I'd call that legit evidence.
Lord Vader
MemberTyrannosaurus RexNov-12-2014 5:00 PMIf I'm not mistaken, a pushover would be incapable of defending itself. With those claws, it's sheer physical size, and possibly the ability to change the sail's colour, Spino would be no pushover. Gracile, perhaps. Pushover, hell no.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
Spinosaurus Rex
MemberCompsognathusNov-12-2014 5:01 PM6-7 tons IS a pushover in terms of the largest carnivores as you put it, i stand at 12 tons average.