Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

General discussion about everything and anything about Prehistoric Kingdom

Re: Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

Postby Andrewsaurchus101 » Mon Feb 22, 2016 4:01 pm

Edaphosaurus wrote:Dinosaurs are usually seen as massive. Now we all know that many of them are not, but what about the big ones. Were they as big as we think of them? Compared to land mammals today, yes, but compared to all of our land mammals through history? Read on...

In the Triassic the biggest animals got to was Plateosaurus, the largest individuals weighing as much as 4 tonnes. This is huge by today's standards, if they still were around they would be the third heaviest genus of animal, after the African and Asian elephant. However, go back only a few tens of thousands of years ago and we find many animals around that size, and not all of them are Proboscideans. Megatherium and Elasmotherium both weighed around the same. In general, size wise Plateosaurus was not out of place.

Nothing really got any bigger than Plateosaurus until the middle Jurassic, when animals like Cetiosaurus evolve. it weighed 16 tonnes, bigger than any living elephant, but still about the same as Zygolophodon (a giant Mastodon) and Paraceratherium. The late Jurassic brought even bigger animals Camarasaurus at 20 tonnes and Apatosaurus at 22 tonnes. Still, these were no larger than the Asian straight-tusked elephant, the heaviest of all land mammals.

Of course, Sauropods got bigger. Brachiosaurus may have weighed 50 tonnes, and the new Titanosaur is said to weigh 70 tonnes. These, and many others, were real goliaths, but what needs to be highlighted is that a) Sauropods only started to get this large in the late Jurassic and b) there was usually only one of these titans to every ecosystem.

Another thing that must be noted about the sauropods smaller than the Palaeoloxodon namadicus is that other non-sauropod dinosaurs rivalled them in size:

Stegosaurus- 4.5 tonnes, larger than Plateosaurus
Ankylosaurus- 7.5 tonnes
Tyrannosaurus- 8 tonnes
Triceratops- 12 tonnes, same as Diplodocus
Shantungosaurus- 16 tonnes, same as Cetiosaurus


hold on a second, triceratops weighed up to 12 TONNES!?!?!?!? thats a lot bigger then i thought it was (i always imagined that it was around 8 tonnes, a little heavier than tyrannosaurus)
I'm here because prehistory is awesome!!!

Image
User avatar
Andrewsaurchus101
Velociraptor
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:30 pm
Location: West coast Florida, Taming a Colombian mammoth while listening to rock and metal

Re: Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

Postby Edaphosaurus » Mon Feb 22, 2016 4:05 pm

Andrewsaurchus101 wrote:
Edaphosaurus wrote:Dinosaurs are usually seen as massive. Now we all know that many of them are not, but what about the big ones. Were they as big as we think of them? Compared to land mammals today, yes, but compared to all of our land mammals through history? Read on...

In the Triassic the biggest animals got to was Plateosaurus, the largest individuals weighing as much as 4 tonnes. This is huge by today's standards, if they still were around they would be the third heaviest genus of animal, after the African and Asian elephant. However, go back only a few tens of thousands of years ago and we find many animals around that size, and not all of them are Proboscideans. Megatherium and Elasmotherium both weighed around the same. In general, size wise Plateosaurus was not out of place.

Nothing really got any bigger than Plateosaurus until the middle Jurassic, when animals like Cetiosaurus evolve. it weighed 16 tonnes, bigger than any living elephant, but still about the same as Zygolophodon (a giant Mastodon) and Paraceratherium. The late Jurassic brought even bigger animals Camarasaurus at 20 tonnes and Apatosaurus at 22 tonnes. Still, these were no larger than the Asian straight-tusked elephant, the heaviest of all land mammals.

Of course, Sauropods got bigger. Brachiosaurus may have weighed 50 tonnes, and the new Titanosaur is said to weigh 70 tonnes. These, and many others, were real goliaths, but what needs to be highlighted is that a) Sauropods only started to get this large in the late Jurassic and b) there was usually only one of these titans to every ecosystem.

Another thing that must be noted about the sauropods smaller than the Palaeoloxodon namadicus is that other non-sauropod dinosaurs rivalled them in size:

Stegosaurus- 4.5 tonnes, larger than Plateosaurus
Ankylosaurus- 7.5 tonnes
Tyrannosaurus- 8 tonnes
Triceratops- 12 tonnes, same as Diplodocus
Shantungosaurus- 16 tonnes, same as Cetiosaurus


hold on a second, triceratops weighed up to 12 TONNES!?!?!?!? thats a lot bigger then i thought it was (i always imagined that it was around 8 tonnes, a little heavier than tyrannosaurus)


12 tonnes seems to be the upper estimate, but you are correct in saying the average Triceratops was around 8 tonnes.

That said, I would like more data on the really big Triceratops remains, or better still an actual scientific paper.

http://blog.everythingdinosaur.co.uk/bl ... ecies.html

(It probably isn't a new species, just a big individual)
Image
Edaphosaurus 2.0 - Still controversial, just with less hate
Edaphosaurus
Ankylosaurus
 
Posts: 1690
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:25 am
Location: The Permian

Re: Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

Postby barrosasaurus » Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:44 pm

I remember reading a good dinosaur book (IT HAD QUILLED ORNITHISUCHIANS!!! YOU KNOW HOW RARE THAT IS!!!???!?) which refered to an "eotriceratops" discovery, and i think it discussed its validity for being a new genus
I am the ex holy lepidotian pope. The current pope is medena, because i got bored

Also, i am a writer for UP, the one who makes everything sound pretty by saying stuff such as "the magenta flowers" :P
User avatar
barrosasaurus
Ankylosaurus
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 11:53 am

Re: Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

Postby spinosaurus1 » Sat Jun 11, 2016 4:58 pm

Edaphosaurus wrote:
Merking wrote:It´s funny how big people make some dinosaurs up to be.
Like, you know all those about six meter long Theropods? Nearly all of those have their hips around the same heights as average humans have their heads.... And they are already comparingly large. Like, animals that big were comparingly rare, we just find more of them because it´s so hard for small things to get preserved.....


Not only that but those Theropods usually weigh half a tonne (Mainly bird-like ones e.g. Utahraptor and Gallimimus, Ceratosaurus weighs a bit more) which is fairly average for a male polar bear. And even Ceratosaurus was dwarfed by the largest Arctotherium species, which could weigh 2 tonnes, an a par with Allosaurus and Albertosaurus.

In fact, only a handful of Theropods exceeded 2 tonnes, and it remains a mystery to me why Tyrannosaurus seems to be 3 or 4 times heavier than most of its relatives


i thought 1.6 tons is a more likely weight estimate for the largest arctotherium species with the suggested 2 tons being considerably high upper bound weights? i'm asking out of curiosity.
User avatar
spinosaurus1
Egg
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

Postby Edaphosaurus » Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:35 am

spinosaurus1 wrote:
Edaphosaurus wrote:
Merking wrote:It´s funny how big people make some dinosaurs up to be.
Like, you know all those about six meter long Theropods? Nearly all of those have their hips around the same heights as average humans have their heads.... And they are already comparingly large. Like, animals that big were comparingly rare, we just find more of them because it´s so hard for small things to get preserved.....


Not only that but those Theropods usually weigh half a tonne (Mainly bird-like ones e.g. Utahraptor and Gallimimus, Ceratosaurus weighs a bit more) which is fairly average for a male polar bear. And even Ceratosaurus was dwarfed by the largest Arctotherium species, which could weigh 2 tonnes, an a par with Allosaurus and Albertosaurus.

In fact, only a handful of Theropods exceeded 2 tonnes, and it remains a mystery to me why Tyrannosaurus seems to be 3 or 4 times heavier than most of its relatives


i thought 1.6 tons is a more likely weight estimate for the largest arctotherium species with the suggested 2 tons being considerably high upper bound weights? i'm asking out of curiosity.


You are probably right, but still, 1.6 tonnes is fairly similar to the weight of a lot of medium sized Theropods
Image
Edaphosaurus 2.0 - Still controversial, just with less hate
Edaphosaurus
Ankylosaurus
 
Posts: 1690
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:25 am
Location: The Permian

Re: Dinosaurs- Not as big as you think?

Postby Acheroraptor » Sun Jun 12, 2016 9:32 am

Edaphosaurus wrote: You are probably right, but still, 1.6 tonnes is fairly similar to the weight of a lot of medium sized Theropods


Yeah, I can believe Arctotherium was that big. After all, Dinosaurs would have been relatively lighter because of their air-filled bones and air sacs.
Image
User avatar
Acheroraptor
Wiki Team
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2014 2:19 pm

Previous

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests