[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Saurophaganx vs Tyrannosaurus size

     For whatever it's worth, I recently had the opportunity to measure the 
     pedal phalanges of an associated left foot of Saurophaganx in the 
     Oklahoma Museum's collection.  I have also measured the pedal 
     phalanges of several specimens of Tyrannosaurus--not Sue yet, 
     though...sigh...feel my pain, Chris....  :)
     Anyway, here's how the feet of the two beasts compare in size in 
     phalanges present and measurable in both.  All measurements are 
     phalangeal lengths, measured in millimeters.  "II1" means the first 
     (most proximal) phalanx of digit I, and so on:
     Specimen                       II1   III1   III2   III3   IV1   IV2
     Saurophaganx maximus            93    137   92       63    89    57
     OMNH various catalog numbers--they assigned a different number to each
     bone, but they are all thought to be from the same individual.  I have 
     some reservations about the IDs of elements, but the above are my best 
     guesses, based on phalangeal shapes, joint surfaces, and comparisons 
     with the same bones in Allosaurus and Tyrannosaurus
     Tyrannosaurus rex
     MOR 009                        197                                97
     MOR 555                        223    213   140      120   149   109
     BHI's "Stan"                   209    194   141            147   103
     LACM 7225/23844                195    195   133      117   137    99  
     The numbers ain't even close.  So unless Saurophaganx had unusually 
     dainty tootsies for its overall body size, Tyrannosaurus could have 
     kept it as a pet.
     Of course, this is from a Tyrannosaurus chauvinist who thinks that, 
     slight differences in size notwithstanding, Tyrannosaurus could have 
     mopped the floor with Giganotosaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, or any of 
     the other contenders for the title of "biggest" theropod.