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

RE: _T. rex_ debate in the newspaper



Isn't a bite in the sacrum likely to be a side effect of gouging out a chunk
of flesh from the back of the Triceratops? I was not saying that rex never
bit into bone, but that biting into vertebrae was not an effective kill
method, especially considering ceratopsian neck frills. To break the spinal
cord the rex would have had to have bitten down through a large depth of
bone, and would have been in contact with the Triceratops for longer than if
it ran up, bit out a wound, and waited for it to weaken. Dangerous for the
rex. With a less dangerous prey animal like a duckbill, a grab and shake
technique could easily have worked to seperate the vertebrae and break the
spinal cord, as the neck bones were weaker and the prey less dangerous, but
I still think that the rex would try to seperate two vertebrae, not bite
through them. I have seen these tooth marks, and to me they look tike the
teeth of the rex scraped along the sacrum as the triceratops pulled away, or
that the rex misjudged the bite area.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Mallon [mailto:j_mallon@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 12:07 PM
To: paamy@talk21.com; dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: RE: _T. rex_ debate in the newspaper


>From: "Paamy" <paamy@talk21.com>

>I doubt that T. Rex would have been capable of biting through the neck
>vertebrae of it's prey, as this would almost certainly have broken its
>teeth.

_T. rex_ was prone to losing teeth anyhow.  There have been numerous finds
with tyrannosaurid teeth found embedded in the bone, including the skull of
another _T. rex_.  Not that this mattered, though, as its old teeth were
constantly being replaced by newer ones.

-Jordan Mallon

http://www.geocities.com/paleoportfolio/


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.