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

!RE: biggest predators (Allosaurid "Dynasty")

> From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
> Mike Taylor
> Well yes ... but then the Tyrannosaurs were rather cut off their prime
> by that inconvenient bolide.  (Or volcanic activity!  Don't hurt me!
> :-)  Given the increase in bulk through the chronological sequence
> T. efremovi -> T. bataar -> T. rex,

Ummmm... what chronological sequence?  It isn't _T. efremovi_ -> _T.
bataar_ -> _T. rex_ (even accepting for the moment that _T. efremovi_ and
_T. bataar_ are different species: something not generally accepted by
tyrannosaurid workers!!).  The two Mongolian forms occur in the same
Formation (the Nemegt), and there is not enough stratigraphic evidence at
present to say if the big material is stratigraphically above the smaller

On the other hand, I WOULD agree that known _T. rex_ material exceeds all
other tyrannosaurid specimens, and that _T. bataar_ (in the broad sense)
includes the next largest suite of specimens.

> I can't help wondering just how
> big those beasts might have got if they'd made it through K/T.


> DISCLAIMER: I have not yet integrated Thomas Holtz's "Geeze, what a
> way to start the week..." rant  :-)


                Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
                Vertebrate Paleontologist
Department of Geology           Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland          College Park Scholars
                College Park, MD  20742
Phone:  301-405-4084    Email:  tholtz@geol.umd.edu
Fax (Geol):  301-314-9661       Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796