Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
UPDATE(7/4/2016): Even this may be a bit too large. MOR 008's maxilla and dentary measurements from the Theropod Database suggests that, based on AMNH 5027, MOR 008 was around ~11.97-12.22 meters long and ~6.26-6.66 tonnes in mass (taking a mass figure of ~6 tonnes for AMNH 5027). Not only it is now even further from the mass of FMNH PR2081 than I thought before, it's turns out that it doesn't even grab a length advantage.

Not as large as many Tyrannosaurus fans think it is.

The ~1.5-meter reconstructed skull seems to be exaggerated, reconstructing it like a normal Tyrannosaurus skull actually gets it down to ~1.34 meters from snout to the quadratojugal.



It appears that :iconscotthartman: agrees with this: comments.deviantart.com/1/1241…

So how large is this specimen? Well, it is pretty similar to AMNH 5027(they were both assigned to "Tyrannosaurus X"), so it seems to be a good base to use.

And here's the result:



It's still one of the largest known Tyrannosaurus specimens, but due to it's more gracile build, still smaller than FMNH PR2081.

Credits:
:iconscotthartman::iconblazze92:
Add a Comment:
 
:iconmigatte:
Migatte Featured By Owner Feb 24, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Nice post! I am trying to deal with someone on Dinopedia that FMNH PR 2081/and or Trix are the largest T. rex specimens.
Reply
:iconmark0731:
mark0731 Featured By Owner Jul 28, 2018
Trix was probably a bit lighter than Sue.
Reply
:iconmigatte:
Migatte Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
True, but generally those two are likely the largest specimens in the sample size.
Reply
:iconpcawesomeness:
PCAwesomeness Featured By Owner Apr 27, 2017
I was actually hyped to see a tyrannosaur seemingly longer than Sue until I read the update.

Cool, though.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2016
it appears that Wikipedia is catching up with you.

BTW shouldn't the corrected version be 139.7 cm?
assuming the pixel count is correct as well as the 150cm figure
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2016
Did Wikipedia just cite me?
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2016
It cited this page.
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2016
I thought they had a policy against "original research"...
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Edited Aug 18, 2016
Well its Nice to see Wikipedia using a legit estimate for once :)
(yours)

Also what do you mean by original reaserch?
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2016
"Original research" in Wikipedia essentially means "unofficial sources" IIRC.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2016
oh ok.
Reply
Hidden by Commenter
:iconspinoinwonderland:
The scaling was off, but correcting it doesn't lend any support towards the old exaggerated estimates. It's actually even smaller than the estimate I came with here back then.

The Theropod Database has measurements of it's maxilla and dentary (~72 centimeters and ~88 centimeters respectively) which show that the skull wasn't even that big compared to that of AMNH 5027 (~71-centimeter maxilla, ~85-centimeter dentary).

The maxilla and dentary measurements, based on comparison with AMNH 5027, suggests total lengths of ~11.97-12.22 meters.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2016
what do you think of this version?

es.prehistorico.wikia.com/wiki…
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2016
It's Spinodontosaurus' own scaling of MOR 008 based on the "corrected" version.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Edited Feb 5, 2016
corrected" version? what do you mean by that?
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2016
It's the modified skull in the gif above.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Edited Feb 6, 2016
how did the overall body end up slightly longer than your reconstruction?
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2016
Not everyone gets the exact same measurement. There will be small differences in how it's measured, all that matters is that the results cluster around something.
Reply
:iconjonagold2000:
JonaGold2000 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
A friend of mine pointed out a mistake made when making that gif, the other side of MOR 008. As you can see it suggests a shape similar to the unedited skull.
www.google.nl/search?q=mor+008…
Sorry I couldn't find a higher quality picture, most pictures of MOR 008 are of the other side
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2016
In any case it won't end up as long as the museum skull, the thing's maxilla and dentary aren't even much larger than those of AMNH 5027...
Reply
:iconjonagold2000:
JonaGold2000 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
The skull does indeed look suspicious 
Reply
:iconmikebrownsound:
mikebrownsound Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2015
Based on clues inside the microstructure of the dinosaur's bones, Holtz says, Sue was fully grown at the time of death. But individuals vary in how large they can get, and chances are that Sue represents the average full-grown T. rex rather than an extreme example. Given the way that animals vary in terms of size and growth, Holtz suggests that "it is very reasonable to suspect that there were individuals that were 10, 15, or even 20 percent larger than Sue in any T. rex population."

THe bones lying in the ground for millions of year are compressed guys, so by that even MOR 008 can be bigger than it heads shows.
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
Very few dinosaur specimens are confirmed to be skeletally mature, Sue's one of the very few that is.

I don't think taking the largest known specimen as the average representative is a good idea based on the specimens we currently have. I mean, I'm not taking NMMMH 26083 as the average representative of Allosaurus fragilis...most adult Tyrannosauri seem to cluster around the ~5-7 tonne range.

As for Holtz' statement, it could easily apply to every other fossil taxon just as well, even more so to taxa with even smaller sample sizes. It also leads to too much speculation about larger specimens. I think it's best to go with what we currently have.

As for your last statement, MOR008's individual skull bits aren't that deformed, it's just broken.

According to the Theropod Database, it's maxilla is ~72 centimeters long and it's dentary is ~88 centimeters long.

For comparison, Sue's maxilla and dentary are ~86.1 centimeters long and ~1.01 meters long respectively. Stan's dentary and maxilla, ~77.5 centimeters and ~91.5 centimeters respectively.

AMNH 5027 has a maxilla ~71 centimeters long and a dentary ~85 centimeters long. Scaling from AMNH 5027's dentary yields ~12.2 meters TL for MOR 008, and scaling using AMNH 5027's maxilla makes MOR 008 ~11.97 meters long. So that size figure I came up here quite a while back is actually a bit generous.
Reply
:iconmikebrownsound:
mikebrownsound Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2015
I remember reading that Jack horner mentioned the t-rex from Jurassic park/world was based off of sue and that he claims to have a 10% larger t-rex specimen than sue.
An article was printed called my t-rex is bigger than your t-rex, it was about sue, however the paleontologist went on to say that specimens 10,20, 30 % larger than sue would not be unreasonable. He also said that the skeletons you see are too small, he was not talking about girth, he was talking in height. That the skeletons in museums should be 6-12 inches taller. Being buried For so long some bone compression would hinder, slightly, the scientist recording height. Take a 6' 2 man bury him For a few million years, he may be written up as standing 5'9. Nothing extremely significant, but not 100% accurate .
People seem to think that when it comes to a larger t-rex than sue that nothing will surpass her.
People think that absence of proof is proof of absence. How big could t-rex get, I could See maybe 48-50 feet max. I can say in my opinion that of every t-rex that has ever lived that there isn't one out there that is way larger than sue, sue may have been average sized.
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2015
"I remember reading that Jack horner mentioned the t-rex from Jurassic park/world was based off of sue and that he claims to have a 10% larger t-rex specimen than sue."

You mean that "C-rex" thing? I don't trust him, he's not reliable, he thinks that Tyrannosaurus was a dedicated 100% slow scavenger for starters...




"An article was printed called my t-rex is bigger than your t-rex, it was about sue, however the paleontologist went on to say that specimens 10,20, 30 % larger than sue would not be unreasonable. He also said that the skeletons you see are too small, he was not talking about girth, he was talking in height."

Link to article?




"That the skeletons in museums should be 6-12 inches taller. Being buried For so long some bone compression would hinder, slightly, the scientist recording height. Take a 6' 2 man bury him For a few million years, he may be written up as standing 5'9. Nothing extremely significant, but not 100% accurate."

Ok, now you're just assuming out of nowhere.




"People think that absence of proof is proof of absence. How big could t-rex get, I could See maybe 48-50 feet max."

Using your logic I could say that Carcharodontosaurus reached ~18 meters long at max. Let's keep this within what is known. There's no evidence against it, but there's no evidence FOR it either.




"People seem to think that when it comes to a larger t-rex than sue that nothing will surpass her."

We simply don't have any known specimens larger than it (not "her", Sue's sex is completely unknown).




"I can say in my opinion that of every t-rex that has ever lived that there isn't one out there that is way larger than sue, sue may have been average sized."

I wonder why people want to use the largest and oldest known specimen as the average representative...
Reply
:iconmikebrownsound:
mikebrownsound Featured By Owner Edited Dec 8, 2015
I dont find the full article but i found this one news.nationalgeographic.com/ne…

"That the skeletons in museums should be 6-12 inches taller. Being buried For so long some bone compression would hinder, slightly, the scientist recording height. Take a 6' 2 man bury him For a few million years, he may be written up as standing 5'9. Nothing extremely significant, but not 100% accurate."

Ok, now you're just assuming out of nowhere. Its not even my words these are words from Paleonotlogist like Holtz and Horner. 

And i know we dont know the sex gender of sue, we use the term her cause of the woman who found her Mr Hendricksson. 

And for the record Jack Horner im no fan of him neither , he claims the rex to be a scavanger and its beoynd ridicolous for me to believe the rex were  only a scavanger.

I think you should watch this video of Thomas Holtz  some later recent studies of the Rex www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqkqkx…
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2015
"I dont find the full article but i found this one news.nationalgeographic.com/ne…"

And it also applies to just about every fossil taxon out there. What about taxa known from single-digit numbers of specimens? And the article never mentioned that the skeletons were too small.



"Its not even my words these are words from Paleonotlogist like Holtz and Horner"

I would like to see where those palaeontologists said that. Anyway, what you're probably thinking about is bone deformation. There are several Tyrannosaurus bones and specimens with minimal deformation. And if you're thinking "how about the gaps between the bones they may have had in life?", those aren't significant in the animal's full scale and would apply to just about every fossil skeleton out there.



"And i know we dont know the sex gender of sue, we use the term her cause of the woman who found her Mr Hendricksson."

Oh. I thought you were assuming it based on that arbitrary robust/gracile thing.



I'll get back to you later after the video.
Reply
:iconmikebrownsound:
mikebrownsound Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2015
Yeah well watch the video is good! I think Thomas Holtz got some good points.   I dont really have the scientific education to talk about bones, but this is what i heard, i cant really confirm it.  
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Edited Aug 29, 2015
how tall is MOR 008 it at the hips?
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Aug 28, 2015
If it has the same leg proportions as AMNH 5027, roughly around ~3.5 meters.
Reply
:iconcrashbandicoot2015:
CrashBandicoot2015 Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2015   Filmographer
sue she can up to 7.5-8.4 tons
the male is just longer not bigger
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2015
We have no idea what the sex/gender of Sue/FMNH PR2081 or MOR008 are.

We only have the gender of 1 Tyrannosaurus specimen(MOR 1125 aka "B-rex"), and that isn't enough to make conclusions.
Reply
:iconcrashbandicoot2015:
CrashBandicoot2015 Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2015   Filmographer
but 70% in the internet said that sue is girl
Reply
:iconmikebrownsound:
mikebrownsound Featured By Owner Edited Dec 7, 2015
Sue is based of the name of the woman who found her in the cliff in south dakota.  There is only one T-rex specimen we know 100% is a female and that was the one Mary Schweitzer found blood vessels in due to the kalcium in the bones , same as female birds have when they are pregnant. So by that this specimen must have been a mother awating a clutch of eggs.    But that was the perfect specimen preserved in the right sediment. And that would be very hard to find due to the envoriment Tyrannosaurus Rex were living in and dying in.   
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2015
Over 80+% of the internet have no clue what they're talking about. If you check actual scientific sources, there's nothing on Sue's gender because we just don't know what it is.
Reply
:iconcrashbandicoot2015:
CrashBandicoot2015 Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2015   Filmographer
i think you are right
Reply
:iconak1508:
ak1508 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
1.35 is still not bad, plus, it is built pretty strong, and has decent set of teeth anyway to do the job! A T-Rex is just T-Rex ;)

I also dont really buy the whole idea of robust being females and gracile being males, since not enough have been confirmed to have specific genders except for one. If they do find a gracile morphed specimen rex to be a female, then that will make it a whole lot more confusing :D
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2014
Yeah, a terrestrial predator larger than a bull African elephant is not to be messed with, especially if said predator has a ~50+ kN bite force :)

I don't buy into that sexual dimorphism thing either, unfortunately it has been engraved into the minds of too many members of the palaeo community because of WWD...
Reply
:iconak1508:
ak1508 Featured By Owner Nov 11, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
well, many throughout the history tried to relate dinosaurs to birds and reptiles, so lets draw some statistics here before we get to the main part:

(animal - sexual dimorphism)

Swan - male is larger and usually more aggressive and sporty (by sporty I mean more active, likes to bully other birds in the pond for fun, territory and to show it has balls)
Goose - male is larger, usually coloured differently (if we talk about the farm goose) and also very aggressive, always the first one to respond to strangers by challenging (i'm sure we've all experienced that at some point!)
Ostrich - male is larger
Mallard Duck - same size, with male being more attractive and flashy, more aggressive behaviour and always trying to show off in fron of female
Birds of Prey - female is larger
Turkey - male is larger
Chicken - male (rooster) is larger and very aggressive
Crocodilians - males are larger
Turtles - females can be a bit bulkier, but mostly same size, barely noticeable differences
Komodo Dragon - male is larger
Snakes - females are mostly larger
Sparrow - same size, with a male having a more colourful feathering

Statistically, most species have larger males than females. If you look at crocodilians and komodo dragons, being the largest predators that can go on land, males are larger. I do not know how aggressive the males are in birds of prey, but in many others that I listed, where males are more aggressive towards each other and foreign species, its usually the male is either larger or same size.

Now, the other fact to consider, is that since theropod dinosaurs are so closely related to modern birds (especially non avian birds like ostrich, emu, turkey, chicken, swan, goose etc), I think males could be of the same size or larger than females. Some might be unique, like say a female may be heavier or have a bigger belly and wider hips, while male is less bulky, has more toned muscles, possibly larger skull and teeth, longer legs and tail. This is something that I would assume a fully grown and matured adult Tyrannosaurus of male and female might look like. That way, we have a female who is mostly there for breeding, and male, who spends most of his time courting, fighting, competing and generally having a very active lifestyle. So, from the mass perspective female Tyrannosaurus could be larger, but overall - they balance each other out, with male more likely being stronger (in most bird species where males show aggressive and competitive behaviour, that is usually true). So, we might even get something similar like in Jurassic Park - male T-Rex is mostly the boss and is coloured something like green or other brighter colours. But thats my opinion.

And take it into acccount, that making a definition of robust rexes being females only comes from one robust specimen, which was discovered when that individual was ovulating. Otherwise - there is no way to tell. So, based on only one specimen, you can't automatically assume that all of them were female, since they have a lot of individual variations, or possibly - they could be different species, like Albertosaurus and Daspletosaurus, while the gracile and robust Tyrannosaurus might just have a closer relationship than those two. My point is - anything is possible, while we still dont have enough solid evidence to prove otherwise.

All in all, I would love it if Scott Hartman, or someone else who can do a good scaling based on the fragments, would do a skeletal reconstruction for other t-rexes, indicating their estimated mass, total length and skull length, may be height at the hips as well.
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
Yeah, the entire Tyrannosaurus sexual dimorphism thing for now rests on little support.

It seems to somehow stubbornly stick to minds though, much like that ~150-tonne, ~25-meter Liopleurodon thing. Some people even take it further and say that most dinosaurs have larger females than males even though in almost all nonavian dinosaur taxa, none of their specimens had their sex discovered.
Reply
:iconak1508:
ak1508 Featured By Owner Nov 11, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah, those myths still apparently go around although have been proven wrong countless times. My fingers get tired of constantly typing the same thing over and over again, when another dude pops up sayin "I heard a liopleurodon was 25 meters long!", "and I heard that spinosaurus was 20 tons heavy and could eat rex for breakfast, because in JP3 it killed t-rex!"... duh! :D

If you notice, all birds today that mainly stay on the ground and don't use flight as their regular means to move around (swans, geese, chicken, turkey, ostrich etc), they all have larger males than females. It seems way more common for them, which is why I could say I'd give it a 70% chance that of all large theropods, males were either larger or same size as females. IMHO
Reply
:iconjonagold2000:
JonaGold2000 Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Yes accuracy on T-rex!
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2013
i guess t.rex fan boys seem to forget that most t.rex skulls are found disformed and not in orginal shape,
silly fan boys, maybe they don't know every ting about t.rex XD
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
SpinoInWonderland Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2013
Especially considering that this one was artificially exaggerated. A true Tyrannosaurus fan would try to know more about his/her favorite animal.

I don't even like theropods as much as sauropodomorph dinosaurs and dinocephalian therapsids, but I know much more about Tyrannosaurus than any of those worshippers.

There is a kilometers-wide and very clear line separating true fans from fanboys/fangirls, in any topic or field.
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2013
exactly, they can't just make up silly assumptions on fragments
if they want to argue, look at the evidence on both sides of the fight (which is what i usually do).
Reply
:iconthesporerex:
Thesporerex Featured By Owner Aug 29, 2013
So MOR 008 is the longest confirmed tyrannosaurus? Awesome.
Reply
:iconkoopalings98:
koopalings98 Featured By Owner Aug 31, 2013
Longest but not the largest. 

"Sue" is still the largest.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconspinoinwonderland: More from SpinoInWonderland


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
August 28, 2013
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
10,199 (1 today)
Favourites
7 (who?)
Comments
59