|
|
Post by creature386 on May 10, 2019 2:05:07 GMT 5
Just to make that clear, I started the first one before I found the second Kronosaurus skeleton. I only posted it because it was harder to make and I didn't want the work to go to waste. The second one should be used as a basis for discussion, as I consider the reconstruction to be more up-to-date. But yeah, with its bigger jaws, Kronosaurus should take this. In all fairness though, the Brygmopheseter holotype has a published length of 6.5 - 7 m (it's mentioned here for example) while Jamie Bran's specimen is not even 6 m long. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on May 10, 2019 2:05:47 GMT 5
dinosauria101: Well, closer to a sperm whale than an orca is, obviously. Stem-physeteroids are sort of in between raptorial delphinids and sperm whales morphologically. They have proportionately larger skulls than orcas, but smaller than sperm whales, and at least Brygmophyseter (as you can see above) seems to have had a more orca-like, barrel-chested body shape, but at the same time the head is much bigger and not as small compared to the chest as in orcas. Zygophyseter might be differently proportioned, there’s no good skeletal reconstruction, but some indication that it was proportionately longer and more slender.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on May 10, 2019 2:09:07 GMT 5
Just to make that clear, I started the first one before I found the second Kronosaurus skeleton. I only posted it because it was harder to make and I didn't want the work to go to waste. The second one should be used as a basis for discussion, as I consider the reconstruction to be more up-to-date. But yeah, with its bigger jaws, Kronosaurus should take this. Ah alright. Maybe I should've been more clear as well. Going by the 1st one, I'd say Kronosaurus stomps 10/10 Going by the 2nd one, I'd still favor Kronosaurus pretty comfortably, but not to the extent of the 1st one. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on May 10, 2019 2:11:44 GMT 5
dinosauria101 : Well, closer to a sperm whale than an orca is, obviously. Stem-physeteroids are sort of in between raptorial delphinids and sperm whales morphologically. They have proportionately larger skulls than orcas, but smaller than sperm whales, and at least Brygmophyseter (as you can see above) seems to have had a more orca-like, barrel-chested body shape, but at the same time the head is much bigger and not as small compared to the chest as in orcas. Zygophyseter might be differently proportioned, there’s no good skeletal reconstruction, but some indication that it was proportionately longer and more slender. Well there WAS a skeletal image for Brygmophyseter on Carnivora. Not sure how it would compare though, due to the bad view  |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on May 10, 2019 2:12:41 GMT 5
I see. Going by above comments, it looks like the orca should be at least a meter longer in Jaime Bran's scale. That sounds interesting. It would be nice if you could post such information here. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be anything on Google Scholar regarding muscle density of reptiles. However, I think we may be able to prove my theory in another way. Alligator meat is said to be denser than beef or pork, therefore being denser as a muscle. I know it's sort of a stretch to compare cattle and pigs to whales, and alligators to pliosaurs, but it is the closest I could find and maybe we can apply it here. So there's no actual proof. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on May 10, 2019 2:15:37 GMT 5
In all fairness though, the Brygmopheseter holotype has a published length of 6.5 - 7 m while Jamie Bran's specimen is not even 6 m long. Maybe that might be fairer. Infinity Blade that was my best guess ATM. Anything else I find (perhaps on Carnivora) I'll post here |
|
rock
Senior Member Rank 1
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by rock on May 10, 2019 2:56:34 GMT 5
i dont know enough about either but i will just favor Kronosaurus as he has the highest vote .
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on May 10, 2019 5:58:33 GMT 5
^Well, here are some more specific reasons to favor it
-Larger
-More durable
-Deadlier bite
-Can kill its foe faster than vice versa
|
|
rock
Senior Member Rank 1
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by rock on May 10, 2019 16:38:57 GMT 5
^Well, here are some more specific reasons to favor it -Larger -More durable -Deadlier bite -Can kill its foe faster than vice versa then i guess i favor it |
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on May 10, 2019 17:15:17 GMT 5
Since you cannot back this up yet, I suggest putting a question mark behind or an "(arguably)" before it. Otherwise, you're just confusing rock. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on May 10, 2019 17:16:02 GMT 5
Well Kronosaurus is a lot bigger, and as a result I'd expect greater durability from it.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on May 10, 2019 17:18:13 GMT 5
Considering how you treated it as a distinct point from "larger", it sounded a lot like it relied on your notion of reptiles being inherently tougher than mammals.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on May 10, 2019 17:20:12 GMT 5
^As I said earlier, that was only what was on Carnivora. I've seen some accounts of high reptile durability, and once they've been found they will be posted.
|
|
|
|
Post by elosha11 on Nov 30, 2022 22:37:31 GMT 5
Brygmophyseter actually looks like it could be as massive as an orca.  Unless, of course, it was significantly thinner in dorsal view, which I doubt. I suspect Kronosaurus may still have a weight advantage, though. was likely just as robust as an orca in terms of body shape, but it was considerably smaller. The holotype skeleton has a postcranial length of only c. 4.3m and a total length of less than 6m even when being very generous. That is simply a fairly small orca shown there, even though adult individuals tend to be considerably larger than that. Brygmophyseter does have a proportionately way larger skull tough, more comparable to a very large orca. What source did you use for these measurements on the brygmo holotype? I know of only two research articles that discuss the holotype, but I only have complete access to one of them. I didn't see total length in the material I've reviewed. www.researchgate.net/publication/316093817_Fossil_sperm_whales_Cetacea_Physeteridae_from_Gunma_and_Ibaraki_prefectures_Japan_with_observations_on_the_Miocene_fossil_sperm_whale_Scaldicetus_shigensis_Hirota_and_Barnes_1995onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1440-1738.1994.tb00125.x Wikipedia cites one of these articles to state that the cranium is about 1.5 m. Using your postcranial measurement of 4.3 m, that's a skeleton approximately 5.8 m long. But the skeleton does not include the caudal fin, which would obviously add some length. I would think the animal easily exceeds 6 m, but not sure about the 7 m often cited. I'm not exactly sure how much length the caudal fin would add, but it seems highly likely it would be more than .20 m. Your thoughts? |
|
