|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 17, 2020 18:56:31 GMT 5
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 17, 2020 20:17:20 GMT 5
Wait, when did Titanoboa go to 16 tonnes???
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 17, 2020 20:19:02 GMT 5
Typo. I meant 1.6. Will have to fix it.
Who do you back here?
|
|
|
Post by 6f5e4d on Jan 19, 2020 11:34:03 GMT 5
Titanoboa might not be as heavy, but as its a snake, it has the ability to constrict many things larger than it, the megalania will easily be constricted to death.
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 19, 2020 12:57:08 GMT 5
I back Titanoboa as well. It's pretty close overall, but V. priscus lacks defense against constriction and that's its downfall; once Titanoboa coils, game over
|
|
|
Post by Ceratodromeus on Apr 22, 2020 22:54:44 GMT 5
The monitor.
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Apr 23, 2020 16:55:48 GMT 5
Not a peer-reviewed paper, but for what it's worth, one of the original describers of Titanoboa thought it would have been an almost completely aquatic snake, only coming up on land to bask every now and then. www.livescience.com/5308-ancient-snake-long-bus.htmlBut supporting this assertion, the original description paper does note that its remains are associated with depositional environments with large-scale river systems and aquatic vertebrates. Head et al. (2009)This abstract has been out for years now, but cranial features also support a dominantly piscivorous diet - unique among living and fossil boids, in fact. Head et al. (2013)Take particular note: "weakly ankylosed teeth". I'm no expert on constrictor snakes (or snakes in general), but I don't imagine that constrictors that restrain and kill large vertebrates have teeth that are weakly fused to their jawbones. This is especially important to note because snake teeth (and the teeth of squamates in general) aren't embedded into deep, well-developed sockets like the teeth of archosaurs or mammals (thecodont). Although the specific type of tooth implantation snakes possess has been the subject of debate for decades, and still doesn't seem to be really clear, we can say this now: they aren't thecodont or even sub-thecodont ( Bertin et al., 2018). So if Titanoboa specifically has teeth that are weakly fused to its jawbone (whether on the top or lingual surface thereof), and not lodged into deep sockets or anything of the sort, I somehow doubt that speaks well about its ability to tackle a large animal, like this giant monitor.
|
|
all
Junior Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by all on May 30, 2020 20:59:01 GMT 5
This would be a close fight. In water I would favor Titanoboa. On land lizard has a slight edge. It is very difficult to fight against large constrictor. Once coils are around V.p. there is very little he can do. But before that happens lizard can do lots of damage. Monitors are pound per pound stronger than crocodiles. And on land Varanus would be in its element there is good chance titanoboa would not as much. Komodo dragon actually has relatively weak bite force I don't know about megalania but both It and Komodo dragon have entire row of large serrated teeth. Megalania's teeth are much larger than those of Komodo dragon even in relation to its size. If megalania does have venom it has good chance on land especially considering the fact that unlike a crocodile Varanus has claws that could do additional damage. In water on the other hand despite the fact that monitors are good swimmers titanoboa would feel better at in aquatic environment than lizard would. And in that environment it would win.
|
|
|
Post by jhg on Jun 20, 2020 4:57:42 GMT 5
Varanus priscus takes it; Didn't it eat snakes?
|
|
|
Post by Ceratodromeus on Jun 20, 2020 5:49:05 GMT 5
It probably ate a lot of things yeah.
|
|
|
Post by sharkboy101 on Jun 25, 2020 3:32:42 GMT 5
Varanus priscus takes it; Didn't it eat snakes? Varanus priscus was contemporaneous with Wonambi naracoortensis, a 5 to 6 meter long madtsoiid snake.
|
|
|
Post by jhg on Apr 10, 2024 2:26:59 GMT 5
Thinking about it, this just wouldn’t work; Titanoboa was aquatic.
|
|