Spinosaurus aegyptiacus vs Triceratops horridus

[gigadino96]

Image from p-tjones (http://giganotosaurinae.deviantart.com/art/Spinosaurus-409193690)

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus
Lenght: 14-15,6 meters long
Weight: 9-12 tonnes
Height: 3,9-4,3 meters
Skull: 1,5-1,75 meters long
Location: Africa
Period: Late Cretaceous, Cenomanian, 112-97 milion years ago


Image by alexandernevsky (http://alexandernevsky.deviantart.com/art/Triceratops-horridus-72545434)

Triceratops horridus
Lenght: 8-9 meters long
Weight: 8-10 tonnes
Height: 2,9-3 meters
Skull: 2-2,5 meters long
Location: North America
Period: Late Cretaceous, Maastrichtian, 68-66 milion years ago

[creature386]

Given that an average Triceratops very likely weighed half as much as Spinosaurus (see the Tyrannosaurus vs Triceratops thread), I favor Spinosaurus here.

[Infinity Blade]

I always thought Triceratops was a bit too small anyway (6t vs. 11t). But given the former was likely a tone smaller than that.......

[Deleted]

I would favor any Triceratops above 7 tonnes in mass over every theropod, up to and including Spinosaurus aegyptiacus.

It's combination of horns and shield are very effective weapons against animals of any size when combined with a very robust and bulky body. It's head is protected by the horns, and it could stand it's ground and turn to keep the theropod in front of it.

Just imagine having a shield with large spikes on it, and at the same time also having the build of a brute.

[Godzillasaurus]

Nov 16, 2013 15:13:15 GMT 5 creature386 said:

Given that an average Triceratops very likely weighed half as much as Spinosaurus (see the Tyrannosaurus vs Triceratops thread), I favor Spinosaurus here.

That is if it could get a good bite on the ornithiscian, of course. This would be difficult given its piscivorous morphology (thin jaws, conical teeth, long forearms, etc.) and the stout and thick body of its opposer. It DID have a size advantage, but it would be a lot more difficult than it a lot of people say for the theropod to effectively bite the ceratopsian, especially on the neck where it was protected by its frill. I would normally favor spinosaurus against theropods, sauropods, and ornithopods smaller than itself, but ceratopsians and ankylosaurs (even though they are irrelevant here) are a stretch given their stout bodies and low postures.

[Runic]

Nov 21, 2013 14:55:24 GMT 5 @brolyeuphyfusion said:

I would favor any Triceratops above 7 tonnes in mass over every theropod, up to and including Spinosaurus aegyptiacus.

It's combination of horns and shield are very effective weapons against animals of any size when combined with a very robust and bulky body. It's head is protected by the horns, and it could stand it's ground and turn to keep the theropod in front of it.

Just imagine having a shield with large spikes on it, and at the same time also having the build of a brute.

A 11+t spinosaurus could literally pin a triceratops head to the ground with its foot alone. It's like a 150lb pure muscles brute fighting a 300lb fat man. Tho the former is blatantly stronger in build, the fat man would overpower him just do to being so much bigger.

Triceratops isn't beating spinosaurus, whether it is or not 7+ tons.

[Deleted]

Pretty sure Spino has lost some weight due to new discoveries.

[dinosauria101]

Triceratops wins on land and Spinosaurus wins in water

[rock]

This was originally the OP of a different thread, I'm gonna leave it here so that people understand the discussion below. -creature

Spinosaurus - belonging to the theropod dinosaur family - was the largest known carnivorous dinosaur to ever live. It was probably larger than both Tyrannosaurus Rex and Gigantosaurus. Spinosaurus means "spine lizard," referring to the long spines that formed something that probably looked like a sail on its back.

Spinosaurus lived in what is now called North Africa during the Cretaceous period, 112 million to 97 million years ago.

The distinctive spines, which grew out of the animal's back, were up to 7 feet long and were likely connected to one another by skin.

Because Recent fossil evidence shows that Spinosaurus was able to swim and likely spent most of its time in water, catching fish and hunting other sea living creatures.

Some of the reasons for theses conclusions are..

The long and slender snout with conical teeth was perfect for catching fish.

The wide and flat claws and feet were perfect for paddling.

It had short hind limbs just like early whales.

Spinosaurus was probably and opportunistic carnivore but it is easy to think that the favorite prey was large-sized fish that swam in the same waters. Spinosaurus probably had to compete for its prey with giant sharks and enormous crocodile creatures like the Sarcosuchus.

The function of Spinosaurus sail is a continuing mystery but it might has been used as…

A trigger in mating rituals, where the animal with the more prominent sail gets favored by females.

* …Or as a radiator, to regulate Spinosaurus body temperature, collecting warmth from the sun and dispersing excess body heat when in the shade.

* It could also have acted as a balancing mechanism when swimming, like a modern day shark, orca or sailfish.

Two Spinosaurus species have been named based on the regions where they were discovered:

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus “Egyptian spine lizard” - which was discovered in 1912 - and the Spinosaurus maroccanus “Moroccan spine lizard” - discovered in 1996.



Triceratops - Triceratops horridus
Triceratops ( /traɪˈsɛrətɒps/ try-SERR-ə-tops) is a genus of herbivorous ceratopsid dinosaur which lived during the late Maastrichtian stage of the Late Cretaceous Period, around 68 to 65 million years ago (Mya) in what is now North America. It was one of the last dinosaur genera to appear before the great Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. The term Triceratops, which literally means "three-horned face," is derived from the Greek τρί- (tri-) meaning "three", κέρας (kéras) meaning "horn", and ὤψ (ops) meaning "face". Bearing a large bony frill and three horns on its large four-legged body, and conjuring similarities with the modern rhinoceros, Triceratops is one of the most recognizable of all dinosaurs and the best known ceratopsid. It shared the landscape with and was preyed upon by the fearsome Tyrannosaurus, though it is less certain that the two did battle in the manner often depicted in traditional museum displays and popular images. The exact placement of the Triceratops genus within the ceratopsid group has been debated by paleontologists. Two species, T. horridus and T. prorsus, are considered valid although many other species have been named. Recent research suggests that the contemporaneous Torosaurus, a ceratopsid long regarded as a separate genus, actually represents Triceratops in its mature form. Triceratops has been documented by numerous remains collected since the genus was first described in 1889, including at least one complete individual skeleton. Paleontologist John Scannella observed: "It is hard to walk out into the Hell Creek Formation and not stumble upon a Triceratops weathering out of a hillside." Forty-seven complete or partial skulls were discovered in just that area during the decade 2000–2010. Specimens representing life stages from hatchling to adult have been found. The function of the frills and three distinctive facial horns has long inspired debate. Traditionally these have been viewed as defensive weapons against predators. More recent theories, noting the presence of blood vessels in the skull bones of ceratopsids, find it more probable that these features were primarily used in identification, courtship and dominance displays, much like the antlers and horns of modern reindeer, mountain goats, or rhinoceros beetles. The theory finds additional support if Torosaurus represents the mature form of Triceratops, as this would mean the frill also developed holes (fenestrae) as individuals reached maturity, rendering the structure more useful for display than defense. Individual Triceratops are estimated to have reached about 7.9 to 9.0 m (26.0–29.5 ft) in length, 2.9 to 3.0 m (9.5–9.8 ft) in height, and 6.1–12.0 tonnes (13,000–26,000 lb) in weight. The most distinctive feature is their large skull, among the largest of all land animals. The largest known skull (specimen BYU 12183) is estimated to have been 2.5 metres (8.2 ft) in length when complete, and could reach almost a third of the length of the entire animal. It bore a single horn on the snout, above the nostrils, and a pair of horns approximately 1 m (3 ft) long, with one above each eye. To the rear of the skull was a relatively short, bony frill, adorned with epoccipitals in some specimens. Most other ceratopsids had large fenestrae in their frills, while those of Triceratops were noticeably solid. The skin of Triceratops was unusual compared to other dinosaurs. Skin impressions from an as-yet undescribed specimen show that some species may have been covered in bristle-like structures, similar to the more primitive ceratopsian Psittacosaurus.

[arethousleepy]

May 22, 2019 3:23:57 GMT 5 rock said:

Because Recent fossil evidence shows that Spinosaurus was able to swim and likely spent most of its time in water, catching fish and hunting other sea living creatures.

Some of the reasons for theses conclusions are..

The long and slender snout with conical teeth was perfect for catching fish.

The wide and flat claws and feet were perfect for paddling.

It had short hind limbs just like early whales.

Spinosaurus was probably and opportunistic carnivore but it is easy to think that the favorite prey was large-sized fish that swam in the same waters. Spinosaurus probably had to compete for its prey with giant sharks and enormous crocodile creatures like the Sarcosuchus.

Just gonna leave this out here in case you haven't heard of the news: peerj.com/articles/5409/

Anyways, I feel like triceratops would dominate spinosaurus on land as it wouldn't really be able to do much damage with the conical teeth it has, and that sail could pose some problems when knocked over, which the former seems very capable of doing so. Spinosaurus does have massive claws though, and I feel as if that would be its most damaging weapons. On water, it's pretty hard to say. If it weren't for the news, I'd maybe say spinosaurus as it definitely has the mobility advantage in water, but then again, wouldn't be able to do much damage but with enough time, should be enough to wear down the triceratops.

Also, shouldn't this be in hypothetical match ups?

[dinosauria101]

^I agree arethousleepy. Also great to have you here, I can't say that enough!
Triceratops should win on land and Spino in water due to each being in their element, but Spino would have to carefully wear Trike down

creature386: can you move this? (also refer to what I said to rock in terms of this thread's distinctness and creation, if you'd like)

rock: you're lucky this time because S. maroccanus is distinct enough for this to be viable, but next time, REMEMBER TO SEARCH! If a matchup's already done, do not make it again

[rock]

May 22, 2019 4:05:29 GMT 5 arethousleepy said:

May 22, 2019 3:23:57 GMT 5 rock said:

Because Recent fossil evidence shows that Spinosaurus was able to swim and likely spent most of its time in water, catching fish and hunting other sea living creatures.

Some of the reasons for theses conclusions are..

The long and slender snout with conical teeth was perfect for catching fish.

The wide and flat claws and feet were perfect for paddling.

It had short hind limbs just like early whales.

Spinosaurus was probably and opportunistic carnivore but it is easy to think that the favorite prey was large-sized fish that swam in the same waters. Spinosaurus probably had to compete for its prey with giant sharks and enormous crocodile creatures like the Sarcosuchus.

Just gonna leave this out here in case you haven't heard of the news: peerj.com/articles/5409/

Anyways, I feel like triceratops would dominate spinosaurus on land as it wouldn't really be able to do much damage with the conical teeth it has, and that sail could pose some problems when knocked over, which the former seems very capable of doing so. Spinosaurus does have massive claws though, and I feel as if that would be its most damaging weapons. On water, it's pretty hard to say. If it weren't for the news, I'd maybe say spinosaurus as it definitely has the mobility advantage in water, but then again, wouldn't be able to do much damage but with enough time, should be enough to wear down the triceratops.

Also, shouldn't this be in hypothetical match ups?

i do not think so because they were both cretacus dinos. anyways i agree that spino wins in the water and triceratops wins on land

[rock]

May 22, 2019 5:31:24 GMT 5 dinosauria101 said:

^I agree arethousleepy. Also great to have you here, I can't say that enough!
Triceratops should win on land and Spino in water due to each being in their element, but Spino would have to carefully wear Trike down

creature386: can you move this? (also refer to what I said to rock in terms of this thread's distinctness and creation, if you'd like)

rock: you're lucky this time because S. maroccanus is distinct enough for this to be viable, but next time, REMEMBER TO SEARCH! If a matchup's already done, do not make it again

ok , i will

[dinosauria101]

^Good.
And just because they were Creataeous does not mean they were sympatric. This is a hypothetical

[rock]

May 22, 2019 15:39:18 GMT 5 dinosauria101 said:

^Good.
And just because they were Creataeous does not mean they were sympatric. This is a hypothetical

i know they lived in diffrent areas so maybe thats why?