Re: Nanotyrannus

[Stephen Okay <sokay@snm.com>]

On Sun, 7 Jan 1996 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> The earliest tyrannosaurians also have no lacrimal horns, which
> is the character state right up through tribe Tarbosaurini. The
> lacrimal horns appear only in tribe Albertosaurini, the genera
> _Albertosaurus_, _Gorgosaurus_, _Daspletosaurus_, and the unnamed
> genus for FMNH PR308. Then they were secondarily subdued in tribe
> Tyrannosaurini.
> 

Which brings up a question I've been meaning to ask for a while(although 
I realize this is drifting into a semi-hated thread, I promise not to 
stay too long). I've noticed in various representations of tyrannosaurids
a disparity in the length or overall size of these lacrimal horns. 
Just how large were these and how much are they overrrepresented in 
current illos and models?

The Dinosauria skulls in the carnosaur section(pg. 170, fig H) and The 
Ultimate Dinosaur Book(pg. 54 ) show them as noticeable, but nothing like 
the near horns they are shown to be in such works as JP and The James 
Gurney books. I have always assumed that these were grossly exaggerated 
in JP for that "evil tyrannosaur" look, but then that look started 
showing up in "The Ultimate Dinosaur" and "Dinotopia", which, while still 
popular works, I had thought to be grounded in a bit more paleo-reality
that the Hollywood-generated stuff.

Also, what exactly is being exaggerated here? Is it the lacrimals or the 
superorbitals or both?

Thanks,

----Steve