[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Saurophaganx vs Tyrannosaurus size
For whatever it's worth, I recently had the opportunity to measure the
pedal phalanges of an associated left foot of Saurophaganx in the
Oklahoma Museum's collection. I have also measured the pedal
phalanges of several specimens of Tyrannosaurus--not Sue yet,
though...sigh...feel my pain, Chris.... :)
Anyway, here's how the feet of the two beasts compare in size in
phalanges present and measurable in both. All measurements are
phalangeal lengths, measured in millimeters. "II1" means the first
(most proximal) phalanx of digit I, and so on:
Specimen II1 III1 III2 III3 IV1 IV2
Saurophaganx maximus 93 137 92 63 89 57
OMNH various catalog numbers--they assigned a different number to each
bone, but they are all thought to be from the same individual. I have
some reservations about the IDs of elements, but the above are my best
guesses, based on phalangeal shapes, joint surfaces, and comparisons
with the same bones in Allosaurus and Tyrannosaurus
Tyrannosaurus rex
MOR 009 197 97
MOR 555 223 213 140 120 149 109
BHI's "Stan" 209 194 141 147 103
LACM 7225/23844 195 195 133 117 137 99
The numbers ain't even close. So unless Saurophaganx had unusually
dainty tootsies for its overall body size, Tyrannosaurus could have
kept it as a pet.
Of course, this is from a Tyrannosaurus chauvinist who thinks that,
slight differences in size notwithstanding, Tyrannosaurus could have
mopped the floor with Giganotosaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, or any of
the other contenders for the title of "biggest" theropod.