This niche specialization by age wasnt unique to t-rex, many other large archosaurs like other large theropods, sauropods and the aznarchids also practiced this and it very well could be a major fact in why they went extinct when shit hit the fan. This is a horrible way to survive because the moment the juveniles see an massive uptick in mortality rates and cant replace the adults at a constant rate spells disaster for the species.
“Least favorite meteor” is an understatement about how much everyone doesn’t like it, BECAUSE I CANT RIDE A FLIPPIN PARASAUROLOPHUS. Joking… but seriously, we need to bring dinosaurs back to life in a contained environment… a sort of biological preserve on an island, likely off the coast of Costa Rica, about 100 or so miles off the shore. But enough of that, I love knowing about dinosaurs, and this is quality as usual.
@@2011XREAL I don’t know the facts behind that but you wouldn’t be able to use dinosaurs to make dinosaurs, but you can use chickens and alligators with gene splicing and genetic modification to make patentable “dinosaurs”. Take other archosaurs to make dinosaurs.
Thank you. It took a lot of rewrites to get the script there. Even so, it probably would have been better if it included information on how carcharodontosaurid growth rates and lifespans contrasted with those of tyrannosaurids. Instead of growing fast and dying young, they grew much slower and lived longer, with one carcharodontosaurid specimen being 50 years old.
Yeah, as soon as i heard that i thought something similar. It's a great one sentence way of explaining the reason of why so many creatures developed the way they did at different times throughout this planets life sustaining periods. 😄👍
Well it's just a rephrasing of the famous quote from Aristotle: "Nature abhors a vacuum." Not saying it isn't a fine way of rephrasing the quote, but it almost seems like people aren't aware of the original quote based on some of the comments.
There is an interesting story of a Trex that had most of its tail bitten off by a larger Trex. It survived and healed and carried on. What is strange about it was the shear damage done, near the base of the tail. The animal would have had great difficulty balancing and running even after it healed. The blood loss and possible infection is what baffled researchers, how could a creature survive such a devastating injury? It seems Trex was like modern crocodile with one of the strongest immune systems in nature, able to eat rotting meat, drink putrid water, and fight off infection. It was also clear that it healed at an extremely fast rate and had a cardiovascular system that minimized blood loss when injured. These traits would have made Trex particularly well suited to a violent predatory lifestyle filled with injury. That's how it survived the injury, but how could it hunt and sustain itself while healing? There isn't any concrete evidence to suggest Trex was a social animal, but it does seem possible that it lived in relative harmony with other Trex, or perhaps it simply scavenged from kill sites, staying away from other Trex just on the fringe sneaking in for a quick bite when safe. This image of Trex is quite amazing, a giant predator, living and competing with others of its own kind, battling, fighting, hunting, being injured and scarred, some probably would have missing arms, eyes, tails, toes, and just kept going. What an amazing animal.
given how absurdly dominant crocs are, anything remotely similar in their success as predators must have similar characteristics. There are very few species with such a long standing streak of eras in a row, specially when many of those eras had such cataclysmic extintion events as a meteorite and the rise and fall of ice age. The only thing that comes to mind are sharks, wich share all those traits you mentioned.
It is quite well documented that crocs could survive with their jaws severely deformed, or even snapped clean off. Usually from losing a death roll battle with a bigger rival during mating season. How they got by is beyond me. Having ruled for 25 million years, it's not implausible that T-rex had similar or even greater ability to survive catastrophic injuries.
I wonder if T Rex was a night fighter? It had the largest eyes, a bloodhound sense of smell perfect to stalk. Serrated bone crunching teeth that might cause infections like the Komato Dragon. Blood and infection the bloodhound sense of smell could track. Arms, though small, were strong enough to push off prey to bite after a clumsy rush. Even a sauropod wouldn't sleep soundly.
It is a possibility but I don’t think Trex needed to hunt in the night as it could outrun its preys, wouldn’t need to rely on a septic bite (the Komodo dragon actually possess venom) as its insanely powerful bite would have been enough of a weapon to seriously wound or even kill a prey in one hit. I like what you said about sauropods, the presence of sauropods outside of maybe Alamosaurus is not really known in Trex’s environment but it’s fascinating to imagine it trying to take down a sauropod.
@TheGreenEyedMonsterTruck you’re right, Tyrannosaurus rex seem to have been particularly intelligent for a large theropod, I in no way implied that it was dumb by any means. I don’t know about killing an adult alamosaurus but a young could definitely had been a part of T-Rex’s diet. That being said T-Rex preying on alamosaurus is at this point only speculative since this sauropod seems to be quite rare in T-Rex’s environment (this might be due to the fact that sauropods are usually quite fragmentary). Tyrannosaurus isn’t commonly portrayed as a sauropod hunter which makes this idea really interesting and exciting in my opinion.
@@Charlie-Charlot they were definitely not faster than their prey. They were extremely slow and not exactly sneaky with all that weight. Evidence suggests they weren't much of hunters at all, but scavengers who stole meals from the better hunters. They may not have been built well for hunting, but they were definitely built for killing anything that didn't run away when they approached, which obviously most would when they see or hear it coming.
I honestly love how so much research has gone into this beast that it’s like it went extinct a 1000 years ago. It’s like we know more about an animal that went extinct 66 million years ago compared to the dodo bird that went extinct 400 years ago.
On the bright side, we do know the dodo must have tasted good, since it was man who hunted them into extinction. We can only guess how T-Rex tasted (possibly like wild turkey?) 😉
The idea Tyrannosaurus insta-killed prey with a neck bite while other large theropods were slow, inefficient predators ignores that predators that rely on bleeding out their prey actually kill much faster than usually assumed, and that predators with powerful jaws generally (with the exception of jaguars) do not try to one-shot their prey, but use their bite force to maintain a jaw grip instead (which also fits far better with Tyrannosaurus’s robust build).
or just ambush from behind breaking a triceratops back leg with it's bone crushing bite as a result the triceratops cannot run and is slowed down by the injury and hell creek was full of dense flora so even a fully grown tyrannosaurus would be able to ambush it's prey
Ceratopsians probably didn't form herds , at least i heaed scant evidence about that , And adult edmontosaurus where almost as big as t-rex so ye , The ceratopsian goes
They were more prone to scavenging and stealing bodies off of better hunters. They were too big and slow to catch most prey, but since they were big and powerful, most other predators would abandon their prey if a Rex came up.
@@firegator6853 from what I've read, they avoided trikes and ankylosaurus and stuff like that unless they were starving. Not worth the risk. Tbh a triceratops is more likely to kill the Rex than the other way around. An ankylosaurus would break their jaws and ribs and leave them for dead. Although movies like to portray Rex's as some fierce predator, they really were more scavengers then anything. Too slow to catch anything and too big and noisy to sneak up on them.
@@colecampbell1906 noisy is dumb because all they would need is just not make any sound Also if trex is slow due to its size what do you think makes stuff like triceratops faster?
This is one very good video analysis, but there's one thing you didn't bring up that I think is important. Most of what you said about T.rex might also apply to predators of similar size and build, like the carcharodontosaurids. While their morphologies were obviously different, it's not too outlandish to believe that they too would've had their bodily anatomy change substantially throughout their lives. In other words, they might've also fulfilled multiple predatory niches in the course of their lives. Juvenile carcharodontosaurids are scarce, if not absent from the fossil record, but it wouldn't be too hard to believe. Though, I do agree that carcharodontosaurids were likely far more generalist than tyrannosaurids and that they were also more suited for hunting giant adult sauropods. It's also worth mentioning that it would be beneficial for tyrannosaurids mated for life and with both parents looking after their kids until a certain age. After all, I don't imagine theropods to lay that many eggs. I hope this was an interesting perspective.
Why would something that can kill a herbivore that could feed 10 sub adults need to evolve to hunt diverse prey? I mean I get what you're saying, but it's also possible that carcharodontosaurids were not solitary kill hoarders.
I love this. So much information I hadn't known before! As the age of adults is no more than 30ish, new to me. The high turnover rate is also very interesting. The idea that T. Rex lived as the medium predator before reaching adulthood is also fascinating! I can't help but imagine a Dakotaraptor squaring off against a juvenile Rex for prey.
11:11 Actually I think it's suspected that the Hadrosaurs had the speed to easily outrun their Tyrannosaur predators. To make up for this, Tyrannosaurs were more of stamina based hunters. Don't quote me on this, as it could be outdated, but seeing as it's only suspected Tyrannosaurus itself didn't exceed 18 mph in running speed, it seems fairly plausible.
Evidence suggests they weren't much of hunters at all. More scavengers than anything. They couldn't catch much, but when other better hunters have a body, they aren't going to stand still when the Rex comes. Very powerful and can kill almost anything, but not catching much itself if they choose to run, so they just likely chose to run. Though that's not to say they never killed anything, just took more rare circumstances. Most would know better than to fight them outside of big trikes and ankys. Tbh the ankylosaurus was probably the most feared dinosaur out there. Super aggressive to anything that moves, nearly impossible to injure, and guaranteed to shatter any bones that make contact with that tail.
@@Blackratsnake pack hunters could easily. Also there were other large carnivores that worked in small groups that were great hunters but still too small to risk fighting a Rex. It's easier to just find some more prey than risk a bite from them.
@@colecampbell1906 Again, what predators? The next largest predator that lived with T. rex was Dakotaraptor, and it's now pretty commonly accepted that Dromaeosaurs did not hunt in packs.
T.rex is the largest (weight nearly10 tons) and strongest terrestrial predator to ever walk on earth, spinosaurus is just longer and slender animal with very short legs, carcharadontosaurid are smaller and less robust less muscular than t.rex
Well, tyrannosaurs was the heaviest and could crush metal, carcharodontosaurus was faster and could do what The Isle players do and ass ride it and just keep biting it till it bleeds to death, considering if they could get in a fight even though they couldn’t. …lol
@@silvertheelf Perhaps not. Most other tyrannosaurids, along with juvenile Tyrannosaurus, were very much built for speed and would have been faster than most similarly sized theropods. While their size would have made them slower, adult Tyrannosaurus still retained some of these traits into adulthood, so it is possible that an adult T-rex could still outrun a smaller carcharadontosaurid.
Personally Its my favourite meteorite as I wouldn't exist without it and I'm fairly partial to myself. I think the reason Trex got so big was because it could crush and eat bones and more importantly the marrow within. It's similar to how it has been purposed human got such big brains, by breaking bones apart to eat the marrow and brains.
Can you please elaborate further on your explanation of Tyrannosaurid growth size and human brain size in relation to the consumption of bone marrow? I don’t really know the effects of eating bone marrow but it sounds very interesting
I know this is a year old comment but f it. I think this really isn't an explanation. Tyranosaurus could crush bones due to its exceptional size and therefore your explanation is backwards and can't work as a reason for the size, but more as a possible contributing factor once the species got large enough to effectively crush bones.
ive often wondered why there are no predators alive today able to prey on elephants. even prides of lions are completely incapable of preying on full grown elephants. i suppose humans evolved to fill that niche, but even before humans evolved, there didnt seem to be much more powerful mammalian predators than lions. i would even argue the african lion is the most formidable land mammalian predator ever apart from humans, due to not only being large but hunting in groups.
Check stuff like megistotherium , entelodon and arctodus , Or other smaller critters such as dinocrocuta , borophagine and homotherium Those guys where imo way more powerful than lions ... Most of these guys when extinct because of us and because of the yunger drias
@@davidegaruti2582 those were alot bigger than current lions and bears. but still in the same ball park and not an allosaurus let alone a t rex. maybe humans evolved to fill the boots of those super predators. and proved too effective... in wiping out earths entire current crop of megafauna. oops my bad. that was the ice ages and climate change lol
I would assume elephants are so big because of evolutionary anachronism.Like they evolved to their size because of large predators, but haven’t needed to get smaller or couldn’t get smaller, either from low genetic diversity or something else.
@@boatman783 there have been discoveries of tiny adult elephant [bones] on islands. presumably because a combo of lack of food and lack of predators. so eles can definitely be small. the odd thing about elephants is they are much bigger than they need to be to avoid predation from lions or hyenas. and if size is so advantageous to avoid preds, why don't things like water buffalo grow bigger. elephants are a bit strange
Add to this the fact that supporting a large population of mature giant carnivores would probably crash a local ecosystem, and cascade the move of too many predators elsewhere. Makes sense.
Never really occurred to me that T. Rex’s size was so odd till this video. Knowing so many other similarly sized carcars and tyrannosaurs existed I guess I just forgot they didn’t have a sauropod food source
Fortunately, Tyrannosaurus Rex only dominates its own continent. Of course, Laramidia was occasionally connected with East Asia, which is why Tyrannosaurs were present in Asia in addition to North America, but Tyrannosaurus Rex was completely absent from South America, Europe, Africa, and Antarctica.
Wasn’t that mainly due to the geography of the world at the time? Being that the southern continents were separated, otherwise tyrannosaurs would have dominated there too
Can't really say anything about Antarctica, we have no idea what's under there yet. They've only explored a fraction of a percentage of it. They're just now discovering frozen lakes and forests under the ice.
I noticed that that you mentioned the Western Interior Seaway was 'retreating' southwards during the time of the T-Rex--which is an interesting factiod. Did that mean that the Rex possibly moved from Laramidia into Appalachia before "The Great Meteor of Death" arrived?
No Tyrannosaur fossils have been found in Appalachia so far. However, since less Late Cretaceous fossils are known from that part of North America it is possible.
@@chimerasuchus Thanks; given 'Appalachia' made up a large part of the Northeast of the US, I figure it's just too hard to dig for fossils in, say Pittsburgh or Newark. Of course, if I got my geography TOTALLY wrong, I'm sorry.
@@chimerasuchus I also have to add, having the Rex move east, it would be a HELL of an invasive species for the local tyrannosaurids to deal with. I can only imagine the surprise of a dryptosaur or an appalachiasaurus to having THIS intruder in their hunting ground
I never saw the Largest Sauropods as a prey species. And as you mention the numbers of large ones were probably few and safe from predation while the smaller ones were virtually defenceless except while in the herd. So the Jurassic eras probably didn't require the massive T-rex.
Man, your channel was small before, and now it has grown bigger over time, with one video - this one in particular - getting 1 million views. Your presentation is professional and information is valuable. I would like to congratulate you with this comment. 🎉👏🦖🦕
For the mention of spinosaurus I would say it only got big to try to intimidate carchars away because it’s prey is small enough for even irritator to take and it’s too weak to take on large herbivores like it’s rival carcharodontosaurus, it’s sail was probably so large as a defence against carchar to intimidate it because well except oxalaia there are no other spinosaurs with such a large sail, but oxalaia is still a mystery right now
That would be quite the costly form of defence. One that I am not sure would hold up under closer examination, but hell we know almost nothing about spinosaurus so who knows.
Correct. Rexy probably only hunt the small, sick Alamosaura or because of desperation. It does not have the right build to hunt sauropods (that would be its South American distant cousins)
@@alphawolf8031 Tyrannosaurus was slow and not agile too. Plus, Alamosaurus was much bigger. If T. rex got stomped on by one, it would possibly be fatally wounded.
The artist (s) and their art that illuminated your narrative proved spectacular. Not only the colors but the detailed use of shading and shadows made this entire production a work of art. And have you thought of bring in music? Congratulations!
T-rex didn't need to slice flesh with razor sharp teeth. It had the bulk and the strength to just rip the flesh off in huge chunks. There are even studies proving that trex could rip the heads clean off of triceratops just by grabbing on and pulling.
Tyrannosaurus was the ultimate predator, he wss deadly from the cradle. If in every step of it's growth occupied a different niche means that in any given period he was competing with every other predators of each size with the exception of adulthood when just competed with other adults. The ultimate predator since it's style and dynamics changed at every period.
He was bearly a predator. His upper leg length relative to its lower leg length prevented him from making sharp turns, it would've broken its knees. His size also prevented him from running. He went after pray that were not capable of running or straight up bullied smaller predators in giving up their prey.
@@TheSuperhoden That's totally false. Shorter fibula/tibia helps for lower turn radius and higher balance. Surely a carnivore with the strongest biteforce (not including other evolutionary traits) of any land animal in earth's history wouldn't just be a mere scavenger, right? TRex just needed to outpace it's prey, which it did.
@@hishamsadiq4104 but how many had to compete against other specialised carnivores and end up being the apex predator? it would be interesting to know to which degree young Tyrannosaurus competed with raptorial dinos or for their localisation just was against other tyrannosaurids.
@@TheSuperhoden are you really a person? don't try to offend is just that recently I see a lot of profiles that have a hot chick so my guess is that you are a bot and somehow able to give quite elaborated responses.
Your welcome, but I should point out that some of the hypothesizes in this video are out of date. They will be addressed in a later video about the newly described Tyrannosaurus mcraensis.
Tyrannosaurs ( in my opinion ) acted more like kamado Dragons biting their prey and letting bacterial infection take down their prey, and adults stealing smaller t. rex's food. It makes sense with the new look of the predator ( the adult body is now so close to the ground that if they were run it could easily crash into the ground as it tried running after prey. ) I personally think that they also stalked the rivers and lakes like storks hunting for large fish and amphibians since their teeth are similar to crocodilians, for the small and mid-size of the species at least. A big change from the argument started over 40 yrs ago about their high speed running after prey. Great presentation thank you for making it.
Komodo dragons don't actually hunt that way. Most of the time their prey die way to quickly for them to even start to feel the effects of infection. Not that many would, since more recent studies have found most Komodo dragons don't posses the mouths full of bacteria that they were once thought to have. What happens is that when Komodo dragons attack water buffalo, the buffalo's instinct is to go to the water. However, the water buffalo are not native to the same islands as the Komodo dragon, and the water there is mostly stagnant and ends up filled with water buffalo feces. This infected water then ends up entering the wounds made by the dragons, often with lethal results. Even ignoring all of that, Tyrannosaurus's anatomy simply doesn't support such a strategy. It had an incredibly powerful bite that would simply be wasted with such tactics.
See how established facts can change from one day to the next … lol. I see that in 2009 using medical scanners they found venom sacs that cause the prey to bleed to death from the wounds.
well not just that, but during the Rex's time, were there large sea turtles (like archelon sized?) in the great western seaway? was there even a great western sea way at the Rex's time? IF there were, I would like to think sea turtle breeding season would be a time of great feasting for all generation of tyrannosaurids.
@@chimerasuchus the bite force could help the scavenger theory though. Would allow them to eat more variety with less restrictions and help in bullying other hunters off their meal.
wales process huge amounts of small-sized biomass and some de facto fast for long periods. Snakes "sleep" for weeks and even months after a meal... So one needs to consider the entire ecologically (popgen-relevant) metabolic cycles and energy fluxes (and the processing "functional" response for the issue of the sizeXcatchability offered by a prey).
I honestly think that possibly up to 30% of a T Rex diet was scavenging prey killed by other dinosaurs. With steroscopic smell and the largest olfactory organ to brain size ratio, it would have taken the easy route when it could.
This is an interesting evolutionary history about the King of Hell Creek and its amazing to see the secrets of the success of the Tyrannosaurus, and is surprising to see how little the adults live
11:55 if juvenile fossils are rarer than adults, then assuming adults fossilize at same rate as medium sized juveniles, it would follow that juveniles are less common. There is a precedent for an ecosystem with a top-heavy predator guild- intact coral reefs tend to have a large population of large sharks and a relatively smaller population of smaller sized fish that is quickly eaten and replenished by the sharks. If there are few adults and medium-sized juveniles, then the selective sieve operates at smaller size- perhaps makes sense if cannibalism by 'teenagers' on younger trexes was common
More than likely it's that juvenile T. rexes had a low mortality rate. T. rexes likely had high mortality rates when they were very young, then mortality declined as they entered their rapid growth phase (they would have been too agile for an adult T. rex to catch), then mortality once again increased when they reached adulthood and they had to face the pressures of hunting larger, slower prey (juvenile T. rexes likely hunted small, fast moving prey) as well as mating. This is pretty common in archosaurs.
@@minutemansam1214 the problem is juvenile fossils are rarer than adults while juveniles (not babies) are still quite large so should fossilize at similar rates to adults. So it argues that there is a smaller population of juveniles. It definitely does not mean that fewer juveniles died tho lol.
@@minutemansam1214 Also what does "pretty common for archosaurs" mean. Your reference points are birds and crocodiles. Both of which have very different reproductive strategies and birds don't really have the pattern you describe.
Great videos. More variety of dinosaurs than I imagined. How about a segment on the livability of humans in various climates of earth history? Fascinating pondering this. I know there were periods throughout hundreds of millions in years where we could not thrive in the extremes.
Very well described. I had heard that the Juveniles where the medium sized predictors before but you went on to explain how that dynamic worked and why it worked so well and why we find so many Tyrannosaurus Fossils. Something I was always somewhat unclear on before.
It’s honestly crazy how OP T.Rex was in real life and what a strangle-hold it had on nearly every trophic level. Small/medium animals had to deal with a roided-up Alioramus/Qianzhouasaurs and Edmonto’s and Trike’s dealt with massive adults.
Even the other carnivorous therapods that equated to Tyrannosaurs didn't have near the mass. Every argument of T-Rex vs the rest of massive carnovores is weird. (and the only way we would know it is to be able to go back in time, transport them and fight them.) If you compare tyrannosaur skulls to all the rest it hits different. Rex had an AMAZING skull. I still like the idea that it might have used it's arms for egg carrying and infant care. I've never heard anyone else hypothesize this. I just like it as a casual. (No nest would be safer than being held beneath a t-rex's jaws) Edit: Also t-rex's brain was huge compared to it's counterparts.
I've heard it suggested that the arms of a T. Rex would have completely been buried in muscle by the time they were adults. Probably the purpose of them was wholely limited to their youth. As for the Rex adults themselves, I suspect their skulls were so resilient just to maximize how much nutrition they got out of their prey. That way they could then attempt to maximize their reproduction.
Yes, other large carnivorous dinosaur could rival the T. rex in mass. Even if the T. rex was the most massive, animals like Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus wouldn't have been THAT much lighter.
It was by Christopher Srnka. The artist credit in bottom right corner, though looking at it now it is probably easy to miss. I will try to make sure such credit is more noticeable in future videos.
@@chimerasuchus Oh wait im dumb it is just i watched this vid from my ps4 and the tv in the living room where my ps4 is has a bunch of black on one side so i did not see and when i commeted on my laptop i was not paying attention sorry!
Excellent, you went into depth on some issues that have concerned me. This got a like but also I plan to watch it again. You do not understand an animal (any animal) unless you understand its environment.
I don't really think tyrannosaurus was much larger compared to other theropods. I think it was the same size as carcarodontosaurus, giganotosaurus, spinosaurus, and mapusaurus
Those are exceptionally sized theropods as well. Most environments during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods lacked such massive predators. As noted in the video, most of the other mega-theropods are closely related carcharodontosaurids. The explanation for their massive size: coexistence with massive sauropods they were specialized to hunt, didn't apply to Tyrannosaurus While Tyrannosaurus did coexist with Alamosaurus in part of its range, it was poorly suited to hunt large individuals compared to the carcharodontosaurids.
@@chimerasuchus true, althouth Zhuchengtyrannus and Tarbosaurus were large animals as well, not as large as tyrannosaurus however, and tarbosaurus may have been a sauropod butcher like the others. Anyway nice vid.
T-rex hunting strategy was persistence hunting. Meaning it didn't not need to target only sick or weak individuals. It could target the largest and strongest animals, and chase them until they were too exhausted to fight back. Guaranteeing a large meal with relatively little risk.
@@alphawolf8031 you can't say that. You have no way of knowing what a trike or anky would or wouldn't do. Just because an animal has built in weapons doesn't mean they will use them the way you assume they would, or behave like you assume they would. Then there are also the differences between individual animals within a species. Some individuals might be more likely to fight while others might be more likely to run. Take a look at wolves. A wolf pack can bring down a large and dangerous animal like a moose, but only if the moose runs. The wolves specialize in intimidation tactics to make their prey run. And while some moose do stand their ground, many more choose to run. And the ones that run, end up as dinner. I would imagine a t-rex is one hell of an intimidating animal.
@@KurNorock Well that's usually how it works, animals defend themselves with the weapons they have. Cape buffaloes for example usually defend themselves against a lioness pride hunting them but they outmanuveur them with agility and speed. Triceratops and Ankylosaurus didn't have their weapons for looks and that's for sure. Wolves can hunt bisons regardless if the intimidation works or not, they are intelligent enough to use their numbers with superior tactics where one wolf can distract the bison while the other tears it from behind, and the fact that wolves are much smaller and shorter than a bison makes it harder for them to get gored. For the TRex, it wasn't the case as TRex was larger, heavier and taller than almost all its prey. Not to mention that if what you said is true, then the TRex wouldn't need to evolve to have such a strong biteforce if it just chased and waited for its prey to get exhausted leaving it defenceless. You can argue that some predators today like hyenas who have very strong biteforce usually wait for their prey to tire out but hyenas hunt in large clans and they are far smaller than most prey they hunt, there is no complete proof however for TRex being a pack hunter. I'm not saying that this is always the case with Trike and Anky fighting back, but they have their weapons for a reason so sometimes they did fight back. TRex was indeed intimidating, but so were Trike and Anky.
@@alphawolf8031 Again, you can't say that for sure. Many animals have deadly weapons and very often do not use them the way you would think. Deer for example have massive antlers with many sharp points, but when attacked by a predator they most often just run away. And in the rare instances where they do stand their ground and fight back, they almost never use their antlers and instead rear up and kick with their front legs. The fact is that most animals with horns or antlers will chose running away more often than not. The horns and antlers are almost always reserved for inter-species combat, usually over mating rights or territorial disputes. Even in your example with the cape buffalo, they do run more often than they stand their ground. They almost only ever stand and fight back when protecting their young. And again, they are all just animals. It doesn't matter how big and powerful the moose/elk/buffalo/ is, if the predator can intimidate it, it will run. I am not saying that no triceratops ever fought back against a t-rex. I am just saying that as of now, we have no idea how often that happened. But what we do know is that t-rex absolutely did feed on adult triceratops. We also know that t-rex was capable of long distance travel at a steady, if somewhat slow, speed. That is an adaptation that is really only good for one thing, persistence hunting.
@@colecampbell1906 Rex is scientifically agreed to be the most massive (weight) THAT WE KNOW OF AT THE MOMENT, but as far as length, assuming 40 foot is the estimated length of a large Rex, the following theropods may have reached that length: (Forgive my spelling I’m going by memory) Of course Mapusaurus Spinosaurus Giganotosaurus Acrocanthosaurus Allosaurus Saurophaganax (most likely a particularly large Allosaurus) Tyrannotitan Carcharadontasaurus Sigalamassasaurus (sp? Probably a Carcharodontosaurus Torvosaurus Tarbosaurus Zhuchengtyrannus Siats Deltadromeus or Bahariasaurus Oxalia (probably a junior synonym of Spinosaurus). Cristatusaurus (probably a particularly large Baryonyx) And there’s that new huge megalosaurus that they named megalosaurus ingens after Jurassic Park, but there’s no data or papers out on it yet. So, yeah, there were plenty that if we use the upper end of the length estimates were possibly as long as Sue or Scotty. But again, size must factor in mass, and Rex was much stronger built than most of these, sometimes comically so. The way I always describe it is this: There’s a possibility Torvosaurus was as long as Tyrannosaurus Rex…much in the same way Kevin Durant and Shaquille O’Neal are about the same height. You couldn’t ever say Durant is “bigger” than Shaq, but they are the same “size” if you don’t account for mass.
@@Tyrannosaurine I can not think of the mans name or the show but he was saying he had a toe bone of a T-Rex that would maybe hit 45 feet. That would make him far larger than Sue or Scotty and will over ten tons. I think they need to build an animal around that toe bone and put it up for everyone to see. A close Godzilla. They could name it V-Rex. LOL.
2:29 Since it wasn’t technically covered in the video, I just would like to point out some things that weren’t said. First of all, the Spinosaurus actually grew to be (as far as we know) up to 17 feet longer than Tyrannosaurus (59 feet long) though it didn’t have it beat in weight, at 6.4 to 7.3 metric tons, while the Tyrannosaurus was 7.3 to 10.5 metric tons. Other carnivores, such as Giganotasaurus, Allosaurus, and Carcharodontosaurus (as mentioned in the video) could grow to Tyrannosaurus’s size, if not larger. Even more carnivores grew to about 10 feet shorter, though some individuals of the species could be comparable (within 5 feet) to an adult Tyrannosaurus’s size; Suchomimus, Albertosaurus, and Tarbosaurus, the latter of the two being Tyrannosaurids. This isn’t meant to be offensive or standoff-ish, it’s just something I wanted to point out. Please do correct any incorrect facts in this comment.
Actually newer estimates for lager carnivores put tyrannosaurus far ahead of everyone else in terms of weight the largest speciement scotty being 10.5 metric tons with other large therapods mainly mapusaurus giganotosaurus tyrannotitan and spinosaurus being quite far off Giganotosaurus:7.9 metric tons Mapusaurus: 8.2 metric tons Tyrannotitan:8 metric tons Spinosaurus 7.3 metric tons
@@Novitiate001 ye thats fair things change all the time with these kind of things and in a few months even what i just said would likely be outdated tbh
13:23 Effective population size (what affects 'genetic diversity') is purely a function of number of reproducing adults- it doesn't matter how many juveniles are scurrying around.
It's kind of like how bears were super big back in the day, an availability of food plus basically being a hunter and a scavenger whenever one is most available at the moment
I don't think I have commented this before but thank you so much for English subtitles, it really helps me to don't get lost, it's a lot of info yet so interesting, amazing channel keep it up
not related to this video ,but would you do a video on pliosaurus species because nobody on youtube seems to care about them! just a little request !thanks !
Love the video, though I do question the implication that Tyrannosaurus couldn't have hunted adult sauropods in the same manner proposed for abelisaurids. Otherwise fantastic video.
Seriously. I usually just half listen as a layman, but what you described was fascinating. I’m 67. As a young boy I was enchanted by images in books in the family library, which was extensive. My father was a bibliophile and traveled a lot. We had thousands of books. Everything from underground comics (1st edition Crumb) to mathematics texts of all kinds and in the hundreds. I had a career in teaching and got first pick of the math books in my dad’s work library were donated to the university. Having access to that library helped me become known as a great math teacher with my 3rd grade gifted classes. I enjoyed a freedom that today’s teachers will never have. Teaching is not a profession if the practitioners have no influence core decisions. Keep up your great work!
I cannot watch any t-rex related videos for the fear of seeing THAT image. You know the one where a T-rex is crouching next to a stream and looking directly at the viewer
I think Tyrannosaurus Rex was a predator that would and could kill anything it wanted. I think a pack of Tyrannosaurus would kill an adult Alamosaurus while an individual would only go after juveniles and the other aforementioned herbivores. If we look at history, we see giant sauropods having giant predators to hunt them. Allosaurus and diplodocus, mamenchisaurus and sinraptor, Giganotosaurus and Argentinosaurus, carcharodontosaurus and paralatitan, Torvosaurus and Lusotitan. Alamosaurus and Tyrannosaurus Rex.
The difference is that while the carcharodontosaurids had evolved alongside the mega-sauropods and had adaptations like their flesh cutting teeth that evolved to take the titans down. On the other hand, Alamosaurus was a recent arrival North America and Tyrannosaurus's bone crushing method of hunting was poorly suited for hunting some a large animal, even with a pack. In contrast, the tyrannosaurid Tarbosaurus, who had coexited with smaller sauropods in Asia, did adaptions for hunting them.
@@chimerasuchus that is fair I suppose, but I wouldn't put it past a Rex to take out a sub-adult or to bring down a sick or old one. I still believe that T-Rex was so powerful that it in fact could take out an adult. My reason being that T-Rex had a 6 ton bite force, that would crush any animal's bones and with Rex being far more intelligent, itcould figure out how to possibly use its tail to break the front leg in a sneak attack.
Because apart from the fact that a TRex could tilt its head up (increasing its height), there is nothing to suggest that bigger TRex specimens didn't exist that were within that range.
@@alphawolf8031 Sue is likely near the very upper limit of how large a T. rex could get. Unless one had gigantism, but for a bipedal animal already in excess of seven tons, they would have been quite limited biomechanically from reaching too big of sizes. Two legs offers less stability compared to four.
@@minutemansam1214 Scotty and Sue are both fully grown TRex's yet Scotty is still noticeably bigger than Sue. In excess of 7 tons? Sue and Scotty pushed nearly 10 tons and the average adult TRex weighed 8 tons. Sue and Scotty are highly unlikely to be the biggest TRex's to have ever existed.
im bout halfway through. you make really valid points but im no accredit scientist or anything, but here me out... The alamosaur sauropod being the last known sauropod to co-exist in t-rex territory, could point to an animal so powerful it could just erradicate sauropods over time because theres a difference when attacking juvenile or even sub-adult sauropods when you just grab the smaller ones and chok them out like a lion , or you just rip their neck and head right off the body which t-rex would likely be able to do . i think t-rex was potentially so underestimated and moved a lot like a bird, the muscle mas made it heavy but quick in movement like a ninja. Something had to be reallllllly bad out there to make a monster like a triceratops be required to thrive.
I love soaking stuff like this in...but I always have to remind myself this is 90% educated guesses and logical imagination. I just wish people didn't arrogantly present it as factual.
Thinking that the medium sized predator niche was filled by juveniles T-Rex is kinda scary on how much dominant that animal was on the environment.
This niche specialization by age wasnt unique to t-rex, many other large archosaurs like other large theropods, sauropods and the aznarchids also practiced this and it very well could be a major fact in why they went extinct when shit hit the fan. This is a horrible way to survive because the moment the juveniles see an massive uptick in mortality rates and cant replace the adults at a constant rate spells disaster for the species.
@@chrisdonish i always wonder if that was the casse with the mid cretacious speices the lieks of gigas and mapu just suddenyl dissapered
Thats not something unique for Tyrannosaurus, almost all juveniles of large theropod filled niche of medium size predators
All of its relatives, most likely do it
“Least favorite meteor” is an understatement about how much everyone doesn’t like it, BECAUSE I CANT RIDE A FLIPPIN PARASAUROLOPHUS.
Joking… but seriously, we need to bring dinosaurs back to life in a contained environment… a sort of biological preserve on an island, likely off the coast of Costa Rica, about 100 or so miles off the shore.
But enough of that, I love knowing about dinosaurs, and this is quality as usual.
What can go wrong?
@@animalguyanimalguy270 nothing could, I assure you we have state of the art security.
*trex breaks fence for the 500th time*
DAMN
recognizable dna only exists for 6.8 million years
@@2011XREAL I don’t know the facts behind that but you wouldn’t be able to use dinosaurs to make dinosaurs, but you can use chickens and alligators with gene splicing and genetic modification to make patentable “dinosaurs”. Take other archosaurs to make dinosaurs.
@@silvertheelf oh i see
"Nature abhors a vacant niche."
You totally get a 'like' from me on that one, man. That is just beautiful. Great writing
Thank you. It took a lot of rewrites to get the script there. Even so, it probably would have been better if it included information on how carcharodontosaurid growth rates and lifespans contrasted with those of tyrannosaurids. Instead of growing fast and dying young, they grew much slower and lived longer, with one carcharodontosaurid specimen being 50 years old.
Yeah, as soon as i heard that i thought something similar. It's a great one sentence way of explaining the reason of why so many creatures developed the way they did at different times throughout this planets life sustaining periods.
😄👍
So that's why Gaia hates Publius Quinctillius Boris.
yeah and then created Tyrannosaurus as it's jack of all traits to cover any.
Well it's just a rephrasing of the famous quote from Aristotle: "Nature abhors a vacuum." Not saying it isn't a fine way of rephrasing the quote, but it almost seems like people aren't aware of the original quote based on some of the comments.
There is an interesting story of a Trex that had most of its tail bitten off by a larger Trex. It survived and healed and carried on. What is strange about it was the shear damage done, near the base of the tail. The animal would have had great difficulty balancing and running even after it healed. The blood loss and possible infection is what baffled researchers, how could a creature survive such a devastating injury? It seems Trex was like modern crocodile with one of the strongest immune systems in nature, able to eat rotting meat, drink putrid water, and fight off infection. It was also clear that it healed at an extremely fast rate and had a cardiovascular system that minimized blood loss when injured. These traits would have made Trex particularly well suited to a violent predatory lifestyle filled with injury. That's how it survived the injury, but how could it hunt and sustain itself while healing? There isn't any concrete evidence to suggest Trex was a social animal, but it does seem possible that it lived in relative harmony with other Trex, or perhaps it simply scavenged from kill sites, staying away from other Trex just on the fringe sneaking in for a quick bite when safe.
This image of Trex is quite amazing, a giant predator, living and competing with others of its own kind, battling, fighting, hunting, being injured and scarred, some probably would have missing arms, eyes, tails, toes, and just kept going. What an amazing animal.
It had great healing ability
given how absurdly dominant crocs are, anything remotely similar in their success as predators must have similar characteristics. There are very few species with such a long standing streak of eras in a row, specially when many of those eras had such cataclysmic extintion events as a meteorite and the rise and fall of ice age. The only thing that comes to mind are sharks, wich share all those traits you mentioned.
It is quite well documented that crocs could survive with their jaws severely deformed, or even snapped clean off. Usually from losing a death roll battle with a bigger rival during mating season. How they got by is beyond me. Having ruled for 25 million years, it's not implausible that T-rex had similar or even greater ability to survive catastrophic injuries.
That trex ur talkin about is housed in my home town Houston the bob tailed trex😄
@@_el_del_bajo5_ that sounds way cuter than it should be. 😂
I wonder if T Rex was a night fighter? It had the largest eyes, a bloodhound sense of smell perfect to stalk. Serrated bone crunching teeth that might cause infections like the Komato Dragon. Blood and infection the bloodhound sense of smell could track. Arms, though small, were strong enough to push off prey to bite after a clumsy rush. Even a sauropod wouldn't sleep soundly.
It is a possibility but I don’t think Trex needed to hunt in the night as it could outrun its preys, wouldn’t need to rely on a septic bite (the Komodo dragon actually possess venom) as its insanely powerful bite would have been enough of a weapon to seriously wound or even kill a prey in one hit. I like what you said about sauropods, the presence of sauropods outside of maybe Alamosaurus is not really known in Trex’s environment but it’s fascinating to imagine it trying to take down a sauropod.
@@Charlie-Charlot
While it probably wasn’t a specialized night hunter.
It probably hunted at night from time to time, like many modern predators
It's unlikely, as most birds today are diurnal. But again we don't know anything about prehistoric creatures.
@TheGreenEyedMonsterTruck you’re right, Tyrannosaurus rex seem to have been particularly intelligent for a large theropod, I in no way implied that it was dumb by any means. I don’t know about killing an adult alamosaurus but a young could definitely had been a part of T-Rex’s diet. That being said T-Rex preying on alamosaurus is at this point only speculative since this sauropod seems to be quite rare in T-Rex’s environment (this might be due to the fact that sauropods are usually quite fragmentary). Tyrannosaurus isn’t commonly portrayed as a sauropod hunter which makes this idea really interesting and exciting in my opinion.
@@Charlie-Charlot they were definitely not faster than their prey. They were extremely slow and not exactly sneaky with all that weight. Evidence suggests they weren't much of hunters at all, but scavengers who stole meals from the better hunters. They may not have been built well for hunting, but they were definitely built for killing anything that didn't run away when they approached, which obviously most would when they see or hear it coming.
I honestly love how so much research has gone into this beast that it’s like it went extinct a 1000 years ago.
It’s like we know more about an animal that went extinct 66 million years ago compared to the dodo bird that went extinct 400 years ago.
On the bright side, we do know the dodo must have tasted good, since it was man who hunted them into extinction.
We can only guess how T-Rex tasted (possibly like wild turkey?) 😉
Luckily we have Dodo Colors Confirmed now B)))))
good thing the T-Rex went extinct about 4000 years ago
@@thehoboeskimo9888 yeah man 😳but what if it went extinct 3000 years ago???
@@thehoboeskimo9888 No it went extinct 65 000000 million years ago. 🙄
The idea Tyrannosaurus insta-killed prey with a neck bite while other large theropods were slow, inefficient predators ignores that predators that rely on bleeding out their prey actually kill much faster than usually assumed, and that predators with powerful jaws generally (with the exception of jaguars) do not try to one-shot their prey, but use their bite force to maintain a jaw grip instead (which also fits far better with Tyrannosaurus’s robust build).
5 tons bone crushing bite
Good analysis. I think, though the Tyrannosaurus was more prone to attacking hadrosaurs than to facing a phalanx of ceratopsian horns.
or just ambush from behind breaking a triceratops back leg with it's bone crushing bite as a result the triceratops cannot run and is slowed down by the injury
and hell creek was full of dense flora so even a fully grown tyrannosaurus would be able to ambush it's prey
Ceratopsians probably didn't form herds , at least i heaed scant evidence about that ,
And adult edmontosaurus where almost as big as t-rex so ye ,
The ceratopsian goes
They were more prone to scavenging and stealing bodies off of better hunters. They were too big and slow to catch most prey, but since they were big and powerful, most other predators would abandon their prey if a Rex came up.
@@firegator6853 from what I've read, they avoided trikes and ankylosaurus and stuff like that unless they were starving. Not worth the risk. Tbh a triceratops is more likely to kill the Rex than the other way around. An ankylosaurus would break their jaws and ribs and leave them for dead. Although movies like to portray Rex's as some fierce predator, they really were more scavengers then anything. Too slow to catch anything and too big and noisy to sneak up on them.
@@colecampbell1906 noisy is dumb because all they would need is just not make any sound
Also if trex is slow due to its size what do you think makes stuff like triceratops faster?
This is one very good video analysis, but there's one thing you didn't bring up that I think is important.
Most of what you said about T.rex might also apply to predators of similar size and build, like the carcharodontosaurids. While their morphologies were obviously different, it's not too outlandish to believe that they too would've had their bodily anatomy change substantially throughout their lives. In other words, they might've also fulfilled multiple predatory niches in the course of their lives. Juvenile carcharodontosaurids are scarce, if not absent from the fossil record, but it wouldn't be too hard to believe. Though, I do agree that carcharodontosaurids were likely far more generalist than tyrannosaurids and that they were also more suited for hunting giant adult sauropods.
It's also worth mentioning that it would be beneficial for tyrannosaurids mated for life and with both parents looking after their kids until a certain age. After all, I don't imagine theropods to lay that many eggs.
I hope this was an interesting perspective.
១
Why would something that can kill a herbivore that could feed 10 sub adults need to evolve to hunt diverse prey? I mean I get what you're saying, but it's also possible that carcharodontosaurids were not solitary kill hoarders.
That asteroid is the mammal's favorite. It allowed for the Synapsids to strike back. Now reptiles live in our shadows*. *Most of the time.
2:18 "Everyone's least favorite meteor."
I love this. So much information I hadn't known before! As the age of adults is no more than 30ish, new to me. The high turnover rate is also very interesting. The idea that T. Rex lived as the medium predator before reaching adulthood is also fascinating! I can't help but imagine a Dakotaraptor squaring off against a juvenile Rex for prey.
11:11 Actually I think it's suspected that the Hadrosaurs had the speed to easily outrun their Tyrannosaur predators. To make up for this, Tyrannosaurs were more of stamina based hunters. Don't quote me on this, as it could be outdated, but seeing as it's only suspected Tyrannosaurus itself didn't exceed 18 mph in running speed, it seems fairly plausible.
Evidence suggests they weren't much of hunters at all. More scavengers than anything. They couldn't catch much, but when other better hunters have a body, they aren't going to stand still when the Rex comes. Very powerful and can kill almost anything, but not catching much itself if they choose to run, so they just likely chose to run. Though that's not to say they never killed anything, just took more rare circumstances. Most would know better than to fight them outside of big trikes and ankys. Tbh the ankylosaurus was probably the most feared dinosaur out there. Super aggressive to anything that moves, nearly impossible to injure, and guaranteed to shatter any bones that make contact with that tail.
@@colecampbell1906 But what would be out there killing things large enough to sustain a full grown Tyrannosaurus?
@@Blackratsnake pack hunters could easily. Also there were other large carnivores that worked in small groups that were great hunters but still too small to risk fighting a Rex. It's easier to just find some more prey than risk a bite from them.
@@colecampbell1906 Again, what predators? The next largest predator that lived with T. rex was Dakotaraptor, and it's now pretty commonly accepted that Dromaeosaurs did not hunt in packs.
@@colecampbell1906 like what?
T.rex is the largest (weight nearly10 tons) and strongest terrestrial predator to ever walk on earth, spinosaurus is just longer and slender animal with very short legs, carcharadontosaurid are smaller and less robust less muscular than t.rex
Well, tyrannosaurs was the heaviest and could crush metal, carcharodontosaurus was faster and could do what The Isle players do and ass ride it and just keep biting it till it bleeds to death, considering if they could get in a fight even though they couldn’t.
…lol
@@silvertheelf "carcharadontosaurus was faster"....probably not, it was about as fast as the t.rex despite its size.
@@rodrigogongorapinto588 I would imagine it would be a little faster because it was lighter thus being able to move with less weighing down.
@@silvertheelf Perhaps not. Most other tyrannosaurids, along with juvenile Tyrannosaurus, were very much built for speed and would have been faster than most similarly sized theropods. While their size would have made them slower, adult Tyrannosaurus still retained some of these traits into adulthood, so it is possible that an adult T-rex could still outrun a smaller carcharadontosaurid.
@@chimerasuchus hmm… interesting.
Personally Its my favourite meteorite as I wouldn't exist without it and I'm fairly partial to myself.
I think the reason Trex got so big was because it could crush and eat bones and more importantly the marrow within. It's similar to how it has been purposed human got such big brains, by breaking bones apart to eat the marrow and brains.
Can you please elaborate further on your explanation of Tyrannosaurid growth size and human brain size in relation to the consumption of bone marrow?
I don’t really know the effects of eating bone marrow but it sounds very interesting
@@aaroncalapre5980 Google is your friend.
I know this is a year old comment but f it. I think this really isn't an explanation. Tyranosaurus could crush bones due to its exceptional size and therefore your explanation is backwards and can't work as a reason for the size, but more as a possible contributing factor once the species got large enough to effectively crush bones.
@@troo_6656 touch grass
Came here from Reddit, not disappointed, thank you !
ive often wondered why there are no predators alive today able to prey on elephants. even prides of lions are completely incapable of preying on full grown elephants. i suppose humans evolved to fill that niche, but even before humans evolved, there didnt seem to be much more powerful mammalian predators than lions. i would even argue the african lion is the most formidable land mammalian predator ever apart from humans, due to not only being large but hunting in groups.
Check stuff like megistotherium , entelodon and arctodus ,
Or other smaller critters such as dinocrocuta , borophagine and homotherium
Those guys where imo way more powerful than lions ...
Most of these guys when extinct because of us and because of the yunger drias
@@davidegaruti2582 those were alot bigger than current lions and bears. but still in the same ball park and not an allosaurus let alone a t rex. maybe humans evolved to fill the boots of those super predators. and proved too effective... in wiping out earths entire current crop of megafauna. oops my bad. that was the ice ages and climate change lol
Elephants fill today's niche of the sauropods: enormous herbivores too big to reliably prey on.
I would assume elephants are so big because of evolutionary anachronism.Like they evolved to their size because of large predators, but haven’t needed to get smaller or couldn’t get smaller, either from low genetic diversity or something else.
@@boatman783 there have been discoveries of tiny adult elephant [bones] on islands. presumably because a combo of lack of food and lack of predators. so eles can definitely be small. the odd thing about elephants is they are much bigger than they need to be to avoid predation from lions or hyenas. and if size is so advantageous to avoid preds, why don't things like water buffalo grow bigger. elephants are a bit strange
One of the most informative natural history videos I've watched in a while. Keep up the good work!
Add to this the fact that supporting a large population of mature giant carnivores would probably crash a local ecosystem, and cascade the move of too many predators elsewhere. Makes sense.
Never really occurred to me that T. Rex’s size was so odd till this video. Knowing so many other similarly sized carcars and tyrannosaurs existed I guess I just forgot they didn’t have a sauropod food source
Alamosaurus has left the Chat
Fortunately, Tyrannosaurus Rex only dominates its own continent. Of course, Laramidia was occasionally connected with East Asia, which is why Tyrannosaurs were present in Asia in addition to North America, but Tyrannosaurus Rex was completely absent from South America, Europe, Africa, and Antarctica.
Wasn’t that mainly due to the geography of the world at the time? Being that the southern continents were separated, otherwise tyrannosaurs would have dominated there too
Can't really say anything about Antarctica, we have no idea what's under there yet. They've only explored a fraction of a percentage of it. They're just now discovering frozen lakes and forests under the ice.
There's a level of sophistication to this analysis I really enjoyed.
Found on reddit but subbed because of the excellent content. Great job I can tell I'm going to love this channel :)
I noticed that that you mentioned the Western Interior Seaway was 'retreating' southwards during the time of the T-Rex--which is an interesting factiod. Did that mean that the Rex possibly moved from Laramidia into Appalachia before "The Great Meteor of Death" arrived?
No Tyrannosaur fossils have been found in Appalachia so far. However, since less Late Cretaceous fossils are known from that part of North America it is possible.
@@chimerasuchus Thanks; given 'Appalachia' made up a large part of the Northeast of the US, I figure it's just too hard to dig for fossils in, say Pittsburgh or Newark.
Of course, if I got my geography TOTALLY wrong, I'm sorry.
@@chimerasuchus I also have to add, having the Rex move east, it would be a HELL of an invasive species for the local tyrannosaurids to deal with. I can only imagine the surprise of a dryptosaur or an appalachiasaurus to having THIS intruder in their hunting ground
I never saw the Largest Sauropods as a prey species. And as you mention the numbers of large ones were probably few and safe from predation while the smaller ones were virtually defenceless except while in the herd. So the Jurassic eras probably didn't require the massive T-rex.
tyrannosaurus rex xenomorph
15 min video of rexes? subscribed!
Man, your channel was small before, and now it has grown bigger over time, with one video - this one in particular - getting 1 million views. Your presentation is professional and information is valuable. I would like to congratulate you with this comment. 🎉👏🦖🦕
For the mention of spinosaurus I would say it only got big to try to intimidate carchars away because it’s prey is small enough for even irritator to take and it’s too weak to take on large herbivores like it’s rival carcharodontosaurus, it’s sail was probably so large as a defence against carchar to intimidate it because well except oxalaia there are no other spinosaurs with such a large sail, but oxalaia is still a mystery right now
That would be quite the costly form of defence. One that I am not sure would hold up under closer examination, but hell we know almost nothing about spinosaurus so who knows.
I like to think that T-Rex would hunt Alamosaurus, but only on rare occasions, and most certainly the half grown would be the preferred targets.
Sauropods were slow and not agile so they aren't as dangerous as one would think.
Correct. Rexy probably only hunt the small, sick Alamosaura or because of desperation. It does not have the right build to hunt sauropods (that would be its South American distant cousins)
@@alphawolf8031 True, but they would be hard to kill due to their size. And one well placed hit would kill any large predator.
@@alphawolf8031 Tyrannosaurus was slow and not agile too. Plus, Alamosaurus was much bigger. If T. rex got stomped on by one, it would possibly be fatally wounded.
@@alphawolf8031are you jw fan cause you sound lile
The artist (s) and their art that illuminated your narrative proved spectacular. Not only the colors but the detailed use of shading and shadows made this entire production a work of art. And have you thought of bring in music? Congratulations!
Could someone, like anyone explain to me why are there so many crationists and self proclaimed 'experts' in the comment section?
That pic of trex sitting down in the woods is amazing
Wow, you channel have gotten even more popular!
T-rex didn't need to slice flesh with razor sharp teeth. It had the bulk and the strength to just rip the flesh off in huge chunks. There are even studies proving that trex could rip the heads clean off of triceratops just by grabbing on and pulling.
Yup, there's physical/fossil evidence of that so it pretty much sums up the lies of TRex not hunting Triceratops.
Yes after the triceratops was dead.
@@sirblack1619 Ok?
@@alphawolf8031meanwhile trike impales rex
Tyrannosaurus was the ultimate predator, he wss deadly from the cradle. If in every step of it's growth occupied a different niche means that in any given period he was competing with every other predators of each size with the exception of adulthood when just competed with other adults. The ultimate predator since it's style and dynamics changed at every period.
It’s obviously not the only dinosaur who’s growth occupied a different niche
He was bearly a predator. His upper leg length relative to its lower leg length prevented him from making sharp turns, it would've broken its knees. His size also prevented him from running. He went after pray that were not capable of running or straight up bullied smaller predators in giving up their prey.
@@TheSuperhoden That's totally false. Shorter fibula/tibia helps for lower turn radius and higher balance.
Surely a carnivore with the strongest biteforce (not including other evolutionary traits) of any land animal in earth's history wouldn't just be a mere scavenger, right?
TRex just needed to outpace it's prey, which it did.
@@hishamsadiq4104 but how many had to compete against other specialised carnivores and end up being the apex predator? it would be interesting to know to which degree young Tyrannosaurus competed with raptorial dinos or for their localisation just was against other tyrannosaurids.
@@TheSuperhoden are you really a person? don't try to offend is just that recently I see a lot of profiles that have a hot chick so my guess is that you are a bot and somehow able to give quite elaborated responses.
Thank you for this informative video!
Your welcome, but I should point out that some of the hypothesizes in this video are out of date. They will be addressed in a later video about the newly described Tyrannosaurus mcraensis.
Tyrannosaurs ( in my opinion ) acted more like kamado Dragons biting their prey and letting bacterial infection take down their prey, and adults stealing smaller t. rex's food. It makes sense with the new look of the predator ( the adult body is now so close to the ground that if they were run it could easily crash into the ground as it tried running after prey. ) I personally think that they also stalked the rivers and lakes like storks hunting for large fish and amphibians since their teeth are similar to crocodilians, for the small and mid-size of the species at least. A big change from the argument started over 40 yrs ago about their high speed running after prey. Great presentation thank you for making it.
Komodo dragons don't actually hunt that way. Most of the time their prey die way to quickly for them to even start to feel the effects of infection. Not that many would, since more recent studies have found most Komodo dragons don't posses the mouths full of bacteria that they were once thought to have.
What happens is that when Komodo dragons attack water buffalo, the buffalo's instinct is to go to the water. However, the water buffalo are not native to the same islands as the Komodo dragon, and the water there is mostly stagnant and ends up filled with water buffalo feces. This infected water then ends up entering the wounds made by the dragons, often with lethal results.
Even ignoring all of that, Tyrannosaurus's anatomy simply doesn't support such a strategy. It had an incredibly powerful bite that would simply be wasted with such tactics.
See how established facts can change from one day to the next … lol. I see that in 2009 using medical scanners they found venom sacs that cause the prey to bleed to death from the wounds.
well not just that, but during the Rex's time, were there large sea turtles (like archelon sized?) in the great western seaway? was there even a great western sea way at the Rex's time?
IF there were, I would like to think sea turtle breeding season would be a time of great feasting for all generation of tyrannosaurids.
@@chimerasuchus the bite force could help the scavenger theory though. Would allow them to eat more variety with less restrictions and help in bullying other hunters off their meal.
@@colecampbell1906 Biteforce doesn't help with scavenging, stop with your biased bs lmao.
wales process huge amounts of small-sized biomass and some de facto fast for long periods. Snakes "sleep" for weeks and even months after a meal... So one needs to consider the entire ecologically (popgen-relevant) metabolic cycles and energy fluxes (and the processing "functional" response for the issue of the sizeXcatchability offered by a prey).
I honestly think that possibly up to 30% of a T Rex diet was scavenging prey killed by other dinosaurs. With steroscopic smell and the largest olfactory organ to brain size ratio, it would have taken the easy route when it could.
All predators scavenge when they can, including TRex.
So acting like any predator yes?
Imagine what the Tyrannosaur would've evolved into if the asteroid didn't hit.
8.4 metric tons is the lower estimate for the largest specimens found. The average Rex would be between 5 and 8 tons.
Thanks for the video.
Have a great day.
You too.
Good stuff as always!
This is an interesting evolutionary history about the King of Hell Creek and its amazing to see the secrets of the success of the Tyrannosaurus, and is surprising to see how little the adults live
11:55 if juvenile fossils are rarer than adults, then assuming adults fossilize at same rate as medium sized juveniles, it would follow that juveniles are less common. There is a precedent for an ecosystem with a top-heavy predator guild- intact coral reefs tend to have a large population of large sharks and a relatively smaller population of smaller sized fish that is quickly eaten and replenished by the sharks. If there are few adults and medium-sized juveniles, then the selective sieve operates at smaller size- perhaps makes sense if cannibalism by 'teenagers' on younger trexes was common
More than likely it's that juvenile T. rexes had a low mortality rate. T. rexes likely had high mortality rates when they were very young, then mortality declined as they entered their rapid growth phase (they would have been too agile for an adult T. rex to catch), then mortality once again increased when they reached adulthood and they had to face the pressures of hunting larger, slower prey (juvenile T. rexes likely hunted small, fast moving prey) as well as mating. This is pretty common in archosaurs.
@@minutemansam1214 the problem is juvenile fossils are rarer than adults while juveniles (not babies) are still quite large so should fossilize at similar rates to adults. So it argues that there is a smaller population of juveniles. It definitely does not mean that fewer juveniles died tho lol.
@@minutemansam1214 Also what does "pretty common for archosaurs" mean. Your reference points are birds and crocodiles. Both of which have very different reproductive strategies and birds don't really have the pattern you describe.
Great videos. More variety of dinosaurs than I imagined. How about a segment on the livability of humans in various climates of earth history? Fascinating pondering this. I know there were periods throughout hundreds of millions in years where we could not thrive in the extremes.
Very well described. I had heard that the Juveniles where the medium sized predictors before but you went on to explain how that dynamic worked and why it worked so well and why we find so many Tyrannosaurus Fossils. Something I was always somewhat unclear on before.
Do you ever proofread your posts? They "where predictors"...?
Watched on Reddit. Awesome video :)
It’s honestly crazy how OP T.Rex was in real life and what a strangle-hold it had on nearly every trophic level. Small/medium animals had to deal with a roided-up Alioramus/Qianzhouasaurs and Edmonto’s and Trike’s dealt with massive adults.
Even the other carnivorous therapods that equated to Tyrannosaurs didn't have near the mass. Every argument of T-Rex vs the rest of massive carnovores is weird. (and the only way we would know it is to be able to go back in time, transport them and fight them.) If you compare tyrannosaur skulls to all the rest it hits different. Rex had an AMAZING skull. I still like the idea that it might have used it's arms for egg carrying and infant care. I've never heard anyone else hypothesize this. I just like it as a casual. (No nest would be safer than being held beneath a t-rex's jaws)
Edit: Also t-rex's brain was huge compared to it's counterparts.
I've heard it suggested that the arms of a T. Rex would have completely been buried in muscle by the time they were adults. Probably the purpose of them was wholely limited to their youth.
As for the Rex adults themselves, I suspect their skulls were so resilient just to maximize how much nutrition they got out of their prey. That way they could then attempt to maximize their reproduction.
Yes, other large carnivorous dinosaur could rival the T. rex in mass. Even if the T. rex was the most massive, animals like Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus wouldn't have been THAT much lighter.
4:26 Where the heck did you find that art!? If that is a question if you can answer.
It was by Christopher Srnka. The artist credit in bottom right corner, though looking at it now it is probably easy to miss. I will try to make sure such credit is more noticeable in future videos.
@@chimerasuchus Ok thanks by the way good video.
@@chimerasuchus Oh wait im dumb it is just i watched this vid from my ps4 and the tv in the living room where my ps4 is has a bunch of black on one side so i did not see and when i commeted on my laptop i was not paying attention sorry!
Excellent, you went into depth on some issues that have concerned me. This got a like but also I plan to watch it again. You do not understand an animal (any animal) unless you understand its environment.
These pictures are mind blowing 🤔🤔🤔 nice job.
Alamosaurus, a legitimately huge titanosaur, existed alongside, and was hunted by, t-rex.
It's more likely that T. rex scavenged them, though. Not hunting them as it was very risky.
Oh man, your channel is so good, I myself just start my own channel about dinos too, we love dinos 🎉
I don't know if this was a school project or you did this on your own. Either way, great job!!
It was made for TH-cam.
This channel is amazing.
This video is amazing, great work.
I’ve leaned a lot from this vid thank you.
Grade A material. This was so interesting.
when playing the board game of evolution u know u did something right when ur predator takes up both the medium and apex predator spots
Thank you for this informative video! I appreciate it, and enjoyed listening.
Shantungosarus is a Herbivore and it's nearly bigger than Tyrannosaurus Rex same with Giganotosaurus is even bigger than Tyrannosaurus Rex
Giganotosaurus is a lot smaller than tyrannosaurus with 1.5 metric tonnes.
Tyrannosaurus was in an evolutionary arms race with its prey essentially right?
I don't really think tyrannosaurus was much larger compared to other theropods. I think it was the same size as carcarodontosaurus, giganotosaurus, spinosaurus, and mapusaurus
Those are exceptionally sized theropods as well. Most environments during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods lacked such massive predators. As noted in the video, most of the other mega-theropods are closely related carcharodontosaurids. The explanation for their massive size: coexistence with massive sauropods they were specialized to hunt, didn't apply to Tyrannosaurus While Tyrannosaurus did coexist with Alamosaurus in part of its range, it was poorly suited to hunt large individuals compared to the carcharodontosaurids.
@@chimerasuchus true, althouth Zhuchengtyrannus and Tarbosaurus were large animals as well, not as large as tyrannosaurus however, and tarbosaurus may have been a sauropod butcher like the others. Anyway nice vid.
@@ferociousrazordino3581 True that Rex wasn't really longer, but his thicc boi status meant a mass difference.
T-rex hunting strategy was persistence hunting. Meaning it didn't not need to target only sick or weak individuals. It could target the largest and strongest animals, and chase them until they were too exhausted to fight back. Guaranteeing a large meal with relatively little risk.
Depends on the prey, Trike and Anky would most likely fight and not run.
@@alphawolf8031 you can't say that. You have no way of knowing what a trike or anky would or wouldn't do.
Just because an animal has built in weapons doesn't mean they will use them the way you assume they would, or behave like you assume they would.
Then there are also the differences between individual animals within a species. Some individuals might be more likely to fight while others might be more likely to run.
Take a look at wolves. A wolf pack can bring down a large and dangerous animal like a moose, but only if the moose runs. The wolves specialize in intimidation tactics to make their prey run. And while some moose do stand their ground, many more choose to run. And the ones that run, end up as dinner.
I would imagine a t-rex is one hell of an intimidating animal.
@@KurNorock Well that's usually how it works, animals defend themselves with the weapons they have.
Cape buffaloes for example usually defend themselves against a lioness pride hunting them but they outmanuveur them with agility and speed.
Triceratops and Ankylosaurus didn't have their weapons for looks and that's for sure.
Wolves can hunt bisons regardless if the intimidation works or not, they are intelligent enough to use their numbers with superior tactics where one wolf can distract the bison while the other tears it from behind, and the fact that wolves are much smaller and shorter than a bison makes it harder for them to get gored.
For the TRex, it wasn't the case as TRex was larger, heavier and taller than almost all its prey.
Not to mention that if what you said is true, then the TRex wouldn't need to evolve to have such a strong biteforce if it just chased and waited for its prey to get exhausted leaving it defenceless.
You can argue that some predators today like hyenas who have very strong biteforce usually wait for their prey to tire out but hyenas hunt in large clans and they are far smaller than most prey they hunt, there is no complete proof however for TRex being a pack hunter.
I'm not saying that this is always the case with Trike and Anky fighting back, but they have their weapons for a reason so sometimes they did fight back.
TRex was indeed intimidating, but so were Trike and Anky.
How do you know this? are you a Tyrannosaurus rex?
@@alphawolf8031 Again, you can't say that for sure.
Many animals have deadly weapons and very often do not use them the way you would think.
Deer for example have massive antlers with many sharp points, but when attacked by a predator they most often just run away. And in the rare instances where they do stand their ground and fight back, they almost never use their antlers and instead rear up and kick with their front legs.
The fact is that most animals with horns or antlers will chose running away more often than not. The horns and antlers are almost always reserved for inter-species combat, usually over mating rights or territorial disputes.
Even in your example with the cape buffalo, they do run more often than they stand their ground. They almost only ever stand and fight back when protecting their young.
And again, they are all just animals. It doesn't matter how big and powerful the moose/elk/buffalo/ is, if the predator can intimidate it, it will run.
I am not saying that no triceratops ever fought back against a t-rex. I am just saying that as of now, we have no idea how often that happened. But what we do know is that t-rex absolutely did feed on adult triceratops. We also know that t-rex was capable of long distance travel at a steady, if somewhat slow, speed. That is an adaptation that is really only good for one thing, persistence hunting.
this was yet another very interesting video
thank you very much 👍👍👍
Great video, but there were many and I mean many carnivores that were as large as rex, sadly they don't get the attention they deserve.
Can you name a few other than the giga, spino, acro, or mapu? I don't think there's really that many on that scale.
Though spino and giga were slightly bigger tbh. Rex was just essentially the most powerful due to its robust build and biteforce.
@@colecampbell1906 TRex was the biggest (by mass), you mean Spino and Giga were just longer.
@@colecampbell1906 Rex is scientifically agreed to be the most massive (weight) THAT WE KNOW OF AT THE MOMENT, but as far as length, assuming 40 foot is the estimated length of a large Rex, the following theropods may have reached that length:
(Forgive my spelling I’m going by memory)
Of course
Mapusaurus
Spinosaurus
Giganotosaurus
Acrocanthosaurus
Allosaurus
Saurophaganax (most likely a particularly large Allosaurus)
Tyrannotitan
Carcharadontasaurus
Sigalamassasaurus (sp? Probably a Carcharodontosaurus
Torvosaurus
Tarbosaurus
Zhuchengtyrannus
Siats
Deltadromeus or Bahariasaurus
Oxalia (probably a junior synonym of Spinosaurus).
Cristatusaurus (probably a particularly large Baryonyx)
And there’s that new huge megalosaurus that they named megalosaurus ingens after Jurassic Park, but there’s no data or papers out on it yet.
So, yeah, there were plenty that if we use the upper end of the length estimates were possibly as long as Sue or Scotty.
But again, size must factor in mass, and Rex was much stronger built than most of these, sometimes comically so.
The way I always describe it is this:
There’s a possibility Torvosaurus was as long as Tyrannosaurus Rex…much in the same way Kevin Durant and Shaquille O’Neal are about the same height.
You couldn’t ever say Durant is “bigger” than Shaq, but they are the same “size” if you don’t account for mass.
@@Tyrannosaurine I can not think of the mans name or the show but he was saying he had a toe bone of a T-Rex that would maybe hit 45 feet. That would make him far larger than Sue or Scotty and will over ten tons. I think they need to build an animal around that toe bone and put it up for everyone to see. A close Godzilla. They could name it V-Rex. LOL.
2:29
Since it wasn’t technically covered in the video, I just would like to point out some things that weren’t said. First of all, the Spinosaurus actually grew to be (as far as we know) up to 17 feet longer than Tyrannosaurus (59 feet long) though it didn’t have it beat in weight, at 6.4 to 7.3 metric tons, while the Tyrannosaurus was 7.3 to 10.5 metric tons. Other carnivores, such as Giganotasaurus, Allosaurus, and Carcharodontosaurus (as mentioned in the video) could grow to Tyrannosaurus’s size, if not larger. Even more carnivores grew to about 10 feet shorter, though some individuals of the species could be comparable (within 5 feet) to an adult Tyrannosaurus’s size; Suchomimus, Albertosaurus, and Tarbosaurus, the latter of the two being Tyrannosaurids.
This isn’t meant to be offensive or standoff-ish, it’s just something I wanted to point out. Please do correct any incorrect facts in this comment.
Actually newer estimates for lager carnivores put tyrannosaurus far ahead of everyone else in terms of weight the largest speciement scotty being 10.5 metric tons with other large therapods mainly mapusaurus giganotosaurus tyrannotitan and spinosaurus being quite far off
Giganotosaurus:7.9 metric tons
Mapusaurus: 8.2 metric tons
Tyrannotitan:8 metric tons
Spinosaurus 7.3 metric tons
@@gojirarex5138 Good to know, since a number of my sources were 7 or more years old, leaning into the age of being outdated.
@@Novitiate001 ye thats fair things change all the time with these kind of things and in a few months even what i just said would likely be outdated tbh
@@gojirarex5138 Estimates of T. rex being over ten tons are greatly exaggerated. Most estimates put the weight of the sue at just over eight tons.
@@minutemansam1214 ehh that used to be the case but newer estimates put sue at 9.7 tons and scotty is even larger at 10.5 tons
13:23 Effective population size (what affects 'genetic diversity') is purely a function of number of reproducing adults- it doesn't matter how many juveniles are scurrying around.
It's kind of like how bears were super big back in the day, an availability of food plus basically being a hunter and a scavenger whenever one is most available at the moment
Interesting! Any links and sources of this?
I don't think I have commented this before but thank you so much for English subtitles, it really helps me to don't get lost, it's a lot of info yet so interesting, amazing channel keep it up
"In the end, it was not guns or bombs that defeated the aliens, but that humblest of all God's creatures, the Tyrannosaurus Rex."
T Rex made by fallen angels angels . Read book of Enoch
@@MasterHaloOne You seem to misunderstand me. I'm a Futurama fan, not a magical creationist.
Most underrated channel in paleontologist and science on TH-cam. Like, share, comment and watch the full video library after you the subscribe bell!
Good vid, have a sub 😊
Great content!
Aww they look so cute in the thumbnail 🥰
not related to this video ,but would you do a video on pliosaurus species because nobody on youtube seems to care about them! just a little request !thanks !
Excellent analysis
Love the video, though I do question the implication that Tyrannosaurus couldn't have hunted adult sauropods in the same manner proposed for abelisaurids. Otherwise fantastic video.
I can't understand that either. If a T-Rex can take down a four legged tank it can take down a soft skin long neck.
I think pack hunting works with this idea because younger Rex can herd and larger rexes can ambush. Higher rate of success and less effort
Very large animals hardly gang up because so much food is needed to support them there'd be infighting.
4:57 This paleo art is pretty inaccurate. Why is grass there, if it didn’t evolve by that time?
Grass had evolved by the Cretaceous period, it just wasn't very common.
@@chimerasuchus Well, did it overlap with the territory of Tyrannosaurus?
@@juanjoyaborja.3054 Nope.
Just india
Brilliant analyzation.
Great vid
Fascinating, the population dynamics.
Seriously. I usually just half listen as a layman, but what you described was fascinating. I’m 67. As a young boy I was enchanted by images in books in the family library, which was extensive. My father was a bibliophile and traveled a lot. We had thousands of books. Everything from underground comics (1st edition Crumb) to mathematics texts of all kinds and in the hundreds. I had a career in teaching and got first pick of the math books in my dad’s work library were donated to the university. Having access to that library helped me become known as a great math teacher with my 3rd grade gifted classes. I enjoyed a freedom that today’s teachers will never have. Teaching is not a profession if the practitioners have no influence core decisions. Keep up your great work!
The hyper intelligence hypothesis is an interesting take on Tyrannosaur size.
2:29 I can feel the sheer weight behind this art piece by just looking at it. And f*ck me does it feel heavy...
I cannot watch any t-rex related videos for the fear of seeing THAT image. You know the one where a T-rex is crouching next to a stream and looking directly at the viewer
I think Tyrannosaurus Rex was a predator that would and could kill anything it wanted. I think a pack of Tyrannosaurus would kill an adult Alamosaurus while an individual would only go after juveniles and the other aforementioned herbivores. If we look at history, we see giant sauropods having giant predators to hunt them. Allosaurus and diplodocus, mamenchisaurus and sinraptor, Giganotosaurus and Argentinosaurus, carcharodontosaurus and paralatitan, Torvosaurus and Lusotitan. Alamosaurus and Tyrannosaurus Rex.
The difference is that while the carcharodontosaurids had evolved alongside the mega-sauropods and had adaptations like their flesh cutting teeth that evolved to take the titans down. On the other hand, Alamosaurus was a recent arrival North America and Tyrannosaurus's bone crushing method of hunting was poorly suited for hunting some a large animal, even with a pack. In contrast, the tyrannosaurid Tarbosaurus, who had coexited with smaller sauropods in Asia, did adaptions for hunting them.
@@chimerasuchus that is fair I suppose, but I wouldn't put it past a Rex to take out a sub-adult or to bring down a sick or old one. I still believe that T-Rex was so powerful that it in fact could take out an adult. My reason being that T-Rex had a 6 ton bite force, that would crush any animal's bones and with Rex being far more intelligent, itcould figure out how to possibly use its tail to break the front leg in a sneak attack.
Great stuff
Hard to believe when I look up trex it says 12-20 ft tall when the largest tyrannosaurus was Scotty and Sue at 13 ft
Because apart from the fact that a TRex could tilt its head up (increasing its height), there is nothing to suggest that bigger TRex specimens didn't exist that were within that range.
@@alphawolf8031 Sue is likely near the very upper limit of how large a T. rex could get. Unless one had gigantism, but for a bipedal animal already in excess of seven tons, they would have been quite limited biomechanically from reaching too big of sizes. Two legs offers less stability compared to four.
@@minutemansam1214 Scotty and Sue are both fully grown TRex's yet Scotty is still noticeably bigger than Sue.
In excess of 7 tons? Sue and Scotty pushed nearly 10 tons and the average adult TRex weighed 8 tons.
Sue and Scotty are highly unlikely to be the biggest TRex's to have ever existed.
@@alphawolf8031 "Sue and Scotty are highly unlikely to be the biggest T. rex's to have ever existed." Do you have evidence for that?
@@aliakbarmaliki3156 The rule of probability, just as how you have no evidence of them being the biggest TRex's to have ever existed.
Great art in this video.
im bout halfway through. you make really valid points but im no accredit scientist or anything, but here me out... The alamosaur sauropod being the last known sauropod to co-exist in t-rex territory, could point to an animal so powerful it could just erradicate sauropods over time because theres a difference when attacking juvenile or even sub-adult sauropods when you just grab the smaller ones and chok them out like a lion , or you just rip their neck and head right off the body which t-rex would likely be able to do . i think t-rex was potentially so underestimated and moved a lot like a bird, the muscle mas made it heavy but quick in movement like a ninja. Something had to be reallllllly bad out there to make a monster like a triceratops be required to thrive.
So what is bigger tyranosaurus or spinosaurus?
I love soaking stuff like this in...but I always have to remind myself this is 90% educated guesses and logical imagination. I just wish people didn't arrogantly present it as factual.
Who drew the thumbnail?
I just want to go back in time and see one. That’s not asking to much, cmon now
Very interesting video! Thanks for sharing! 👍🔔
T Rex is really huge at 12.4 meters long & 11 tonnes