Young Tarbosaurus had the killer instinct

Galvasean

The remains of a 2-3 year old Tarbosaurus bataar ads weight to the idea that tyrannosaurs changed radically in appearance as they grew older. Youngsters were sleek, fast and nimble and would have hunted much different prey to their parents.
http://www.livescience.com/14066-tyrannosaur-toddlers-trex-predators.html



PS: first to like on Facebook

Alvin T. Grey

They didn't change that much.

Adam Khor

Hmm... nothing new, really. It was already known about T-Rex, wasn´t it? They say that the adults and the youngsters occupied different ecological niches, thus explaining why there aren´t other large predators from the same time and place.

Question to those who know more than I do ; is the same true for Tarbosaurus? I hear that Alioramus may be a juvenile Tarbosaurus. Are there other large predators from the same time and place? Or would Tarbosaurus completely dominate the food chain as seemingly did T-Rex?

Galvasean

Adam Khor wrote: »

Hmm... nothing new, really. It was already known about T-Rex, wasn´t it? They say that the adults and the youngsters occupied different ecological niches, thus explaining why there aren´t other large predators from the same time and place.

I'm assuming this also puts a nail into the coffin of the Nanotyrannus genus.

Adam Khor wrote: »

Question to those who know more than I do ; is the same true for Tarbosaurus? I hear that Alioramus may be a juvenile Tarbosaurus. Are there other large predators from the same time and place? Or would Tarbosaurus completely dominate the food chain as seemingly did T-Rex?

There are no other massive carnivores present in Tarbosaurus' domain that I am aware of.
While non of teh articles I have read on the juvenille Tarbosaurus mention whether or not it was one in the same with Alioramus, the skull in the picture looks quite different.

Alvin T. Grey

Galvasean wrote: »

I'm assuming this also puts a nail into the coffin of the Nanotyrannus genus.

I don't think they could have changed that much. Nano-Ts brain was in a different place. It's eyes were different, it's teeth were different.
http://discovermagazine.com/1992/mar/insidetheheadofa8

Galvasean

Alvin T. Grey wrote: »

I don't think they could have changed that much. Nano-Ts brain was in a different place. It's eyes were different, it's teeth were different.
http://discovermagazine.com/1992/mar/insidetheheadofa8

Hope it is a seperate genus TBH (if anything so I don't have to admit Jack Horner was right about something). Apparently BobBakker, Peter Larson, and Phil Currie are due to publish a paper on the Tyrannosaurus/Nanotyrannus debate soon. Should be interesting considering Larson and Currie have been on opposite ends of the debate.

Adam Khor

Galvasean wrote: »

Apparently BobBakker, Peter Larson, and Phil Currie are due to publish a paper on the Tyrannosaurus/[/i]Nanotyrannus[/i] debate soon. Should be interesting considering Larson and Currie have been on opposite ends of the debate.

Sounds like they reached a conclusion then?

Galvasean

Hope so. Best keep our ears open.

Alvin T. Grey

I can't wait to find out what the outcome is. As far as Jack is concerned, even a broken clock is right at least twice...