Advertisement
Private Profiles - an update on how they will be changing here
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.

Dueling Dinos: Fossil Find of the Decade?

  • 12-11-2011 8:02pm
    #1
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Adam Khor


    It is certainly one of the most spectacular fossils ever found. It is a lot like the Figthing Dinos (Velociraptor and Protoceratops) found in Mongolia, only these were found in Montana and were a tyrannosaurid and a ceratopsid.

    There are several awesome things about this fossil:

    1- The two dinos were found very close to each other. Scientists believe that they actually died together. The tyrannosaurid was found by accident when the scientists were digging the ceratopsid out.

    2- The ceratopsid was HUGE; as big or bigger than Triceratops and Torosaurus, yet it does not belong to any of those genera.

    3- The fact that the fossils were found in the Hell Creek Formation suggests that there was a third genus of ceratopsid (a chasmosaurine) living alongside Triceratops and or Torosaurus.

    4- The ceratopsid was at first thought to have been hornless! However further study has revealed that it did indeed have horns.

    5- The tyrannosaurid (get this) is seemingly an ADULT NANOTYRANNUS! That's right; this fossil could prove once and for all that Nanotyrannus was NOT a juvenile T-Rex, but rather a separate species- the second tyrannosaur species from the latest Cretaceous of North America. The leopard to Tyrannosaurus' lion, if you will.

    6- If both dinos did die together that would indicate that Nanotyrannus did not limit itself to hunt small prey, as the ceratopsid was MUCH, much bigger than itself.

    7- Both dinos are almost complete and fully articulated- even more amazing,both seem to have preserved skin impressions.

    8- Teeth from the Nanotyrannus were found in the ceratopsid's body. The Nanotyrannus also seems to have very serious injuries that may have been caused by the ceratopsid.

    So, amazing news or what?

    CHRIS_pipquarry4_DUELDINOS.jpg

    This is a replica:

    DINO_DUELING_DINOS_MDDKBS1j.jpg

    Oh, and, it seems that they found a second Dracorex specimen from Hell Creek, this time with teeth... and they were pointy and serrated?!! WTF?


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭ Kess73


    This is one find that I am really stoked about, and am looking forward to seeing what new info it produces.


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,747 ✭✭✭✭ Galvasean


    I read that the tyrannosaurid's head was crushed. Not confirmed whether or not the ceratopsian did it or not. I'd say the TV documentary / book deal rights for this one are hotly contested!
    It would be awesome if it turned out to be an adult Nanotyrannus. What size was the specimen?
    Very cool that it appears to be a chasmosaurine. Very underrated branch of ceratopsian IMO.

    src.php?title=Chasmosaurus+belli+and+Daspletosaurus+torosus&objectid=2&size=full


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,747 ✭✭✭✭ Galvasean


    Re: the Dracorex, pointy serrated teeth? A carnivourous pachecephalosaur right out of the Land Before Time!

    Pachycephalosaurus.JPG


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Adam Khor


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Re: the Dracorex, pointy serrated teeth? A carnivourous pachecephalosaur right out of the Land Before Time!

    Pachycephalosaurus.JPG

    I always assumed that those Pachys were simply extremely aggressive... kind of like a youth gang that corners u in a dark alley XD

    But yeah, it seems that at least Dracorex may have been partially carnivorous.

    And, chasmosaurines underrated? How can that be, if Triceratops itself is a chasmosaurine?

    PS- I think the Nanotyrannus is about 6 meters long


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,747 ✭✭✭✭ Galvasean


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    And, chasmosaurines underrated? How can that be, if Triceratops itself is a chasmosaurine?

    And there I was thinking the triceratopsini were seperate to the chasmosaurines. Just looked it up and apparently they;re a sort of sub group of the chasmosaurines. Hmmph. :/


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 128 ✭✭ Allosaur


    NANNO t.!!!!!

    Too early to say I told you so yet?


  • Registered Users Posts: 128 ✭✭ Allosaur


    Adam, can I get links?


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,747 ✭✭✭✭ Galvasean




  • Registered Users Posts: 128 ✭✭ Allosaur


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Spotted that. I was hoping to get a paper on it. Early days yet I suppose.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Adam Khor


    Sorry, hadn´t seen Allosaur's request for links. :o


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1 ItIsCloudy


    Allosaur wrote: »
    Spotted that. I was hoping to get a paper on it. Early days yet I suppose.

    Currently the place where any new info will first be posted is http://www.duelingdinos.com any other sites are taking the information from that site. You will find as much information as exists at this site run by BHIGR. There is a PDF on this site but no scientific papers have been published as of yet, BHIGR is currently seeking a home for these amazing specimens; so go to you local university and/or museum and tell them to raise money to bring it to you!!! Woo Hoo, dueling dinos for all!


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,747 ✭✭✭✭ Galvasean


    Right people, if we all donate one euro... that's like 8 euros....

    Need more....

    edit: PS welcome to the forum :)


Advertisement