|
Post by Carcharadontosaurus on Nov 9, 2013 18:59:39 GMT -5
I never said that it would gravely wound the theropod (as in bloodless, puncture wounds, etc), just that a good bite could easily break its ankle and/or cause damage to its tibia. Its jaws in general were NOT gracile and its premaxilla teeth were certainly not small; they were actually rather thick and robust, built much like stout spikes. Spinosaurus had longer teeth, but not necessarily larger-bodied teeth. And for the theropod to effectively bite the crocodylomorph, it would have to bend over and, fundamentally, have to penetrate the sarcosuchus' osteoderms, which would be difficult for a primarily piscivorous animal. It is rather blatantly obvious that sarcosuchus had a slender snout: Those jaws clearly look proportionally thinner than a similar sized alligator or crocodile. And theropods had to bend down to eat and drink at a regular basis, so why consider that to be such an issue for spinosaurus to effectively bite sarco? As it really doesn't even need to bite it as it could stomp or slash the pholidosaurid.
|
|
Godzillasaurus
Invertebrate
Reptile (both extant and extinct) and kaiju enthusiast
Posts: 314
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Nov 9, 2013 19:39:12 GMT -5
There still is variation, it is just subtle.
|
|
Godzillasaurus
Invertebrate
Reptile (both extant and extinct) and kaiju enthusiast
Posts: 314
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Nov 9, 2013 19:51:20 GMT -5
Were they proportionally thinner than the jaws of many modern crocodilians? Yes. But does that mean they were thin and weak as a whole? Hell no! You can clearly discern differences between the jaws of sarcosuchus and the jaws of modern piscivorous crocodilians. Sarcosuchus had a much dorsally thicker jaw structure and its teeth were much more stout and robust (and they did not interlock). Sarcosuchus was clearly not a weakly-built animal. That claim is not simply not true.
Maybe because the sarcosuchus would be fighting backā¦ And it was a very broad animal that was covered in osteoderms, which means that the spinosaurus couldn't effectively bite its back. If it tried to do that, it wouldn't be able to get its jaws around the crocodylomorph and would basically only scrape it with the ultimate front of its maxilla, which would practically do nothing due to the theropod's long and thin jaws and non-serrated teeth. Spinosaurus was, first and foremost, primarily a piscivore unlike sarcosuchus which was more of a generalist. Spinosaurus' dentition was not designed for penetrating thick bony structures and would have only caused very superficial damage in this event.
|
|
|
Post by Dinopithecus on Nov 10, 2013 7:16:30 GMT -5
Godzillasaurus That's my point. I am merely stating their bite forces aren't that far off. There probably is a difference, just not very well pronounced.
|
|
|
Post by bobby on Jan 17, 2015 22:11:10 GMT -5
I think the Spinosaurus would have won this fight. Actually the data provided by the author is false. Spinosaurus weight was 7-10 tonnes while supercroc weight was 10-13tonnes. In addition supercroc had a bite force psi of 9 tonnes per square inch while spinosaurus had a psi of less then 2 tonnes per square inch
|
|