Tyrannosaurus Split into 3

[Concavenator]

I don't know what to think after these news...

it seemed strange to me that there was only one species of Tyrannosaurus, it lived for such a long time in so many places and in different climates, all of which is unusual for a terrestrial animal, as far as I know.

This. Theoretically, the idea of more than 1 species within the genus Tyrannosaurus is very reasonable, but the evidence this paper provides doesn't appear to be too convincing. It also struck me as strange that news as important as these are coming out now, in 2022, when Tyrannosaurus surely is the most studied dinosaur of all time (maybe even the most studied extinct animal) and it's known from multiple, excellent skeletons (not just multiple fragmentary remains either). I would have expected something like this to have been discovered by now, again, with all the studies that have been done on this particular animal. In that video:

https://youtu.be/bgZUE8tiLGs

minute 11:50, Hone makes a pretty good point. Turns out the authors of the paper, according to their hypothesis, aren't sure what species would AMNH 5027 represent, despite being almost complete. This is an example of some methodology issues this new paper has. But again, on the other hand, logic says the idea of more than one Tyrannosaurus species seems likely, and even if this paper turns out to be wrong, it opens the possibility and may foster further research on this particular subject.

[stargatedalek]

The idea of distinct Tyrannosaurus strains/forms/population morphs is not new, none of this is "discovery" so much as it is "formal proposal of recognition".

[SRF]

I found this video the most in depth analysis of the new paper and how to place this within other theories regarding Tyrannosaurus morphs. Just wanted to share that here.

https://youtu.be/4AxNJ1Lix8k

[SidB]

Thanks, @SRF , that is informative and useful.

[dyno77]

I remember some similar reports  back in the mid 2000s that suggested that the gracile forms should have a different name simply because they are slender,nothing came of it clearly...
Blogspots and forums back a few years ago, would also make suggestions that t rex should  have its name changed back to ornithomimus grandis ,because this was the first fragment that belonged to t rex ,but because it was based on 1 fragment and they already had the type specimen and other very nearly  complete skeletons, so there was no good reason to change it...and no experts went along with it either...
whichever the lead tyrannosaur experts decide it should be interesting....

[HD-man]

I was surprised that Klayton Fioriti posted a video about "The Controversial New T. Rex Debate". Here's my comment on the video:

In reference to ~7:50, what, no love for A. europaeus? Lame! (JK of course) As for the the T. rex debate, I'm open to the possibility, but not optimistic that it'll survive the scientific scrutiny of so many other experts. It seems especially weird to split up those robust & gracile specimens found in the same layer based on so little evidence that could be (& has been) more easily explained by dimorphism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQpb-KKsIP0&t=472s

[Duna]

I was waiting for Palaeos video about this subject, and he has exceeded himself (even more than always ). The best video I've watched about this, no doubt. Not only he explains the subject perfectly, he also adds more information about scientific nomenclature, species descriptions and personal attacks given to the authors of the paper.

https://youtu.be/oiNayM8umjY

[andrewsaurus rex]

it would not be surprising if there were multiple species of T rex, more likely sub-species, given its vast range.   I'm sure physical and behavioural variations evolved in different regions of Laramidia, just like what happens today with wolves, bears, cougars etc  which are spread all over North America.   Whether these would be distinct species, ie unable to interbreed, is far from certain.  I believe in paleontological terms, species are defined solely by physical variation, since it is nearly impossible to determine ability to mate in extinct animals, so perhaps what might better be defined as sub species, will end up being called species.  Even if this happens, they'll all still be T rex to me...

[HD-man]

Tyrannouroboros: how everything old is new again in recent proposals of Tyrannosaurus taxonomy: https://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2022/03/tyrannouroboros-how-everything-old-is.html

STATEMENT OF CONCERNS AND FACTS BY THE SENIOR
AUTHOR IN RESPONSE TO THE MANY UNSCIENTIFIC
CRITICISMS IN THE MEDIA OF EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
PAPER ON TYRANNOSAURUS SPECIES: http://gspauldino.com/EBTyrannoxResponseedit.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgXRK9Tjyi0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saC-RZJiVGg

[Faelrin]

Trying to jog my memory on 2022's paleontology discoveries when I came across this paper disputing the previous paper from Paul et al:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11692-022-09573-1

Didn't read it just yet, but figured I would share it for folks to gather thoughts on it, since I know this caused a big stir earlier on this year.