From the North (of China) came the furry tyrannosaurs

[Arioch]

Maybe the young Rex's had feathers to keep them warm, like chickens have down feathers and at a later age they lose their feathers, this is what I am thinking.

That's actually what most scientists think these days.

Truth be told, the whole feathered baby tyrannosaurs that lose all their feathers as they grow thing is just a meme started by some paleoartist time ago ( I think it was GSP itself), not a scientific theory. If some paleontologists agree with this is because its a relatively harmless one, and until last week there wasn´t evidence of feathers in anything related to tyrannosaurids but in a rather distant and dubious form (think Guanlong), and obviously, not too big. And also we´re dealing with a sacred cow here; this popular culture perception of a big bad T. rex looking ridiculous with feathers is just plain ...ridiculous, and outrageous.

Tyrannosaurus and its closest kin having feathers its really more than a 50/50 right now. Why would they not have feathers, even sparsely arranged to begin with? we know size is not a problem anymore,  and not "need" them is not a good excuse either... phylogenetic bracketing has the preference.   I have to say though that this isn´t nowhere near as bad as naked big dromaeosaurs (just because), so I can live with it until some direct and irrefutable evidence is found...maybe some adult Tarbosaurus with feather impression would be enough...? but I´m sure some people would still say that its just an "asian" trait.   

/end rant

Very cool animation, btw. 

[Tylosaurus]

So far Yutyrannus has been proved it had feathers, as for T-Rex, I highly have my doubts, it would literally overheat, elephants don't have feathers or fur either, well the common ones don't they have hides same goes for any other reptiles.

As birds go they are rather small, unless the bigger flightless ones, they are still small when comparing to any large reptile or mammal.
That Yutyrannus had feathers was because it lived in a very cold climate, the feathers gave it a purpose to keep it self warm, a normal T-Rex would not need feathers me thinks, it's not like if one has something all the others would have it also, sorry just my theory of this subject

All Birds have Feathers
All Reptiles have Scales
All Mammals have Hides with or without fur

All dinosaurs? Probably a combination of all three possibilities, yet we can only speculate, unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales.

As your rant? That is no rant, just an opinion of how you would visualize the situation

[tyrantqueen]

And also we´re dealing with a sacred cow here; this popular culture perception of a big bad T. rex looking ridiculous with feathers is just plain ...ridiculous, and outrageous.

That's not what bothers me...notice I referred to the Tyrannosaurus Rex animation earlier as "adorable". I'm hardly concerned with Tyrannosaurus not looking "big and bad" just 'cause it has fuzz/feathers XD

It's just that there are some wonderful depictions of T-Rex (like the Krentz) that will get bad reviews now, since that they're unfuzzied.

Yeah, I know, it's something I gotta get used to 

[Gwangi]

there are some wonderful depictions of T-Rex (like the Krentz) that will get bad reviews now, since that they're unfuzzied.

I don't think that is going to happen, we don't have feathers for Tyrannosaurus so there is no way we could make a review of one and give it a bad review on that basis. This new dinosaur only increases the possibility for Tyrannosaurus having feathers, it doesn't prove that it did. I believe Tyrannosaurus likely did have feathers, even if only sparse like our own hair. For comparison sake I think of Yutyrannus as a woolly mammoth and Tyrannosaurus as a modern elephant. 

[Patrx]

there are some wonderful depictions of T-Rex (like the Krentz) that will get bad reviews now, since that they're unfuzzied.

I don't think that is going to happen, we don't have feathers for Tyrannosaurus so there is no way we could make a review of one and give it a bad review on that basis.

I agree. it's not quite the same as criticizing a Utahraptor figure for being featherless, even though we have no direct evidence of feathers on that animal. With raptors, we've got fossils from all over the deinonychusauria showing feathers. Yutyrannus is one genus, and of relatively distant relation to Tyrannosaurus. As you suggest, this raises the odds of T. rex bearing feathers, but ought not make it a requirement for modern reconstructions just yet, if you ask me.

[Himmapaan]

there are some wonderful depictions of T-Rex (like the Krentz) that will get bad reviews now, since that they're unfuzzied.

I don't think that is going to happen, we don't have feathers for Tyrannosaurus so there is no way we could make a review of one and give it a bad review on that basis.

I agree. it's not quite the same as criticizing a Utahraptor figure for being featherless, even though we have no direct evidence of feathers on that animal. With raptors, we've got fossils from all over the deinonychusauria showing feathers. Yutyrannus is one genus, and of relatively distant relation to Tyrannosaurus. As you suggest, this raises the odds of T. rex bearing feathers, but ought not make it a requirement for modern reconstructions just yet, if you ask me.

Ditto both.

Besides, even supposing an actual feathered T.rex were found tomorrow, I still doubt anyone would form an instant compunction to downgrade all unfeathered T.rex toys and models heretofore. Most good reviews take into account the production date of a figure. We are not all lying in wait merely to pounce on flaws and decry them; at least, sensible, well-rounded reviewers aren't.  And anyone curmudgeonly enough to fault a Krentz T.rex merely on unfeathered grounds needs a good ducking, frankly. 

[Arioch]

The Yixian climate, while rather cold was still a far cry from those were wooly mammoths had to live... and no, again, overheating wouldn´t be a problem. 

[stoneage]

So far Yutyrannus has been proved it had feathers, as for T-Rex, I highly have my doubts, it would literally overheat, elephants don't have feathers or fur either, well the common ones don't they have hides same goes for any other reptiles.

As birds go they are rather small, unless the bigger flightless ones, they are still small when comparing to any large reptile or mammal.
That Yutyrannus had feathers was because it lived in a very cold climate, the feathers gave it a purpose to keep it self warm, a normal T-Rex would not need feathers me thinks, it's not like if one has something all the others would have it also, sorry just my theory of this subject

All Birds have Feathers
All Reptiles have Scales
All Mammals have Hides with or without fur

All dinosaurs? Probably a combination of all three possibilities, yet we can only speculate, unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales.

As your rant? That is no rant, just an opinion of how you would visualize the situation

What do you mean it has a hide and no scales?  What do you call this?

[Seijun]

Stoneage, what dinosaur is that skin impression from?

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The Yixian climate, while rather cold was still a far cry from those were wooly mammoths had to live... and no, again, overheating wouldn´t be a problem. 

Beat me to it ! lol  I don;t see how that overheating thing ever got started..when you stop and think for a minute it doesn't make any sense at all really.  Just think how many birds over heat...

[stoneage]

Stoneage, what dinosaur is that skin impression from?

Dakota!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dakota_skin_impression.jpg

Tylosaurus said, "unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales."

[Gwangi]

The Yixian climate, while rather cold was still a far cry from those were wooly mammoths had to live... and no, again, overheating wouldn´t be a problem. 

Beat me to it ! lol  I don;t see how that overheating thing ever got started..when you stop and think for a minute it doesn't make any sense at all really.  Just think how many birds over heat...

Aside from the fact that modern birds can actually overheat modern birds are a far cry from the largest of theropods, no comparison can really be made. The only reason I brought up the woolly mammoth analogy is to illustrate the possible differences between Yutyrannus and Tyrannosaurus. Tyrannosaurus was considerably larger than Yutyrannus and lived in a warmer climate, so the need for feathers might not be as great, just as the need for hair on elephants is not as great as it was for woolly mammoths. Even elephants have to contend with colder weather but yet their hair is sparse, the same could be true for Tyrannosaurus.

[paleoferroequine]

The Yixian climate, while rather cold was still a far cry from those were wooly mammoths had to live... and no, again, overheating wouldn´t be a problem. 

Beat me to it ! lol  I don;t see how that overheating thing ever got started..when you stop and think for a minute it doesn't make any sense at all really.  Just think how many birds over heat...

And, for what it's worth, although not a dinosaur (elephants were mentioned) the ground sloth Megatherium and it's relatives had heavy hair, lived in jungles and the dry, hot southwest U.S. and weighed 6-8 tons. Probably didn't overheat.

[Arioch]

The Yixian climate, while rather cold was still a far cry from those were wooly mammoths had to live... and no, again, overheating wouldn´t be a problem. 

Beat me to it ! lol  I don;t see how that overheating thing ever got started..when you stop and think for a minute it doesn't make any sense at all really.  Just think how many birds over heat...

Aside from the fact that modern birds can actually overheat modern birds are a far cry from the largest of theropods, no comparison can really be made. The only reason I brought up the woolly mammoth analogy is to illustrate the possible differences between Yutyrannus and Tyrannosaurus. Tyrannosaurus was considerably larger than Yutyrannus and lived in a warmer climate, so the need for feathers might not be as great, just as the need for hair on elephants is not as great as it was for woolly mammoths. Even elephants have to contend with colder weather but yet their hair is sparse, the same could be true for Tyrannosaurus.

Tyrannosaurus is just 3 times the mass of Yutyrannus, that´s way less than the size difference between Yutyrannus and Beipiaosaurus, which have exactly the same type of integument. Why we should assume Yutyrannus represents the maximum size for a thickly feathered animal? (that standard would still make subadult T. rexes very plausible, btw...)

As Horridus mentioned earlier, feathers don´t quite work like mammal fur: they´re good for insulation, but also to keep cool, display...they wouldn´t be a "burden" in large animals, quite the opposite. Overheating in birds only ocur under really extreme conditions, that those big mesozoic theropods would rarely -if ever- meet.

We´re talking about a compsognathid-like kind of feathering anyway. The underside of the body on T. Rex was most likely scaly -as tail skin impression shows-  which will make overheating even less plausible.

[Tylosaurus]

Stoneage, what dinosaur is that skin impression from?

Dakota!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dakota_skin_impression.jpg

Tylosaurus said, "unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales."

That does not look like scales to me sorry Even an Elephant's hide is very similar But no matter google is your friend when you need to look for things:
https://www.google.nl/search?tbm=isch&hl=nl&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=1065&q=Elephant+Skin+close&gbv=2&oq=Elephant+Skin+close&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=img.3...1989l6799l0l7098l19l19l0l11l11l0l105l412l7j1l8l0.llsin.

There you go plenty of closeups of elephant hides there also very similar to Dakota's skin print So again the Hadrosaur probably had a hide like that of an elephant

[Gwangi]

Tyrannosaurus is just 3 times the mass of Yutyrannus, that´s way less than the size difference between Yutyrannus and Beipiaosaurus, which have exactly the same type of integument. Why we should assume Yutyrannus represents the maximum size for a thickly feathered animal? (that standard would still make subadult T. rexes very plausible, btw...)

I don't necessarily assume that, I'm just speculating. Tyrannosaurus was large and lived in a warmer climate ergo it could be possible that its covering was not as dense. Also note that I've been talking about Tyrannosaurus specifically. I never mentioned anything about the maximum size of feathered animals. On the contrary, large Tyrannosaurs that lived in cool climates like Albertasaurus could have been as densely covered as Yutyrannus.

As Horridus mentioned earlier, feathers don´t quite work like mammal fur: they´re good for insulation, but also to keep cool, display...they wouldn´t be a "burden" in large animals, quite the opposite. Overheating in birds only ocur under really extreme conditions, that those big mesozoic theropods would rarely -if ever- meet.

I realize feathers are different from fur so perhaps the mammoth analogy was the wrong one. We'll look at birds than. Ostriches are the largest living dinosaurs and have to contend with hot climates. Ostriches are also among the most naked of birds with large patches of featherless skin used to do what? Shed heat! If shedding heat were a non-issue than why wouldn't ostriches be covered head to toe like a snowy owl because despite living in a warm region ostriches do in fact have to deal with some rather cold temperatures. Why are they not as extensively covered as an emu? The ostrich is a perfect example of a large theropod living in a hot climate with less feathers than related animals living elsewhere. It is the same argument I made for Yutyrannus and Tyrannosaurus and yet I'm being attacked on this issue why? I've acknowledged that Tyrannosaurus was likely feathered in fact in my opinion it is nearly a guarantee and for some reason because I don't think it was as densely covered as another animal I'm being lynched for it.

We´re talking about a compsognathid-like kind of feathering anyway. The underside of the body on T. Rex was most likely scaly -as tail skin impression shows-  which will make overheating even less plausible.

So the underside of Tyrannosaurus was likely featherless. Interesting, that is exactly the sort of thing I'm saying. Unless I'm wrong about Yutyrannus the animal is thought to have been completely covered with feathers. Head to tail, down the legs and even possibly the feet. I argued that Tyrannosaurus likely had less feathers and you're basically saying it had less feathers...what are you even disagreeing with me about?

[Gwangi]

Stoneage, what dinosaur is that skin impression from?

Dakota!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dakota_skin_impression.jpg

Tylosaurus said, "unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales."

That does not look like scales to me sorry Even an Elephant's hide is very similar But no matter google is your friend when you need to look for things:
https://www.google.nl/search?tbm=isch&hl=nl&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=1065&q=Elephant+Skin+close&gbv=2&oq=Elephant+Skin+close&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=img.3...1989l6799l0l7098l19l19l0l11l11l0l105l412l7j1l8l0.llsin.

There you go plenty of closeups of elephant hides there also very similar to Dakota's skin print So again the Hadrosaur probably had a hide like that of an elephant

Dakota had scales, you can clearly see them in the posted picture. They look just like the small pebbly scales on a bird's foot or on parts of a crocodile.

[Tylosaurus]

Stoneage, what dinosaur is that skin impression from?

Dakota!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dakota_skin_impression.jpg

Tylosaurus said, "unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales."

That does not look like scales to me sorry Even an Elephant's hide is very similar But no matter google is your friend when you need to look for things:
https://www.google.nl/search?tbm=isch&hl=nl&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=1065&q=Elephant+Skin+close&gbv=2&oq=Elephant+Skin+close&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=img.3...1989l6799l0l7098l19l19l0l11l11l0l105l412l7j1l8l0.llsin.

There you go plenty of closeups of elephant hides there also very similar to Dakota's skin print So again the Hadrosaur probably had a hide like that of an elephant

Dakota had scales, you can clearly see them in the posted picture. They look just like the small pebbly scales on a bird's foot or on parts of a crocodile.

Ah yeah okay point taken, thanks for the clear explanation

[Gwangi]

Stoneage, what dinosaur is that skin impression from?

Dakota!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dakota_skin_impression.jpg

Tylosaurus said, "unless skin is neatly preserved or fossilized like with that Hadrosaur Dakota, which clearly showed that it had a hide and no scales."

That does not look like scales to me sorry Even an Elephant's hide is very similar But no matter google is your friend when you need to look for things:
https://www.google.nl/search?tbm=isch&hl=nl&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=1065&q=Elephant+Skin+close&gbv=2&oq=Elephant+Skin+close&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=img.3...1989l6799l0l7098l19l19l0l11l11l0l105l412l7j1l8l0.llsin.

There you go plenty of closeups of elephant hides there also very similar to Dakota's skin print So again the Hadrosaur probably had a hide like that of an elephant

Dakota had scales, you can clearly see them in the posted picture. They look just like the small pebbly scales on a bird's foot or on parts of a crocodile.

Ah yeah okay point taken, thanks for the clear explanation

No problem. I think a lot of people assume dinosaur skin was like that of elephants or rhinos. Even I myself often imagine sauropods as wrinkly instead of scaly. I think the toy companies are partly to blame as they make a lot of dinosaurs wrinkly, probably because it is cheaper than sculpting scales.

[Seijun]

I believe all Gwangi is saying is that if trex was feathered, it might not have been as thick as on Y huali. I can go with that I would not agree that in a warm climate a large animals HAS to be naked or nearly naked (although I don't think that was what Gwangi was saying), but as can be seen between ostriches and snowy owls, climate difference can affect the amount of feathers a bird has.