Juvenile Tyrannosaurs

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Hey guys I'm trying to figure out some things for my next project, a juvenile Tyrannosaurus.

I first saw the specimen JANE and decided to go with her, but the more I read the more it seems people aren't sure if she is a Tyrannosaurus or not. It seems she may be Nanotyrannus.  Has there been any verification one way or the other yet ?

Is JANE the fossil the the juvi tyrannosaurus in Krentz's Dinosaur Revolution was based on ?

I also looked into Raptorex and most of the juvenile Tarbosaurus specimens but they are all pretty small..I really liked JANE's 21' mark.

I did find this :

It doesn't look too " juvenile " in appearance..it's supposedly based off a specimen # PIN 511-3  , but I couldn't find any more info on it.

Should a juvenile Tyrannosaurus look like this image above or JANE / Krentz's DR Juvi Rex ?

[SBell]

So you're asking a toy forum to answer a riddle that's been plaguing the experts? Good luck with that.

Every time someone has an answer (the bones are fused, so Nanotyrannus is valid) there is a reposte (but not here, here or here so it's a juvenile T.rex). The differential proportions are exactly what is expected of a juvenile T.rex, or of a smaller species.

So I would say do whatever you like.  Unless you are planning on publishing on it, it won't hurt anyone, and will be a lot less frustrating to wade through.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

So you're asking a toy forum to answer a riddle that's been plaguing the experts? Good luck with that.

Every time someone has an answer (the bones are fused, so Nanotyrannus is valid) there is a reposte (but not here, here or here so it's a juvenile T.rex). The differential proportions are exactly what is expected of a juvenile T.rex, or of a smaller species.

So I would say do whatever you like.  Unless you are planning on publishing on it, it won't hurt anyone, and will be a lot less frustrating to wade through.

Sorry, I'm asking for a consensus from our experts here as to what they think. Some seem pretty sure it's one way or the other..but I can't figure out which myself.

That's true, I just like to be as accurate as a possible for my own peace of mind.  Let's tackle it this way,  based the image I posted above of a juvenile Tarbosaurus ( which I can't confirm not being able to find out more about the specimen ) and the JANE / Krentz, DR juvenile Rex..which design makes more sense for a juvenile Rex in your mind ? 

Here's a pic of a sculpture of JANE to compare with the image above :



It's mostly the longer legs and snout I think that are really different.

Edit :

I was looking some more..and I'm not sure Junior the little Rex from DR is based on Jane really...confirm ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1jtsKq55kw

[SBell]

The really long legs and snout are more likely hallmarks of a juvenile. But maybe not. I know this isn't much help, but there is a lot of debate on the whole Nanotyrannus thing.

I would say a juvenile should look something more like the sculpt.  But there is reasonable support for Nano being its own species (although I think the support may be dwindling a little bit).

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The really long legs and snout are more likely hallmarks of a juvenile. But maybe not. I know this isn't much help, but there is a lot of debate on the whole Nanotyrannus thing.

I would say a juvenile should look something more like the sculpt.  But there is reasonable support for Nano being its own species (although I think the support may be dwindling a little bit).

No worries, I appreciate any feedback  I can get. These questions are all making laps in my head and I have very few people to ask opinions of to get some kind of answer.

Have you ever heard of that sub adult Tarbosaur above ?   I couldn't find anything on it.

I'm also thinking the DR junior Rex looks less like that sculpt than I thought.. I wonder what David based it on ?

[Joel]

According to the old forum, David thinks it's Jane:

I pretty sure the sub-adult "Jr" was Jane.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

According to the old forum, David thinks it's Jane:

I pretty sure the sub-adult "Jr" was Jane.

That's interesting...thanks for pulling that up !

" Junior " looks to be much better proportioned than " JANE " ...at least looking at the sculpture of her there he does.

Here is the skeletal of her : http://www.cmnh.org/site/Img/AtTheMuseum/Jane/JaneSkeletal.pdf

Maybe the head in the sculpture is a bit too small  ?

[Sharptooth]

So I would say do whatever you like.  Unless you are planning on publishing on it, it won't hurt anyone, and will be a lot less frustrating to wade through.

This.

However, if i had to restore a young Rex, i would not use Jane as a reference (i'm one of those who think that Nano-T could be a valid genus), and give the baby a more "boxy" snout, like in the young Tarbo recently unhearted, or something like that 

[Himmapaan]

I agree with the others. Given the practically 50/50 split in the arguments, I think you have enough legitimacy doing what you want.

I remembered David Krentz mentioning the young rex in DR was based on Jane too, but Joel beat me to it. I personally really like the look of her as a juvenile T.rex, including the slimmer skull. I haven't seen the recently discovered young Tarbosaurus, but a boxier snout tends to make me think of even younger infants.

Tokugawa has sculpted his Jane with a more robust body than DR's Junior. So basically at this point: do as you please.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

So I would say do whatever you like.  Unless you are planning on publishing on it, it won't hurt anyone, and will be a lot less frustrating to wade through.

This.

However, if i had to restore a young Rex, i would not use Jane as a reference (i'm one of those who think that Nano-T could be a valid genus), and give the baby a more "boxy" snout, like in the young Tarbo recently unhearted, or something like that 

Are there any reference pics of that new Tarbo ?  Or is it the one pictured above by Greg Paul on Wiki ?

[Gryphoceratops]

The beauty of this is that you can do whatever you really want then if its decided its either a juvi rex or a nano for sure in the future you can just call it that.   

[Sharptooth]

It was discovered one year ago, if i remember well... Oh, here it is! 

http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/dbms-witmer/tarbosaurus_skull.htm

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I agree with the others. Given the practically 50/50 split in the arguments, I think you have enough legitimacy doing what you want.

I remembered David Krentz mentioning the young rex in DR was based on Jane too, but Joel beat me to it. I personally really like the look of her as a juvenile T.rex, including the slimmer skull. I haven't seen the recently discovered young Tarbosaurus, but a boxier snout tends to make me think of even younger infants.

Tokugawa has sculpted his Jane with a more robust body than DR's Junior. So basically at this point: do as you please.

Man this is tough..maybe I just do a chimera ? lol   

I'd like to see what that juvi Tarbo in the pic above is based on..if it's that size and they have enough material then being close enough as it is to Tyrannosaurus basing a juvenile on that would be the most accurate way to go.

Most of the juvenile Tarbosaurus images and references I've found are for much smaller individuals though, around 8' or so.

Any sub-adult ( 20' ) or so specimens for Albertosaurus ?  I was really looking to pair up a tyrannosaur with my Styracosaurus piece once done but had read somewhere that Albertosaurus wasn't considered a tyrannosaur anymore ? 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

It was discovered one year ago, if i remember well... Oh, here it is! 

http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/dbms-witmer/tarbosaurus_skull.htm

Thanks !

In that one video, where is the 14 year old specimen from ?

[ZoPteryx]

Any sub-adult ( 20' ) or so specimens for Albertosaurus ?  I was really looking to pair up a tyrannosaur with my Styracosaurus piece once done but had read somewhere that Albertosaurus wasn't considered a tyrannosaur anymore ? 

You could always go with Gorgosaurus (which might just be an Albertosaurus species), it appears to have been a little smaller than Albertosaurus on average, around 25 feet long.  I've never head of Albertosaurus not being a tyrannosaur though.   Maybe your thinking of it being a member of the subgroup Albertosaurinae, not Tyrannosaurinae with T. rex?  They're all still Tyrannosaurids though.

If were size goal is around 20 feet, there's also the poorly known Labocania from Baja California.  It grew to that length but was relatively stocky.  Its exact taxonomic position is not clear though, it may be a Tyrannosauroid, not a Tyrannosaurid, or it may be some type of 'carnosaur' or even an abelisaur.  It's from the late Cretaceous and shared it habitat with Lambeosaurus, Saurolophus, an ankylosaur, and a type of centrosaurine.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Any sub-adult ( 20' ) or so specimens for Albertosaurus ?  I was really looking to pair up a tyrannosaur with my Styracosaurus piece once done but had read somewhere that Albertosaurus wasn't considered a tyrannosaur anymore ? 

You could always go with Gorgosaurus (which might just be an Albertosaurus species), it appears to have been a little smaller than Albertosaurus on average, around 25 feet long.  I've never head of Albertosaurus not being a tyrannosaur though.   Maybe your thinking of it being a member of the subgroup Albertosaurinae, not Tyrannosaurinae with T. rex?  They're all still Tyrannosaurids though.

If were size goal is around 20 feet, there's also the poorly known Labocania from Baja California.  It grew to that length but was relatively stocky.  Its exact taxonomic position is not clear though, it may be a Tyrannosauroid, not a Tyrannosaurid, or it may be some type of 'carnosaur' or even an abelisaur.  It's from the late Cretaceous and shared it habitat with Lambeosaurus, Saurolophus, an ankylosaur, and a type of centrosaurine.

Gorgosaurus could be a good option as well...especially if it ballparks around that size.

The thing I read said something about how it was now known to be a Coelorosaur (sp?) and not a Carnosaur where all Tyrannosaurs are located..can't recall just where I read it..but it stuck.

That's an interesting one ! I was researching Appalachiasaurus for something closer to home that was considered a Tyrannosaur..of course they didn't find any arms of it and now it's restored both with tiny two clawed arms and long 3 clawed arms like Dryptosaurus. :/

[CityRaptor]

Uhh, Tyrannosaurs are not Carnosaurs, they are Coelurusaurs.

[Sharptooth]

Thanks !

In that one video, where is the 14 year old specimen from ?

Frankly, i don't know...   

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Thanks !

In that one video, where is the 14 year old specimen from ?

Frankly, i don't know...   

No worries. I would love to find out as it looks like the size range I'd be going for..and it's skull does look more " blocky " than JANE's .

Uhh, Tyrannosaurs are not Carnosaurs, they are Coelurusaurs.

Hmm..it was in some book or webpage I had read. I assumed it had been re-classified or something.

[Gwangi]

Regarding Tarbosaurus have you seen this?
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2011/05/tiny-tarbosaurus-shows-how-tyrants-grew-up/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucE-6mEgy1E

EDIT: I see this was already posted. Sorry about that.