The Controversial New T. Rex Debate Explained | Jurassic Park Theory
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 вер 2024
- Go to curiositystrea... and use the code KLAYTON to save 25% off today, that's only $14.99 a year. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today's video.
New science around Tyrannosaurus Rex could split the species into T. Regina and T. Imperator but paleontologists aren't on the same page with this dinosaur yet. Jurassic World and Park have their own changes to the animal but this may be even more wild.
#JurassicWorld #Dinosaurs #Science
Link to Marco's Channel : / marcomakesofficial
Check out Daryl Leigh Lynn's Channel! : / @darylleighlynn
Check out my 2nd Channel: / @dragoncurve
Buy Merch Here: teespring.com/...
A Very Special Thanks to InGen Executives Brett Rouleau, Daniel Cole, Christopher Siehda, Jonathan Murphy, Charles Rix, Jack Barnett, George Albott, Luis (Blamo_Guy) Santiago, Rob Langridge, David Bell, Flower Bro, The Sandman, Travis Whatley, Bailey Smith, Alexandre Raison, Cobalttheunicorn, Conner Losco, Cory Lydick, Greg Thornton, Timothy, Chris Stoddard, Cassandra Castaneda, Casey Morris, Andrew Fallon, Sam Lowe, TIMAN, The Melting Squad, FAMOUSLASTWORDS, Colin Paul, BigDanFTW, Matt S, Eddie Hoplight, Nicholas Brown, Verlando Brown, Rob Tallman, Balcora, Nicholas Roque, Bryson Knox, Kevin McDonald, Robert Messing, Brianna Christie, Ben Wilders, Robbie Brown, Joel Elizondo, Jacob Hagelstein, Ryan Moser, Ellis Ozley, Hunter Brown, Isaac Rovenko, Lee Hallewell, Kboss, Patrick Perry, Steven, Mark Rainbow, Andy Lucas, Richard Humbert, Michael Mendez, Christian Macias, Zachariah Shadlock, Adam Hooper, Steveson, Kane Southby, Gerry the Bary, Ari Rosenbaum, Bobby James, JW-Gojifan, John O'Dea, Ryan Seavey, BurakkuRoze, Will Luna, Joseph, Cody Castille, Ian Darsh, Michael Mangione, David L Kisling, FrostyJ, Samuel David Smith, Kyle Rowley, John O'Dea, Will Byrd, MooreFourMe, Ros Geal, Thomas Stonehouse-Burt, That_Clyde_Guy, Jacob Thomas, Phil Ken Sebben, That_Clyde_Guy, GoldsboroTSG, Matthew Smith, Nathan Gribble, Simon Thivierge, John Kuruc, Darklion53, Augustus Bismarck, Pierce Young, king delirious, petemesquite, Wesley Woo and Tyler Shepard, Devon L Dusseau, MustardBus, Omar Miguel Sanane, Clayton Milstead, Devon La Force, Matthew Lariviere, Seth Mcdaniel, Jurassic Jai, Matthew Lariviere, Kevin Baird, Omar Miguel Sanane, Ashlee Tilly, Stan Marsh, Mathew Lortie, Devin Mabe and Eric Loos ! As well as my Game Wardens Paul Chandler, Tyrannical Rex, Doughnut Guy, Martin Ipsen, Libby MacEachern, Andrew Wilmot, Bledsitter, Mulluns, Lauren Hutton, Chase Acker, Auraya Frost, Roger Coleman, Kyle Oxley, RyanHamster, Mike Wu, Lisa Kay, Melissa Rocha, Steven Ray Morris, Keith Powell, Larry Gillis, Cass Wart, Jared Meza, Mark Davies, Jordan J Robles, Brittany Toliver, Logan Howlett, Saturn Sky, Chris Webb, James Luong, Raul Luis-Solorio, Derek Hazen, Ryan LeBrecht, Brandon Bowers, Paolo Caday, Luke Davis, Matthew Buffington, Alex, Luke Osteen, Ted Dino, Jon Robinson, Aaron McLean, Joel Del Toro, Brandon Lade, Stefan Siemers, Jaidabecca, ZombieSalamander, JoyoSnooze, Mike Sherlock, Aaron McLean, Timothy, Killian Bottorf, Chris Martinez, Sam Bordas, Jarret Austin, Nick Cangelosi (CHRONO), Adam Johnson, Jonathan Lotton, Gregor Mundell, Billy Green, Josh Chambers, Pedro Passamani, Xplodin Apple, Chris Risdal, Graydon Greenlaw, Jonathan Wilson, Steve Steranka, Brian Ochoa, Alex Holbrook, Steven G, Amanda Sweatt, Stan Marsh, Adam Dryden, SP4RK INDUSTRIES, Xander, James Dowling-Healey, Blake Hendrix, Cole McCalmon, Philip Neumeier and Lola Lopez ! Seriously, you guys are awesome! :D
Go to curiositystream.thld.co/klayton_0322 and use the code KLAYTON to save 25% off today, that's only $14.99 a year. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today's video.
Here's my opinion on the Prolouge fro dominion, I think it would make it more paleo accurate if instead of Giganotosaurus they had used Siats Meekerorum. Siats is an carcharodontodsaurid dinosaur that lived in Utah during the Early Cretaceous period. Location wise Siats would probobly make more sense since it's fossils are closer to the Rexes Than the Giganotosaurus fossils that were found in South America. Also I think Moros Intrepidus (a small tyrannosaur also in the prolouge and found in Early Cetaceous Utah) lived with Siats so yeah. What do you think Klayton? I wanna hear your own personal opinion on Siats
@@gavinkailey527 Yes, to replace the Giga by the Siat will be alway an inncuracie because the Siat, like the Giga, never live as the same time than the T.rex. But at least this should be less annacurate at least since he lived at least in the same contiennt and I think more closer to the T-rex than the Giga more far in term of period of life of their respectives species !
In many way, the prologue is a lot worse than the entire JP3 movie (so good for him btw) because all the all the excuses about the dinos, their appearances and the fact that some species that have never coexisted in the past coexist in the present are not applicable in this prologue since humans do not yet exist at this point in the space-time.
But thankfully that this sequence was cut from the movie hiself since he was release on youtube some month ago. But that still inforgivable in many way !
@@dudotolivier6363 touche
@@dudotolivier6363 I knew that already, I just forgot to write it down. Sorry.
@@gavinkailey527 You are not to be sorry. Even if this was with the Siat, even if that in this case still innacurate in every way, it will alway bé better than the Giga because him he live not at the same AND the same place than the T-Rex thus the Siat doesn't live too in the same time but at least live in the same place/continent than him !
It's abberant that for the need of the movie they made an separate fictive american specie of the Giga !
Tyrannosaurus Imperator just sounds so badass. I’m down for this ngl
First reply to goji center haha
Sounds like a new Cadillac model
Cool name but doesn’t roll off the tongue as well as T-Rex
Why are you here
@@nathengriffiths-holland7038 it can be shortened to T.I. 🤣
Honestly, even with a brand new set of species names, people will still refer to the genus as T. rex because it's already deep into popular culture, and new species names take a long time to be absorbed and accepted.
Thats true. But ONE day. Finding a Empress sub species wjile at it and we are even!
I think we should just call it "The Big Toothy Rarry Thing"😂😅🤷😉
Not only would they not be able to tell the difference, but their would be tremendous confusion as well, because the general audience does not know dinosaurs beyond "Oh, that's a meat eater, that's planet eater, that's a long neck dinosaur."
Having multiple Tyrannosaurus would either have them all think they're the same, or else confuse them even more, and that would be the worst thing possible.
I'd call them all "Sharp Tooth"
@@ryuken193 I think you’re underestimating the intelligence of the general public. If it’s part of the plot to explain that they’re like “cousin species” to T. rex that’s a great way to launch them into the mainstream
Tyrannosaurus imperator is one of the most badass scientific names I’ve ever heard
Yeah I agree, tho I think Tyrannotitan still edges it out
@@Buttikoferiii I think the chubutensis part of it ruins it for me
@@Buttikoferiii tyrannotitan was smaller than Tyrannosaurus.
AMONGUS
Counterargument, saurophaganax maximus, meaning "largest lord of the lizard eaters"
I just recently spoke with a paleontologist who brought up this debate, and I don't know what to think. Some people say they don't want to "de-throne the king" but it is also just an animal, and if classifying T-rex into multiple groups is more accurate then I would say that is the best thing to do.
As a paleontologist. Nah. Most paleontologists don't have a good understanding of what entails a species. A fossil "species" is not the same thing as a "real" species. Without a very large sample size it can be near impossible to differentiate between species within a genus
@@TheMesosuchus Until they get a large sample base, it seams like certain palaeontologists doing what some always do... want a "new" species. At the moment it's like certifying a large human, dwarf or a human with giantism as a different species.
Everyone will just still call them a Trex anyway.
How do you know theyre different species, not the same species but different morphology. Such as age, gender, or polymorphism?
@@k_tess That is a reason why there is a debate over this.
Feelings on it aside, I gotta admit that Tyrannosaurus Imperator sounds pretty cool.
Totally agree. Doesnt Ark Survival Evolved technically explore that?
İ respect your opinion but i think its lame emperor penguşns always come to my mind when i read that
It's the tyrannosaurus's older edgy brother who wears leather trenchcoats
And a reference to the old name of trex Dynomasaurus Imperator
Tyrannotitan still holds the candle for the most badass name imo tho
I love Robert Bakker's reply to Jack Horner on the death of Robert Burke, "I told you that T Rex was a hunter!"
Yeah, took the shade like a champ
Its teeth, head size and advance d sense of smell says big Rex was a hunter who would scavenge if they came across a carcass all predators do that, even modern ones like the Komodo dragon.
@@sukhastings4200 Komodo Dragons ALSO possess the ability to run down almost anything that they want to sink their teeth into
@@sukhastings4200 jack horner is considered a crackpot now a days for a reason
@@sukhastings4200 what about their lil arms 😆
Cool that you make a video on this *VERY* controversal topic!
I personally feel like the differences are too small to say that those T.rexes are now different species. You probably find more differences between us humans, than between those T.rex skeletons. Also, knowing that "we found 2 new species of T.rex" is one hell of a headline, especially in scientific fields, makes the whole idea kinda suspicious.
But maybe we find more evidence to support this idea in the future. After all, it's 2022, everything is possible, lol.
Yeeeaaaah pretty click-baity. Especially since they keep trying to find "new" tyrannosaurs, only for it to be debunked a few years later as just being a T. Rex at a different life stage. They're also working on reworking Compsagnathus, as it's come to light that quite a few "compy" specimens are in fact just infants of a larger species.
What evidence? Bones give nothing to differienate sub species. Paleontology is 90 percent guessing nonscinece and 10 percent had science
@@NathanielTavington and what is their evidence for this? It is all guessing
@@cpenner7086 "90% guessing" that's certainly not how paleontology works. Sure, *some* guessing is required with very incomplete specimens, like Therizinosaurus, but saying that all the work done on animals like T.rex is about 90% guessing isn't doing the science behind it any justice.
Yeah, this paper is a bit of a mess in how it was set up, and there are significant issues with the characters they use as diagnostic in their paper. Essentially, if you were to utilize the same/similar criteria against extant species, or even our own species even, you'd be breaking up modern Homo sapiens into 3 or more species. The characteristics the authors cite are very much and probably more within the natural variation of any particular species. Plus, some paleonotolgists I've talked to have said that there are some chronology and morphology issues with the specimens too, when trying to assign them based on morphology and time. And, some of the specimens they had cited had more of a blending or intermediate of the character states that they admit were weak in trying to assign certain specimens into one of their described species.
Now if they had cited other characters, like differences in possible display features on their skulls to compare and contrast while splitting and grouping them, or a large number of fossil mummies of Tyrannosaurus spanning 68-66 MA showing significant variations in their morphologies of soft tissues and such, then we can actually have a good argument for whether or not T. rex should be split into 2 or more species. I recall the Dissecting With Emily series talking about evidence for facial display features on the snouts of some T. rexes that had long been mistaken for bite wounds until recent analyses. Could this be evidence of sexual dimorphism or maybe speciation? I've been waiting a LONG while to hear more about further studies coming out of the Witmer Lab about it... Hopefully they'll actually publish something on it soon.
Could T. rex, T. imperator and T. regina prove valid some day? It's possible, but we need much, much stronger evidence that we can mostly agree really deviates from the realm of natural variation.
Now what I would find more intriguing about the characteristics they cited reguarding dental morphology is what could this imply about T. rex's feeding habits possibly evolving from 68-66 MA? Or did these morphologies change in response to something other than feeding behavior? Those are some intriguing questions to ask too
Copy that! Take for instance! The Siberian tiger and Bengal Tiger Differences!
I watched EDGE’s video regarding this controversy and I agree with his conclusion that there isn’t enough evidence to support the hypothesis of three species of tyrannosaurus.
Yeah but tyrannosaurus imperator sounds badass so your point in invalid
@@cookiesnugglez7318 I can agree that the name sounds badass, but again, there’s currently not enough evidence to split the T-Rex into three separate species and it would be dishonest to do so.
In my opinion couldn't this be due to the way that T. Rex grows. I remember hearing that younger T. Rexes were of a slimmer build alloying for more agility hunting style and as they grew older and larger they developed more bulky builds suited to a marathon hunting style. Taking this into account couldn't the differences just have been from the circumferences of the growths of individuals?
Exactly? There are other animals in the world that start out slightly different as newborns and juveniles then their adult form.
When mentioning the adult/juvenile differences and naming I'm reminded of something Jack Horner said on a Ted Talk about the "shape-shifting" Pachycephalosaurus; "Scientists like to name things." While discussing the variation in names of earlier dinosaurs he said; "the early museums wanted a bigger dinosaur than the others so they would name them differently. Each museum wanted a dinosaur that was bigger and more impressive, nobody was looking for baby dinosaurs." Although focusing on the cranial ontogeny of dinosaurs like Nanotyrannus and Tyrannosaurs he both described the Stygimoloch and Dracorex as juvenile Pachycephalosaurs based on the development and counted the teeth to say Nanotyrannus was just a juvenile Tyrannosaur.
Despite the age of the video it's likely he'd have used different parameters for classifying "T. Rex," "T. Regina, and "t. Imperator" as separate branches or cousins of the same family, but based on the article I read it merely referenced the paleontologists' description of a theoretical "slimming" of the built to make some more capable hunters with either gracile or robust builds
This is an argument that has always been there in terms of taxonomy: "What defines a species?" It's quite the extensive debate and most scientists disagree. A lot of people conflate "new species" with similar species with slightly altered morphology (often so they can say "hey I discovered a new species"). Lots of reptiles and fish fall into this debate since there's so many factors going into their morphology and so much variance amongst members of the same species, with some requiring genetic analysis to say if two individuals are in fact the same species. I wrote my thesis on this subject in college and it's an entire rabbit hole to fall into. Personally, I say that "species" is more of a unit of measurement rather than a definitive descriptor. We can say "oh this individual has just enough overlap and sexual viability amongst themselves to be labelled a species, rather than saying this definitively IS a new species. It's a very complex topic with lots of nuance, especially when it comes to paleontological specimens. Without having looked at the study as of this comment, I'd say this is likely another example of this phenomenon.
Nice Video and Explaining of the Tyrannosaurus characters in the Jurassic Series from Jurassic Park to Jurassic World Dominion and I pretty much agree with everything you said in the video and it was amazing.
The imperator debate has been around since the mid 90's. What I am curious about is if that the proposed classification holds (which I doubt it will) then we will likely have to relook at Nanotyrannus as well. Many of the same reasons the paleontologists want to split the genus would also validify nanotyrannus as well if accepted. Likewise the criticisms for said genus would also serve as a serious issue with the proposed seperating of rex into three species.
If Apatosaurs can be classified as related to the Brontosaurus before being deemed a separate species and then 5-8 years ago being reassessed as actually be a valid name for a separate species it's likely the entire Tyrannosauridae group will be reassessed just to clear up whether they're all juveniles, cousins, or separate "new" species
Very interesting video regarding the Tyannosaurus species and I got to say Tyannosaurus imperator sounds amazing.
I was honestly expecting this to happen... now just the question of which Tyrannosaurus is Rexy based on?
Good question
Rexy is based on AMNH 5027 the T-rex specimen from the American Museum of Natural History, which is said to be a T-rex. the holotype of the proposed T. imperator is the Sue specimen and the holotype of the proposed T. regina is the Wankel Rex specimen. Again, these two are proposed as an idea not a fact.
It depends, the animatronic looks more like Stan, which is likely a Regina, while the computer generated model is more like Sue, which is likely an imperator.
I know that im not a paleontologist but i have noticed a lot of people saying "it makes sense because of differences in the skeletons" but these are animals that lived and died over 66million years and have been in the ground for that time a change in the ground can change a skeleton around . Also they were not perfect its like deformitys in animals and people today not everything is perfect like how some people have 1 kidney . Changes in an animal can affect bone structure . Injurys can also change the look of the bones aswell sometimes we can see if a bone is damaged from injury but we cant always tell if something is damaged from injury we are talking about animals that lived so long ago that our minds can barely perceive
So in that respect alone shouldn't there be serval species?
I’m somewhat getting myself into basic paleontology stuff like dinosaurs genus for example from this video like triceratops having two genus (Horridus and Prorsus) and Allosaurus having a couple of genus (Fragillis, jimmadseni, europaenus, and maximumus well know as Saurophaganax). This T.Rex classification of Rex, Imperator, and Regina (those two last names sound very badass) is very interesting and fascinating, but it might be confusing for a casual dinosaur fan.
Yes, I heard about this and I'm ok with it. It's cool to have a T Rex King, Queen and Emperor!
I'm going to put this bluntly, none of us that work in the paleo field/community give this paper any credence.
There is no debate, this paper has no solif facts behind it, just a theory.
And a stupid one at that.
No two animals look the same, even on a skeletal level.
And to expect that to happen with an animal as successful and widespread as tyrannosaurs is nothing but a fools wish.
Until there is any true proof of an actual subspecies then all this paper is to us is dust in the wind, just like jack Horner.
To be fair I think it makes sense that there could be subspecies, and I'm willing to believe it when they bring more solid evidence, also t imperator sounds fucking badass
@@cookiesnugglez7318 it easily could be individual variation or age like us humans .
@@vigneshmuthukumar4264 I never denied that, it could be a lot of things including sexual dimorphism, but that doesn't mean that's what it is, there's tons of animals with sub species, prehistoric creatures shouldn't be any different, so on paper yes this could be a thing, but until more evidence comes forward we'll just have to wait and see
My opinion: Needs more evidence BEFORE splitting them into three species. There has to be VERY significant differences other than size (does not have to be obvious).
After all, both living and extinct animals have different individual variants. One can be bigger or smaller as adults, but the same species.
If evolution is true, then literally the odds are we've never even found the same dinosaur twice. So two triceratops, even found near another one is likely not even related because of the rarity of them, and the necessity of different variations. Anyone who thinks they are related to each other is literally fighting against evolution.
I personally attribute the different raptor colors for each of the films as just a simple desire to change up the look of the creatures for each new movie, so it's "slicker" looking (and plus you can then sell all the kids new dino action figures as well with each new film released). But maybe there is a deeper meaning behind it that I don't know about. Just ordered myself a copy of the original trilogy visual guide so maybe there's info in it about the raptor variations.
3:54
Well A: He was thrilled by that scene.
And B: He technically appeared in the Redemption conic (albeit spelled Backer with a c, not a k).
This just sounds like people wanting to make a name for themselves with some silly stunt. In the end, species, subspecies, and genera are very arbitrary things in the first place; in paleontology, particularly, it seems like people are way too quick to name new species or genera over the slightest of variations that wouldn't constitute a new species in the modern world of zoological classification. For example, Tarbosaurus and Zuchengtyrannus, if existed today, would probably be considered just different species of Tyrannosaurus; but as I said, it's all very arbitrary in the end, nature couldn't give two tosses what humans try to classify stuff as, life is constantly changing, mutating, and adapting all the time and what exactly the cut-off point for a new species or subspecies is, is not very well defined.
There's an artist who actually does JP species variants on devinart named talisaurs its actually very well done you should check them out!
This sounds like a great idea to keep it very interesting, I do think we need freaky dead eyed feathers dinos, and all sorts. Most of all I remember playing "carnivore" or whatever the dino hunting game was for pc (debugup)lol that was truly terrifying having and I would love to experience it in this medium and franchise as opposed to another new universe etc
Want to say I love the animations that come along with your videos. I hope that it's been the same guy all these years because its been awesome to see artistic progress and improvements in the animations. The spinosaurus especially looks awesome. The video is great as well but I wanted to leave a compliment for your artist. Love the videos and can't wait to hear your thoughts on the new movie!
The reasoning for the suggested split feels legit: Imperator is an older species the split into Rex, a stockier species, and Regina, a slimmer one. But whether the variation between specimens is enough to indicate different species is up for people far more familiar with such things than me.
That said, I don't think reclassifying them will make much if any difference except to people who love being pedantic.
...
And people who make dinosaur movies and videogames who would take these differences and run with them.
The study wasn't done too well...you have to take into the account of individuality within a species. He didn't even try to go for subspecies he went straight into there being 2 different species. It's really not enough specimens to determine this and again this is a big jump.
If they can analyze Spinosaurus and either split them into different species or alter their description into "an aquatic predator" there's always a chance this will become a pair of subspecies; Tyrannosaurus Rex Imperator and/or T. rex ssp. regina. Unless someone can truly genotype all the fossils to determine which was older or younger this is just educated guessing, but seems more likely to be morphological variability if not subspecies
Here is my own opinion on this: there is probably at least one other species besides T.Rex, but three is just taking it a bit too far and plus a lot of things are just individual variation. It is really hard to tell how many species an extinct genus from millions of years ago has, because no human has ever seen them other than their fossils. There is so much of the unknown and it's very difficult to tell what is what and whether something is a species or not. But I can see tyrannosaurus at least having one more species besides Rex (my personal favorite name of the two new species is imperator).
@Leo the Anglo-Eastasian oh, thanks.
It's possible, but there needs to be evidence.
@@nicholaslienandjaja1815 yes,
The differences between species and subspecies is still very hotly contested among living animals.
@@kathyl9222 yes, that is why I said nothing about subspecies.
Tyrant Lizard King...
Tyrant Lizard Queen...
Tyrant Lizard Emperor...
Tyrant Lizard Kai...
Tyrant Lizard Grand Kai...
Tyrant Lizard Supreme Kai...
Tyrant Lizard Grand Supreme Kai...
Sorry, I couldn't help it! Seriously though, I am legitimately curious about this and want to learn more about it!
I’m sorry but the Tyrant Lizard Emperor is the most metal and badass thing I have ever heard
Kind of reminds me of the Indi game The Isle, where you could be a regular T-Rex, a bigger T-rex called the Magna-Rex, or an even BIGGER Hyperendrocain Rex or Hypo-Rex. I wonder if maybe that's the reason why they have come out with these different classifications for the Rex, it's the same species but just different sizes...
Idk. I feel like the differences between T. Rex and T. Regina are sexual dimorphism (granted if they are found in the same formation).
In that case, this would be like if they classified a lion and a lioness as 2 different species.
Not a palaeontologist, just love dinosaurs so whatever I say should be taken with a grain of salt.
the new species of T-rex seem to be built on a few select differences which are small details such as incisor tooth and femur size, if we can go with this logic Homo Sapiens should be split up into different species, we have dwarfs and giants so the argument for of “it’s not a birth variation there are multiple specimens” is thrown out the window with how we vary in size. And like T-Rex we are a very successful species so variation of size, teeth, and bones is common place. In general this theory is placed on the fact that these small differences can be chalked up to different species. And again I’m not a palaeontologist so take my words with a grain of salt.
I think paper about three different species is kind of Overkill when it comes to trying to classify them. And it's most likely there were different subspecies within the same genus but not different species. When you look at tigers we know that there are different subspecies we look at their bones and if you compare their bone you can't tell the difference but we know that they are different in some aspect.
*hypothetical subspecies labeling this is not official but this is basically how the paper should have labeled these Tyrannosaurus subspecies:*
Tyrannosaurus Rex imperator.
Tyrannosaurus Rex Regina.
Tyrannosaurus Rex gigas.
There's only one species within this Genus. Maybe this will push the paleontology Community to look into this and consider maybe subspecies of T-Rex.
I kinda really like the idea of Tyrannosaurus Rex, Tyrannosaurus Imperator and Tyrannosaurus Regina. It seems plausible and would explain differences in the skeletons
you are speaking right out of my mind. In relation to these topics. I also think it's way too early to make these 2 other tyrannosaurs official.
I see this issue being more like a subspecies problem than a major species one. Just like we don't shout "Run, you're being chased by a Bengal Tiger as not to be mistaken for an Indochinese Tiger!" I don't think T-Rex as a cultured name will be changing. People still can't agree on if Nano-Tyrannus was a juvenile Rex or its own species so whatever T-Rex is, it's going to continue to be the beloved, iconic dinosaur until undeniable evidence is provided.
It's recent like new probable discovery and the truly one paleontological main subject now for a few weeks. But for now, I prefer to precise that, it's still a possible hypothesis who need to be definitively confirm.
Even if there are high pertinent evidences and arguments to make this possible discovery, there many others conditions and variables and a still large rate of chance that the evidences in question, about the subtles differences about the different studied specimens at the base of this hypothesis, can be explain by others explanations who not put in place 3 separate specie, but about the age, the exclusive difference between specimens of the same specie, habitat, environment, diet etc...
So yes, there still chance that this hypothesis turns out to be invalid and ultimately just becomes an update on the differences between the different T-rex populations (which is still important, interesting and cool, even if not as big a discovery as if we discovered actually three new species apart from the genus).
But in all the case, as long as at least one of them, the one adn our beloved T. rex still a valid specie, all is fine, ascpecially for the Jurassic Park/World Franchise!
That the most important, let be all agree about it!
9:03 That's pretty much what I was kind of thinking:
My personal explanation for a Giganotosaurus specimen in North America is that through genetic drift, a few Giganotosaurus manage to travel to North America from South America where the Gigas left behind went extinct. Since only a sample of the gene pool of the entire species survived and dug roots into their new home, through millions of years of evolution diverted from the original species into the second recorded species of Giga, the NA Giga (you can make up whatever scientific name you want for it). Since there was already an established populations of Tyrannosaur species (Tyrant rex/regina/impertor, Albertosaurus, Gorosaurus, etc) they could not really become the dominate predator so they became a so-called "rare species" mostly hunting for Alamosaurus and evolved to be larger to compete with the Tyrannosaurs to make up for the lack of numbers, even though encounters were rare. Why they aren't fossils found in North American of them? Less than one-tenth of 1% of animal species that have ever lived become fossils, and even fewer have been found. Then again InGen would've need at least some fossils for a complete specimen, maybe they somehow got what they needed from one mosquito trapped in amber. Then again amber is a bit separate from the traditional fossil record.
Sorry for all the reading you had go through, but that's my imagination.
Either that, or in the Jurassic universe, North and South America had become joined sooner?
I'm not sure what to make of this myself. I'm no paleontologist, but I am pursuing a degree in ichthyology (study of fish). It could be the same dinosaur changed to adapt to different conditions in different environments (for example, steelhead and rainbow trout are the same fish species but steelhead are adapted to live in the ocean) or it could be separate species evolving from a common parent based on their separate environments (for example, the North American yellow perch and European perch are very very similar species that developed independently from one another via a common ancestor; or as another example, Russian sturgeon vs the White sturgeon we have in the US). We have to remember that during the time of T. Rex North America was effectively cut in half by a huge inland sea, sort of like the Red Sea in the Middle East today. That could have forced two tyrannosaur populations to develop into two separate species. Or they could still be the same species adapted to two different environments. I think we would have to have more evidence to know for sure.
So basically, we now we have a trio of Tyrannosaurus Rex, just like the trio of Baryonyx from Camp Cretaceous.
Not exactly has these two new species are just proposed as they are just an idea, not a fact.
While i'm somewhat impartial about T.regina, i have no problem admitting Tyrannosaurus Imperator sounds wicked cool!
This is basically the Pluto/Planet/Dwarf Planet debate
the whole tyrannosaurs being different species theory is interesting it needs a lot more research to be done for sure but the drama around it is unnecessary if science stops asking questions it's in trouble.
I think the version idea is the only way to fix the inaccuracy's in jp/jw that way the people that want movie monsters can get what they want and people that want dinosaurs can get what they want as well so im glad it's a thing that already exists in the lore just don't try to pass off monster dinos as being accurate in a pre-historic flash back again that crossed a line imo.
Great idea. I would love to see Allosaurus jimmadseni, Allosaurus fragilis, Allosaurus europaeus or Saurophaganax maximus in new movies. Especially made by Ingen´s competitiors.
Always making sure I leave a like on Klayton’s new videos!
I've noticed something in JP2..the raptors didn't know how to open doors. You could see the two raptors digging underneath the front door while Malcolm was in the car...the one raptor went around back and the other disappeared somewhere while the 3rd was trying to get into the vehicle he was in. He ran up to the front door and turned the knob and opened the door to get inside (the door pushed open). The other 2 raptors were slamming the door and couldn't get it open. Which I find odd...But, also where did that 2nd raptor go? Why did it stop digging when the other raptor went around back?
Considering the dimophism that exist already in the trex simply because of age. It not hard to look at things as leg length and skull shape as another example of that difference vs establishing a diff species.
Omg I need to get one of your mugs! So good 👍👍
From everything ive heard about this there are ALOT of discrepancies in this theory and its not gaining much support in the paleontology community
From what I know of the paper, some people who worked on it took their names off, the studies weren't conducted very well, so personally I'll be sticking with one species of Tyrannosaurus.
Loved your insight! Love your videos!
Species is such a fuzzy thing in actual zoology, and really almost impossible to determine through fossils. There's just not enough information to go on to be really certain of specialization between different fossils with slight differentiation. Some animals can have an enormous range of differences in phenotype despite being genetically members of the same species, just look at domesticated dogs and cats for example.
The reverse has also been pushed for with Mark Goodwin and John Horner saying that multiple genus of dinosaurs are all actually the same genus just at different stages of their life cycle.
I honestly would love to see JP directors to show other sides to the stories for example, Eric’s 8 weeks on his own, I think that would be a great idea
That would probably be a great subject for like an animated short set in the universe. Something like the boys diabolical or Star Wars visions for Jurassic World.
Paleo grad student here- The biological species concept provides a useful predictive framework, all other species concepts (including the anatomical species concept used by the authors) is just a proxy for the drift that comes from the genetic isolation required by a biological species concept. So the next question becomes: is the variance seen in T. rex femoral robusticity an accurate proxy for genetic isolation? I would argue that it's not because anatomical variance derives from variance in developmental plasticity or metabolic rate, which is just not an autapomorohy that is compelling enough to justify splitting the species. It is mostly interesting that T. rex shows a greater degree of population variance, but that variance doesn't need to genetically isolate subpopulations of the species.
Put another way- humans show a huge degree of size variance but we can still interbreed easily, and so we are all one species. The tooth count number is more peculiar, but folks like Brussatte and Holtz (who have more expertise in this) have long known that tyrannosaur tooth counts are always super variable, and they're not too worried about it. Again, it's interesting but it doesn't constitute enough variance to justify splitting the species.
One simple way to look at it is this. Brown Bears. You have Kodiaks that primarily live in the coastal regions of the northwest US all the way to Alaska. Grizzly Bears that live primarily inland from the US northwest most of Canada and Alaska. Then you have the Eurasian Brown Bear that mostly inhabits Russia and the Northern UK. These bears are quite similar in appearance, but their average size diet and territories vary greatly.
For now, it's still T-Rex. Technically, Ark sort of goes off a sub branch of Tyrannosaurus Rex, but it's still T-Rex until proven otherwise.
How does ark go sub branch?
@@canoncalloway3705 On a wiki for Ark Survival Evolved, it says Tyrannosaurus dominum, though everyone refers to it commonly as T-Rex. For now though, in general, T-Rex is still T-Rex until more proof proves otherwise.
@@tyrantking3193
Ark only does that to explain why their T-Rex looks and acts different, they take a page from Jurassic Park with everything being genetically engineered. Its still a T-Rex the same way ol Rexy is a T-Rex, technically not a true sub-species but a genetic abnormality.
@@ZombieBarioth yeah, fair enough. T-Rex is still T-Rex to me personally.
Man you have my dream job. I’m not even jealous you do this very well, I appreciate your passion for dinosaurs. I’ve watched your stuff forever but I am officially subscribing.
I know there's a lot of controversy surrounding this, but we must keep in mind that it's often the smallest pieces of evidence that can redefine the way we think in science. I for one believe that the re-identification of Rex into 3 species is revolutionary in the field of Paleantology. It's been met with a lot of push back, but so has a lot of theories in the past that have turned out to be true. Even if you think it's bogus, keep your mind open, anything is possible when studying ancient life because we as humans don't know everything there is to know.
I am the same, I like the idea but we just need more data.
And I really wish Jurassic would go more scientifically accurate like in the novels.
As a Lost World fan, I like the idea of seeing two Tyrannosaurs on screen again someday.
near the end of this video you mentioned you weren't quite sure why the Raptors in JP3 looked different from the Lost World, I don't recall what website it was, but when Jurassic World was being advertised, they came out with statement detailing everything that happened behind the scenes since Lost World, about Masroni acquiring the island and sending Wu to Site B to experiment. He was supposed to make dinos with feathers but only managed to make the ones with quills, he also made the Spino without Masroni finding out about it. Shortly after wards they had to abandon Site B but I don't recall why. Then a few years later JP3 happens.
I just figured the different specific designs, like with the raptors, was due to simple variation. like, they don't have ONE raptor sample they're using, and with them breeding they'd simply have variation. That, and with how they repair the damaged code using frog DNA. I mean, it's why the velociraptors all have gigantism. The lack of feathers is because we didn't know about the feathers by the time the first film came out. But they ALL have gigantism. Like the dilophosaur was either a juvenile, or has dwarfism.
Paleontologists have already mentioned that the t Rex roar in the jurrasic park movies is likely totally inaccurate , its vocal chords would not have been able to tolerate such a noise and they think it most likely sounded like the current day turkey . Obviously that wouldn't be too cool for the movies
Wasn't this paper not published in scientific journals because it failed peer review? The guy just took it to non-science publishers to put it out.
Due to the dominion giganotosaurus size compared to rexy I like to picture it as a fictional species called giganotosaurus maximus.
Imagine if jurassic park 3 was actually good.
In 1997, I was a volunteer for the University of Notre Dame under Keith Rigby Jr. when they found a large T-Rex specimen. Even back then, he was thinking it was a different species he was going to call Tyrannosaurus Imperator.
Rigby wasn't a fan of Bakker either. Lol
I think it's interesting there could be more Tyrannosaurs some species do look identical at first glance, but it'll take time to see this becomes a full theory fledged rather than stay a hypothesis.
I hope there will be more studies on it. If it turns out to be the case, I'm not surprised if there are subspecies. Considering Tyrannosaurus are find in several different locations, there could possibly exist subspecies if these are distinct populations.
Isn’t the latest Spinosaurus theorized to have a paddle-like tail and is both a land & water animal that walks on two legs.
I also heard that the Spinosaurus couldn’t have walked on all fours, at least not for long, because of how it’s wrists/hands were connected.
T-Rex being renamed to T. regina & T. imperator? Yeah, not my cup of tea. Stick with T-Rex.
Could you possibly do a video on why they keep making the T-Rex lose fights? It’s really annoying me how they keep giving the Rex the shaft.
The issue with this is that although it would be awesome for those of us who enjoy and know dinosaurs beyond the average individual, the issue arises is that the average individual would not care, not see the difference, or worst of all (which will more than likely happen) would become extremely confused.
If you have three different variations of Tyrannosaurus on the screen, that is going to completely confuse the audience, much in the same way of multiple different Spinosaurus or whatever the case may be.
We can't just go spawning all of these new dinosaurs and expecting it's going to be something good when it will probably cause more problems and confusion than anything else.
I think we all understood the JP series took artistic liberties with the dinos, when they decided to make taller than human sized raptors with no feathers.
Here's my opinion on the Prolouge for dominion, I think it would make it more paleo accurate if instead of Giganotosaurus they had used Siats Meekerorum. Siats is an carcharodontodsaurid dinosaur that lived in Utah during the Early Cretaceous period. Location wise Siats would probobly make more sense since it's fossils are closer to the Rexes Than the Giganotosaurus fossils that were found in South America. Also I think Moros Intrepidus (a small tyrannosaur also in the prolouge and found in Early Cetaceous Utah) lived with Siats so yeah. What do you think Klayton? I wanna hear your own personal opinion on Siats
Watching the T.Rex tear apart the car always made me think….. wouldn’t the sudden sharp metal parts cut the soft inner mouth? I mean it slammed it’s jaws into the thick wheel.
Not the rubber, that’s the tire. The wheel is what it’s on, has the brakes, rotor, etc…. Like wouldn’t that HURT? I’d imagine it would break a tooth
Saturday night is Klayton night.....I'm stoked as always!
This is like pointing out the difference between a Bengal tiger and a Siberian tiger, although they're two separate species, not enough of a difference to throw a fit over
The problem with real World Palaeontology is different scientists interpret the limited information or new information comes along. They used to believe T. rex was covered in scales, then it was feathered and now they say it was covered in scales. They used to believe Velociraptors were scaly now they say they had feathers. In 10 years time they may change their minds?
The way this is described feels less like a different species, and more like a different breed of Rex. It makes more sense,at least to me, that different parts of the world would've had different breeds of Rex, each with unique traits or behaviors that make them more adept at surviving in certain biomes. It's like the different breeds of dog, each one is different and suits a different environment(Beagles for tracking, Saint Bernards for winter environments, Corgi's for hearding, etc)
I do love on the three Tyrannosaurus species plus the upcoming Jurassic World Dominion. Imagine if InGen created two Tyrannosaurus species: T-Imperator and T-Regina added their attraction in Jurassic Park/World it'll be fun to see for the first time getting along with T-Rex as well.
I think t rex having three species is very interesting and cool to see in a documentary or a movie like a t rex fight scene where a king is fighting a emperor for dominance.
Tyrannosaurus queen sounds like a drag name lmfao 🤣
Idk I'm always down for more tyrannosaurus. I agree the theory is too new to really debate, but is interesting none the less. Maybe there will be different destinations for the tyrant lizards based upon size instead of a whole separate species given to them. It seems plausible to me because there are many, many different tyrannosaurs.
Tyrannosaurus Rex is my favorite dinosaur of all time!
Got to remember in Jurassic park it’s said multiple times that the dinosaur don’t look how they should, their cloned using other animals dna to fill in the gaps so there will never be accurate to what they should look like so the whole naming thing doesn’t matter because the t Rex we see in the movies technically shouldn’t even be called T-Rex, it’s closer to being a subspecies also there are animals with different features that are named the same thing so I don’t think it will or should matter all that much
Im in the boat of needing more concrete proof that it could be split into 3 species. If we're going off just straight possibilities I'd rather not split them up because what if we do and then later down the line paleontologists turn out to be wrong and there is no reason to have trex be split into 3 species
There are already many animals that have several different species that are apart of the same group so why is it so hard for dinosaurs to have the same.
Wish you would have discussed/shown the differences between the three....
Tyrannosaurus Regina sounds like a no nonsense dinosaur from Brooklyn who has to make to the station before 9.
So basically T rex sub species like with Rathalos and Rathian from monster hunter...I like it.
0:00 I know that
I chuckled when you said you were a Lost World fanboy. I picked up Jurassic Park on bluray and paid extra not to get the second movie, cause the triple pack was cheaper. I thought 2 and 3 were absolutely horrible. But to each their own.
Klayton where are you? We need another upload ASAP. Need more dino content 😩😤
Not every piece of "Fiction" needs to be 100% accurate
Because it will end up awkward or confusing if it's TOO accurate.
@@nicholaslienandjaja1815 yet more media sites want even more science accuracy in films.
Modern entertainment needs more mystery and fiction.
To Quote G’Kar: “I fear the day where we’ve explained everything”
I'm for this new debate
I personally think Tyrannosaurus Rex would be the scavanger and the ones we see in The Lost World. While Tyrannosaurus Imperator and Regina would be hunters.
Or the rexs we see In Jurassic Park films could all be Imperator and Regina. And the scavenger Rex's could be the earlier specimens of Tyrannosaurus Rex like Desplatosaurus and Tarbosaurus.
Plus it gives me a character idea for the book I'm writing :D