HOME | DD
RAPHTOR β Tyrannosaurus bataar
by-nc-nd
#animals #feathers #paleoart #tarbosaurus #tarbosaurusbataar #tyrannosaurusbataar #feathereddinosaur
Published: 2016-10-27 12:38:56 +0000 UTC; Views: 28152; Favourites: 702; Downloads: 183
Redirect to original
Description
Can't help but draw more Dinosaurs, they're such nice stress relivers
. And well, yes 'Tyrannosaurus bataar' aka Tarbosaurus bataar. Depending on who's asked either is correct. And with the discovery of a very closely related animal not very long ago and some recent studies suggests they're more closely related.I pretty much buy the idea that it's a member of the genus Tyrannosaurus despite the few 'significant' differences.Think of it this way, modern animals from the genus Panthera (Tigers, Lions, Jaguars, Leopards, Snow Leopards) and Canis (Wolves(including dogs), Coyotes, Jackals, Ethipian wolves) These things are under their respective genus and they are all different species each of these things have features and structures that differ them from the others. This is the funny thing I don't see when scientists name extinct animals.The slightest or even few differences makes it a different genus than the other. Hopefully I'm wrong with that impression.
It doesn't mean that Tarbosaurus is the same species as T.rex but would be under the same genus which is Tyrannosaurus. Just as Panthera Tigris and Panthero Leo aren't the same species.Β
I could've written a whole blog about this but my English and grammar as well as my writing in all honesty sucks as it is not my native language. This is just my own personal observation as a general animal nerd/lover who somehow gives a lil shoot about biology and taxonomy and should never be taken further beyond that.
Related content
Comments: 37
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
For some reason, all your paleoart has this extra thing to it that makes it extremely life-like, while being somewhat less detailed than some artworks that donΒ΄t have this life-like touch to them.
Very impressive.
π: 1 β©: 0
Interesting depiction.
I agree that Tyrannosaurus bataar is likely more accurate than Tarbosaurus bataar. You are right in that those who name extinct animals often seem a bit too eager to come up with new genera.
π: 0 β©: 0
My impression with paleontologists grouping them into separate genus- is because paleontologists have to deal with animals that lived for longer time spans than animals that live in today's world, and as such those millions of years would probably make them genetically distinct enough to make them a separate genus.
π: 0 β©: 0
I like how you put fleshy dinosaur lips on it instead of reptilian like scaly lips which most artists put in. This is really nice though.
π: 0 β©: 1
Its cool but not proven yet 100% But i like it too!
π: 0 β©: 0
I just love how detailed the your drawings are, it really strikes me how these things were once alive and walked around doing animal things. How wondrous it is that these giant creatures walked the same earth as us once upon a time.
Beautiful art as always.
π: 0 β©: 0
In 2016 we are pretty sure both Tarbosaurus and/or Zhuchengtyrannus are far enough from Tyrannosaurus to be a separated genus
π: 0 β©: 0
I think Tarbo's distinct, mainly becauuse how differentΒ the sub-adults and juveniles look. (I'm also a lumper, so this is different for me.)
π: 0 β©: 0
Pretty bold calling Tarbosaurus Tyrannosaurus
π: 0 β©: 1
Not really 
π: 0 β©: 1
It's pretty rare these days but maybe it will turn out to be a third species of Tyrannosaurus
π: 0 β©: 1
Tyrannosaurus brinkmani, a potential species for the Rex remains found further south in Texas, New Mexico etc.
π: 0 β©: 1
How is it any different than rex?
π: 0 β©: 1
Same reason a Tiger is different from a Lion I suppose. Ask about it.
π: 0 β©: 0
I absolutely love your dinosaur drawings <3 Keep doing them - they are so so so so great - I have to admit I'm out of the dinosaur sprecies stuff for too long to understand completely what you mean, but I'm absolutely happy just with watching you doing your awesome work Β
π: 0 β©: 0
The details and the shading make me want to cry about what a miserable shader I am :'D
This is absolutely beautiful! The background contrasts perfectly with the colors of the dinosaur <3
π: 0 β©: 1
That looks stunning and interesting as well <3
π: 0 β©: 0
Yeah, I don't agree with the lizard lips. Besides, dinosaurs are barely even related to them.
π: 0 β©: 0
I'd make an intelligent, well-informed point about the naming of dinosaur genera and the Tarbosaurus vs. Tyrannosaurus debate, but all the things I wanted to say, have already been said, so I'll just compliment your awesome painting. And yeah, I'd prefer if it's Tyrannosaurus bataar, if only because that would justify everyone using the species name in Tyrannosaurus rex and because more Tyrannosaurus can only be a good thing (unless they're chasing you, in which case not so much).
π: 0 β©: 0
And thanks to the naming system we could never rename it into something like Tyrannosaurus Regina (Tyrant Lizard Queen. Tyrannosaurus Rex = Tyrant Lizard king, Tyrannosaurus Regina = Tyrant Lizard Queen, I mean, come on it fits so perfectly ahh darn you scientist!Β Β ).
π: 0 β©: 0
Nice to see someone who has similar ideas about Tarbosaurus/Tyrannosaurus bataar. I've heard that if you asked a beetle researcher how many dinosaur genera there should be, it would be one, and if you asked a dinosaur researcher how many beetle genera there should be, it would be several million. While of course this is an extreme example, it would be nice if researchers, at least for tetrapods, came up with an exact definition for a genus, based on not only physical characteristics, but time and location as well.
But I do think T. rex and T. bataar are likely the same genus. I mean, look at tigers and jaguars! They've got pretty much as many skeletal differences as T. rex and T. bataar, and a MUCH greater distance from each other, and are still the same genus! The way I see it, either T. rex and T. bataar are the same genus, or Panthera tigris and Panthera onca aren't.Β
Β But, I suppose, at the end of the day, these are all just labels we create for creatures nature gave no name to. If people can tell exactly what animal someone is talking about, then maybe their categories shouldn't be changed. Such a complicated topic...
π: 0 β©: 1
Tyrannosaurus bataar was the first name coined for this species and I believe it should be taken as priority
π: 0 β©: 0
Nice work! I like the bulk and thoat pouch
Naming a genus is a very subjective thing. There aren't really any rules for it so it all depends on the field of biology. With extinct animals it's most of the time the slightest difference that makes something a different genus, with mammals not so much. If large Ceratopsine geni would be described the same way as those who study beetles they'd probably all be the same genus to show you the other extreme.
It's all a bit confusing.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks
π: 0 β©: 0
Two things:
One, I love the painting, especially the color pattern and the way you did the lips.Β
Two, while I will probably still use the name "Tarbosaurus", you do make a good point here. I think I'll wait until more information comes out to make a final decision. Do you know of any papers on the subject?
π: 0 β©: 1
I haven't looked at any scientific papers regarding the subject as they are hard to find in the internet I guess I just don't know where to look. But I looked back at some old Smithsonian.com article about this inspiring me to do the piece.Β
www.smithsonianmag.com/scienceβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks! I have trouble sometimes finding the papers too, but Wikipedia's reference and footnotes section is a good starting place. Also, paleo-blogs sometimes have links.
π: 0 β©: 1
No problem, I might also get back on that T.rex as it looked lipless even when I intended to make it look like it has it.
π: 0 β©: 0
No, you're not wrong, but it is not the same with describing fossil animals as it is with extant ones. Distinct but similar species are not the only thing; members of the same species have been described as separate genera because of present sexual dimorphism or age difference. And frankly said often it is not possible to actually tell the relationship between genders or ages, because there is too little material found of them.
π: 0 β©: 0