HOME | DD

TrefRex — Walking with Dinosaurs: Pachycephalosaurus

Published: 2019-01-02 05:03:54 +0000 UTC; Views: 18322; Favourites: 194; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description Pachycephalosaurus wyomingensis
Named by Barnum Brown and Erich Maren Schlaikjer, 1943
Diet: Omnivore (Plants, seeds, fruits, insects, small animals, and possibly carrion www.nationalgeographic.com/sci… )
Type: Marginocephalian pachycephalosaur dinosaur
Size: 15 feet (4.5 meters) long and 1,000 lb.
Region: North America (Montana, South Dakota and Wyoming USA)
Age: Late Cretaceous (68.5 to 66.8 million BC; Late Maastrichtian)
Enemies: Tyrannosaurus (Mostly juveniles)
Episode: Walking with Dinosaurs Wonderbook video game
Info: The largest of the dome-headed dinosaurs, or pachycephalosaurs, Pachycephalosaurus itself, as its generic and family name meaning "Thick-headed Lizard" applies, had a 9-inch thick, rounded dome skull that was thought by most scienstists to be used as a battering ram and its thought to have used for a head-to-head among the species, but stress and fragile upper roof discredited this theory in recent years however [Note: In 2012, Joseph Peterson and Christopher Vittore identified a Pachycephalosaurus skull that had been injured by a traumatic impact, had suffered an infection in the aftermath of the incident (OUCH!), and concluded that head-butting behavior was the most probable explanation for the damage] . Its thought by many scientists and experts that two other species of pachycephalosaurs that it lived alongside with, the dragon-like, flat-headed Dracorex (whose specific name hogwartsia honors the Hogwarts Academy of witchcraft and wizardry from the Harry Potter series) and the demonic, spikey-headed Stygimoloch [Named after the Styx River and the mythological demon, Moloch; made famous for having a lead, heroic role in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)  ] were all juveniles of the same animal since the only specimens of them were not yet fully-grown and represents the growth stages of the species, but this is still in debate.

Note: Based on Gregory S. Paul while coloration based on prehistoricbeastoftheweek.blog… and DinoRaul's.

First art of 2019.

Requested by 

Walking with Dinosaurs is owned by BBC
Related content
Comments: 61

redrex96 [2019-08-11 10:44:20 +0000 UTC]

Wish They Were In Walking With Dinosaurs Right.

👍: 1 ⏩: 1

pokemaster105 In reply to redrex96 [2022-12-06 03:54:51 +0000 UTC]

👍: 1 ⏩: 1

redrex96 In reply to pokemaster105 [2022-12-06 17:08:50 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pokemaster105 In reply to redrex96 [2022-12-06 19:13:26 +0000 UTC]

👍: 2 ⏩: 1

redrex96 In reply to pokemaster105 [2022-12-07 21:06:55 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pokemaster105 In reply to redrex96 [2022-12-08 01:32:59 +0000 UTC]

👍: 1 ⏩: 1

redrex96 In reply to pokemaster105 [2022-12-08 15:02:31 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PyroPuncherZ [2019-01-19 11:10:25 +0000 UTC]

Are you ever gonna do Tyrannosaurus?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TrefRex In reply to PyroPuncherZ [2019-01-19 14:23:22 +0000 UTC]

Yes I will definitely

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Patchi1995 [2019-01-03 08:32:24 +0000 UTC]

Do we have evidences that Pachycephalosaurus might sometimes be a lot more like Hell Creek's rarest piscivorous dinosaurs, because of their sharp teeth, and may looked somewhat like ornithopods?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-03 06:25:44 +0000 UTC]

Only Anatotitan, Torosaurus, Ankylosaurus, Triceratops and Tyrannosaurus Rex are left.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Kaijufanatic19 In reply to ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-03 22:03:38 +0000 UTC]

Anatotitan?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninjakingofhearts In reply to Kaijufanatic19 [2019-01-03 23:15:50 +0000 UTC]

walkingwith.wikia.com/wiki/Ana…

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Kaijufanatic19 In reply to ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-03 23:25:12 +0000 UTC]

Actually, Anatotitan isn't a real dinosaur anymore. It's now an outdated synonym for Edmontosaurus. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninjakingofhearts In reply to Kaijufanatic19 [2019-01-03 23:29:50 +0000 UTC]

Shut it know it all!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Philoceratops In reply to ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-06 02:07:32 +0000 UTC]

Hey, have some civility.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Kaijufanatic19 In reply to ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-03 23:30:42 +0000 UTC]

I'm just saying. Ask TrefRex himself, he'll know.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninjakingofhearts In reply to Kaijufanatic19 [2019-01-03 23:33:55 +0000 UTC]

Give Anstotitan a chance.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Nerdinator In reply to ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-04 20:54:02 +0000 UTC]

Science doesn't care, Anatotitan has been sunk into Edmontosaurus and it doesn't look like it'll be undone. (If it makes you feel any better, which it most likely won't, it retains its species validity as E. annectens.)

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Philoceratops In reply to The-Nerdinator [2019-01-06 02:08:06 +0000 UTC]

True.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ninjakingofhearts In reply to The-Nerdinator [2019-01-04 21:42:25 +0000 UTC]

 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SonicZilla150 [2019-01-02 20:19:02 +0000 UTC]

Very well done. I take it Anatotitan (Edmontosaurus) is next?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TrefRex In reply to SonicZilla150 [2019-01-02 21:05:51 +0000 UTC]

Yes it is next

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tobyv23 In reply to TrefRex [2019-01-03 00:11:45 +0000 UTC]

How many left until the ultimate T. rex?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SonicZilla150 In reply to tobyv23 [2019-01-03 01:12:06 +0000 UTC]

After Edmontosaurus, then there'll be Torosaurus, Ankylosaurus, Triceratops, until, FINALLY, the KING shall return

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Patchi1995 In reply to SonicZilla150 [2019-01-03 08:35:08 +0000 UTC]

Edmontosaurus annectens must be also known as preferably Anatosaurus annectens.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SonicZilla150 In reply to Patchi1995 [2019-01-03 12:57:56 +0000 UTC]

Edmontosaurus annectens is also referred to as  Diclonius, Trachodon, Hadrosaurus, Claosaurus & Thespesius

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Philoceratops In reply to SonicZilla150 [2019-01-06 02:09:17 +0000 UTC]

Well, those were in the days were dinosaur taxonomy was complete crap, but Anatosaurus was a name made specifically for annectens.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Patchi1995 In reply to SonicZilla150 [2019-01-03 18:39:05 +0000 UTC]

Even rarely as Edmontotitan annectens?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

NRD23456 [2019-01-02 12:59:51 +0000 UTC]

Cool one! Who's next? Also happy New Year!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Allorock2 [2019-01-02 12:32:31 +0000 UTC]

Am I the only one who thinks Pachy looks adorable

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DINOTASIA123 [2019-01-02 12:08:33 +0000 UTC]

Friar Tuck

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

asari13 [2019-01-02 10:34:03 +0000 UTC]

cool

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Phillip2001 [2019-01-02 10:22:48 +0000 UTC]

Cool, my dude!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ninjakingofhearts [2019-01-02 06:49:48 +0000 UTC]

Neato!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Wildgirl2000 [2019-01-02 05:32:36 +0000 UTC]

I, on the other hand, don't believe that Stygimoloch and Dracorex are juvenile Pachycephalosaurus.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Tigon1Monster In reply to Wildgirl2000 [2019-01-02 09:34:24 +0000 UTC]

I'm with ya.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NRD23456 In reply to Tigon1Monster [2019-01-02 12:59:09 +0000 UTC]

Me too!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Tigon1Monster In reply to NRD23456 [2019-01-02 14:03:23 +0000 UTC]

Cool.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NRD23456 In reply to Tigon1Monster [2019-01-02 18:41:46 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MiketheElephantBrony In reply to NRD23456 [2019-01-02 13:23:21 +0000 UTC]

Me three.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NRD23456 In reply to MiketheElephantBrony [2019-01-02 13:25:50 +0000 UTC]

Oh nice! Happy New Year! Glad that you agree!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Jdailey1991 [2019-01-02 05:07:36 +0000 UTC]

It shouldn't be a debate--no piece of the body ever shrinks with age.  This sort of transformation is, at the very most, strictly amphibious.

👍: 0 ⏩: 4

BionicleSaurus In reply to Jdailey1991 [2019-03-08 00:19:04 +0000 UTC]

All of the hornlets and other bony ornamentation on the three genera's skulls are in exactly the same orientation. Complex structures with that degree of similarity would be incredibly unlikely to exist among three distinct animals. Not to mention both Dracorex and Stygimoloch have the cranial bone density to prove that they've gotta' be juvenile forms of something, if not Pachycephalosaurus itself. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong but there's a lot of evidence contradicting you're 'no body part shrinks with age' claim for Pachycephalosaurus specifically, valid as it may be for the majority of species.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Jdailey1991 In reply to BionicleSaurus [2019-03-08 01:45:40 +0000 UTC]

Bone sponginess is a clue for age, not species.  That is a fact that has been overlooked in the firestorm.  We have found only one skull.  That's it.  If we want to be sure, we need MULTIPLE specimens.  And the fact that there we have not found much on pachycephalosaurs in general poses that particular problem.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BionicleSaurus In reply to Jdailey1991 [2019-03-08 03:36:10 +0000 UTC]

Exactly. I was trying to say that bone sponginess IS INDEED a clue for age, as it shows that Dracorex and Stygi were not fully grown.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Dinodavid8rb In reply to Jdailey1991 [2019-01-02 05:23:38 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, I don't want to believe Dracorex and Stygimoloch are baby Pachycephalosaurs, but I'm still so confused. They may be young judging from the bones, but why shrink long horns into bumps?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Jdailey1991 In reply to Dinodavid8rb [2019-01-02 05:36:54 +0000 UTC]

The argument regarding the sponginess of the bones was faulty right at the start because they determine only age, and age has no specific connection with specific species.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Philoceratops In reply to Jdailey1991 [2019-01-02 05:18:41 +0000 UTC]

Ever heard of paradoxical frogs?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Jdailey1991 In reply to Philoceratops [2019-01-02 05:35:23 +0000 UTC]

Don't throw amphibians in an amniotic argument.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1


| Next =>