I take TierZoo as a source of entertainment more than anything else. Lol.
Anyway, the validity of Troodon is currently up in the air at the moment. It's considered a wastebasket taxon right now, a dubious genus at best.
I think Hadrosaurs at D tier is kinda wild when they are one of the most successful dinosaur groups of all time with a global distribution. The size of these lads is being underestimated too. The larger species were matching or exceeding the size of large Therapods. For example, Shantungosaurus size estimates would flat out make it the largest dinosaur outside of Sauropods. Hadrosaurs should be B or A tier.
The T. Rex criticisms are wack. Criticising T. Rex for its small arms is like criticising snakes for having no limbs. In both cases, they don't have them cause they don't need them. The scavenging aspects of T. Rex are being over exaggerated. Most carnivores scavenge carcasses. The fact T. Rex can do it more effectively should really be a bonus in its favour, not slander. T. Rex should be A tier at least.
I think Spinosaurids should be bumped up a tier to C tier. In most environments they were in, they were usually large predators, even reaching apex status in some ecosystems. The "its environment changed" deal is a strange argument to hold against it specifically when ecological change is what typically wipes out most species.
I think Therizinosaurs are being overrated. They don't have the same level of recorded success as the other herbivorous groups on this list. I also think their ability to fight off predators with claws designed to drag down branches is being over exaggerated. C tier.
The importance of the study isn't about the particular species that they did the tests on but far more about potentially getting genetic information from fossilised bones in general.
Fossilised bones are far more common to find in comparison to ancient soft tissue samples.
Anyway, the validity of Troodon is currently up in the air at the moment. It's considered a wastebasket taxon right now, a dubious genus at best.
I think Hadrosaurs at D tier is kinda wild when they are one of the most successful dinosaur groups of all time with a global distribution. The size of these lads is being underestimated too. The larger species were matching or exceeding the size of large Therapods. For example, Shantungosaurus size estimates would flat out make it the largest dinosaur outside of Sauropods. Hadrosaurs should be B or A tier.
The T. Rex criticisms are wack. Criticising T. Rex for its small arms is like criticising snakes for having no limbs. In both cases, they don't have them cause they don't need them. The scavenging aspects of T. Rex are being over exaggerated. Most carnivores scavenge carcasses. The fact T. Rex can do it more effectively should really be a bonus in its favour, not slander. T. Rex should be A tier at least.
I think Spinosaurids should be bumped up a tier to C tier. In most environments they were in, they were usually large predators, even reaching apex status in some ecosystems. The "its environment changed" deal is a strange argument to hold against it specifically when ecological change is what typically wipes out most species.
I think Therizinosaurs are being overrated. They don't have the same level of recorded success as the other herbivorous groups on this list. I also think their ability to fight off predators with claws designed to drag down branches is being over exaggerated. C tier.
The importance of the study isn't about the particular species that they did the tests on but far more about potentially getting genetic information from fossilised bones in general.
Fossilised bones are far more common to find in comparison to ancient soft tissue samples.
