Is this a T. Rex tooth?

[Toast123]

1 inch tooth. Seller says it’s a T. Rex tooth, from what I’ve seen the T. rex teeth are more robust this one looks narrow but I’m not sure. From hell creek

Edited October 7, 2023 by Toast123

[svcgoat]

Hard to say, do you know what County its from? Could be Nano

[Toast123]

Just now, svcgoat said:

Hard to say, do you know what County its from? Could be Nano

Hell Creek Formation, Powder River, Montana

[hadrosauridae]

Its not nano.  Theres no scale for size reference, but looking at the base I would say that there is a good chance it is from the Tyrannosaurid family.  Thats not definite.  Needed info would include length, width, depth and serration densities per mm both mesial and lingual.

[Toast123]

35 minutes ago, hadrosauridae said:

Its not nano.  Theres no scale for size reference, but looking at the base I would say that there is a good chance it is from the Tyrannosaurid family.  Thats not definite.  Needed info would include length, width, depth and serration densities per mm both mesial and lingual.

I suspected nano at first so good to know that’s off the list, here’s the rest of the information i have. 

Dimensions: 1 Inch Long, 0.4 Inches Wide, 0.2 Inches Thick, 0.6 ounces 

Edited October 7, 2023 by Toast123

[Dino Dad 81]

I saw that one one. With the total lack of base pinch and the overall size, it has to be Rex. The following may just be speculation, but perhaps the relatively high-looking CHR (especially considering the missing tip) are related to it being a relatively elongated tooth/position on a relatively young individual.

[patelinho7]

11 hours ago, hadrosauridae said:

Its not nano.  Theres no scale for size reference, but looking at the base I would say that there is a good chance it is from the Tyrannosaurid family.  Thats not definite.  Needed info would include length, width, depth and serration densities per mm both mesial and lingual.

Out of pure desire to improve my dinosaur tooth ID skills, it’s not nano because there’s no base pinch, correct? Is that the main difference between nano and other theropod/tyrannosaur teeth?

[hadrosauridae]

51 minutes ago, patelinho7 said:

Out of pure desire to improve my dinosaur tooth ID skills, it’s not nano because there’s no base pinch, correct? Is that the main difference between nano and other theropod/tyrannosaur teeth?

 

there can be very small difference in the serration densities and size, but there is a  lot of crossover.  The shape of base as well as the pinch are biggest factors

 

[Dino Dad 81]

between Nanos being more laterally compressed (including base pinch), they lack the overall cone shape you often see in Rex teeth. Rex teeth often have a fairly unusual appearance of widening all the way down to the base of the crown. Nanos have the more common theropod look of ceasing to widening before the bottom of the base. So more slender in general.

[JorisVV]

On 10/7/2023 at 6:01 PM, Dino Dad 81 said:

between Nanos being more laterally compressed (including base pinch), they lack the overall cone shape you often see in Rex teeth. Rex teeth often have a fairly unusual appearance of widening all the way down to the base of the crown. Nanos have the more common theropod look of ceasing to widening before the bottom of the base. So more slender in general.

Yup! We do see some compression at trex teeth. But nanotyrannus are in general not that thick of teeth. And the slender built indeed.