Smilodon fatalis

[Sanju]

@Spalea 

For now, we don't know actually what is their social behavior in real and more research should be done in that aspect. IMO, they might have been living in groups not exactly like modern lions (holocene spps, even plesitocene leo spps or cave lion sps are not surely social). As sexual dimorphism is less pronounced indicating there is no particular preferences for females in evolution of smilodons regarding males external appearance/habit, instead they picked their mates who is strong in battles during breeding season. 

Other than that, I think these cats are not entirely social and good on surviving on their own usually and preferred most of the time that. It should be like semi-social (or complex mix of both) and territories or home ranges might be similar to tigers, leopards in which both sexes and smilodons should have defended when unrelated cats enter their range but had tolerate their blood relations to form coalitions during hard and unfavorable times like droughts to look after each other supporting in foraging, team work to hunt and find prey. That explains why there is low sexual dimorphism.

While during plenty times, they preferred mostly to be solitary it seems. These coalitions might be like clans of dholes and hyenas rather than packs of wolves and lion prides which have strong social bonds to be together all the time.

This mastering skills are pretty similar to elephant juvenile learning to use their trunk by practicing, it could be same for smilodon's fang use it could be learnt while playing with siblings or when being notorious to mother like all other cats.

Those bone dislocations and fractures might be caused during their seasonal solitary life as there is high probability to be wounded while tackling large prey (mega fauna) and healed when joining with other cats in relation to help and look after. If they hunted in groups then these wounds are less likely to occur and only are results of fights dismissing that they are social cats entirely.

So, it's likely that they grouped to live together in harsh times and clinged to one when necessary like ill or injured to be parasitic and dependent on their kills to feed. And males might have fought only during breeding season to get rights to females. So it's likely they had territories not during normal times and had them only during breeding season. Rest of the times, it is likely they had home ranges. Once, they get the age of maturity and essential skills to be independent, they might had naturally dispersed to live and associated when needed help or in dry season forming temporary clans. So, the major cause for their scars or heels on their bones due to their large prey relative to fights within conspecies.

As their fangs are so so important to be used carefully only to hunt rather in fights so most of the times they had home ranges. Their fangs are like disabilities, hence they might had avoided conflicts with other predators or their own species like Cheetahs disability is their build and concern to avoid fights even b/w males and venomous snakes disability is its precious venom which can't be wasted so snakes fight with their body weight and most of the time threaten before biting to other animals.

This behavior or social life is almost exactly similar to modern day cheetah and one horned rhino.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rhi...ocial_life Reply