|
Smilodon fatalis
|
@Sanju :
About #45: Quite interesting, and exciting too, your post ! We can therefore think that the smilodon fatalis lived like the extant wolves, because the young needed a longer learning period than modern lions in order to "master their anatomy" : how to use their fangs advisedly. Therefore the females needed to be more robust to stand them. Thus too, differences between males and females were not so great, weak sexual dimorphism... But contrary to the modern wolves, conflicts between members of the pride could happen much more often (very numerous lesions among the smilodon fatalis' bones). I would say, socially speaking, that they weren't more evolved than the extant lions. The weaker dimorphism between males and females being conditionned by the longer period of the young smilodon within the parental pride. One question: did the alpha males expell, like the extant male lions, the young males having finished their "learning period" ? If yes, the life of the young males having to establish a new pride owed be very hard too. Inside a foreign and hostile territory they had to fear as much the females as the males reigning over this territory. Definitely carnivors' life had to be very intense and difficult during the Pleistocene. The Pleistocene becoming, IMO, more and more a very fascinating period. 
@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
@Sanju :
Sorry to answer you only now... About #48: one horned rhino, cheetah, juvenile elephant, wolf ? Your range of comparaison is much broader than mine ! Very interesting. As concerns wolves, if I am not wrong, they form some big prides during winter, when they have to hunt big preys... Otherwise they live solitary or in small groups or as in couple. Cheetah ? Their top speed represents an hyper specialization as the Smilodon fatalis's fangs do. Juvenile elephant: same point as for the cheetah and smilodon fatalis as concerns their trunk. Dholes, spotted hyenas (and African wild dogs) live constantly in prides but they have not an hyper specialization of their anatomy... Lions have not either. Unless their luxuriant mane is itself an hyper specialization too. East and South African lions live constantly in prides because the males wear luxuriant manes. West and Asiatic lions rather in small groups (females and cubs/a few males, juvenile or not), perhaps too the cave lions and the American lions if the males were no maned... Very interesting ! (03-27-2019, 11:56 AM)Spalea Wrote: one horned rhino, cheetah, juvenile elephant, wolf ? Your range of comparaison is much broader than mine !Actually, I compared smilodon with these animals in only one particular aspect just for "instance" not everything about them is applicable to smilodon. Please read again. :) For cheetah, its weak body to fight in conflicts is disability or draw back and hence, they rarely involve in serious fights similarly smilodon fangs are fragile to lateral compression hence, it might not had involved much in serious territorial disputes like cheetah. One horned rhino or coastal brown bear becomes territorial only in breeding season, rest of the time they usually allow their presence in their home ranges and can freely move or trespass in their home ranges even forage together or bathe in waterholes and feed on mineral rich salt licks or open clearings but at the same time also live lonely if wanted. It's life style is semi-social in comparison to smilodon, it might had live in clans and solitary as well. I hope you are getting. Comparison to elephant is just mastering and practicing to use their fangs and trunk resply. and their behavior is opposite to wolf and lion, I mean similar to hyena (spotted) and dhole more like a clan or loose coalition rather than a wolf or AWD pack or lion pride. It's just based on my understanding about smilodon AFAIK. It need not be true.
@Sanju :
About #50: OK, no problem... I reacted following an analogy I formuled myself by connecting the differents animals you were evoking. And this analogy, the hyper anatomical specialization, is purely personal and was not the your, the food quantity and the season. I take off in one other direction, sorry. (03-27-2019, 12:32 PM)Spalea Wrote: @Sanju : It's ok friend. 
  image copyright of artist I love smilodon fatalis! They were one fierce cat compared to tigers and lions! And they have some wicked teeth! Thanks for making this thread about these creatures!@epaiva!
Smilodon fatalis in La Brea Tarpits and Museum
Credit to @labreatarpits  *This image is copyright of its original author
Credit to Cave Lion Paleontology
 *This image is copyright of its original author
Evolution in the sabre‐tooth cat, Smilodon fatalis, in response to Pleistocene climate change
Abstract The late Pleistocene was a time of environmental change, culminating in an extinction event. Few fossil localities record a temporal series of carnivore fossil populations from this interesting interval as well as Rancho La Brea (RLB). We analysed mandibles of Smilodon fatalis from RLB using 2‐D geometric morphometrics to examine whether, and how, mandibular shape changes through time. Smilodon fatalis shows mandibular evolution with oscillations between a small, ancestral‐type morph in pits 77 (≈37 Kybp) and 2051 (≈26 Kybp), a larger, more derived morph in pits 91 (≈28 Kybp) and 61‐67 (≈13.6 Kybp), and an intermediate morph from pit 13 (≈17.7 Kybp). These oscillations end in pit 61‐67, with greatest body size, and are estimated to have its widest gape and lowest bite force. Additionally, variation is lowest in pit 61‐67, which was deposited concurrent with the Bølling–Allerød warming event, which may have important implications for the timing or conditions during the extinction event. Contra to a temporal Bergmann's rule, such rapid warming events appear to be correlated with larger, derived, morphologies whereas static, cooler, climates correlate with gracile, ancestral morphologies.
Smilodon fatalis by Peter Hutzler
 *This image is copyright of its original author
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |