Which are stronger pound for pound Herbivores or Carnivores?

[parvez]

(12-02-2016, 08:07 PM)Polar Wrote: I see a contradiction within the bold part, is that a typo?

There are also carbohydrates in fat, and compared to most vegetation that I come in experience with, I doubt that plants in general have more carbs than an equally-weighted fat portion of a let's say, gaur. Big cats can't finely separate muscle from fat, so at some point, they will consume a slight portion of fat by the end of their meal. Meat and fat do contain the nutrients and substances you mentioned, but I doubt that herbivores have more protein synthesis due to insulin: in fact, the carnivores should have similar levels of protein synthesis due to amino acid completion and large amount of meaty protein.

That is not typo. Meat does not contain considerable amounts of carbohydrates if not minimal. Plants store starch in various parts. That is why they contain more carbohydrates. Yes, i do feel they have more protein synthesis due to insulin which plays major role in the process. Reply

[parvez]

(12-02-2016, 08:12 PM)Polar Wrote: Herbivores also developed extra size, which gives "extra" muscles due to them being hunted by carnivores.

I doubt that anyhow. That may be due to poor senses. But yes gaur seem to be extra muscular. To counter predators with their poor senses they must have developed extra muscle. Reply

[brotherbear]

Every animal possesses some form of "self-defense" be it size, speed, quick-climbing ability, camouflage, flight, etc. Yes, the gaur is big and strong. Some herbivores are. What about the rabbit? Male gaur challenges male gaur for a female; this likely has even more effect on his size and build than do the tiger and the dhole. Most predators will choose the easiest meal and a bull gaur is anything but. Reply

[parvez]

But I am speaking in general. In general carnivores seem to develop muscles in secondary way than from diet. A few herbivores may also fall in that category. Just a few exceptions. About rabbits I agree. They seem to be the most delicate creatures. That may be because they live in fear and are defenseless. Due to ever existing anxiety they have evolved to have higher unbelievable heart rates. So, due to constant fear they must have evolved to be weaker ones. There seems to be an ecological reason for everything as tiger luver said besides a scientific reason. Reply

[brotherbear]

(12-02-2016, 10:15 PM)parvez Wrote: But I am speaking in general. In general carnivores seem to develop muscles in secondary way than from diet. A few herbivores may also fall in that category. Just a few exceptions. About rabbits I agree. They seem to be the most delicate creatures. That may be because they live in fear and are defenseless. Due to ever existing anxiety they have evolved to have higher unbelievable heart rates. So, due to constant fear they must have evolved to be weaker ones. There seems to be an ecological reason for everything as tiger luver said besides a scientific reason.

Wild rabbits are not defenseless; they are very quick and know a few tricks, such as darting into a brier patch. Reply

[parvez]

Yes they have tricks I know. But defenseless in the sense against other animals lol though they have been sometimes known to be tough against animals like snakes though it is very rare. Reply

[Polar]

As for power, gaurs have had some exceptional displays of it regarding hoof striking (if they are huge individuals): they've killed grown tigers with one powerful, yet inflexible hoof strike, and have made their own individuals (regarding mating fights) fly back with their neck strength. But pound-for-pound, a tiger's swipe is much, much more powerful than the hoof strike of an equally-sized gaur. This is due to two reasons: one is that the tiger's limbs are more flexible, allowing for greater motion for swiping, thus a greater damage buildup, and greater fast-twich muscle percentage within the tiger's forelimbs. 

Although, a gaur's elbow tension strength (I guess) would be greater than that of the tiger due to its inflexible limbs, similar to canines compared to ursines. But for striking and grappling, bovines don't compare to big cats, nor do most other herbivores compare as well. Ursus Arctos back in CarnivoraForums proved that a more inflexible animal usually has greater elbow strength than a completely flexible animal, and that predators who grapple efficiently are within a middle range between the two.

Inflexible: Canines and most modern mammalian herbivores.

Middle: Felines, ursines, and amphicyonids.

Flexible: Primates. Reply

[parvez]

Interesting can you please give me the link to carnivora? I can guess their horns and striking power is strong but I didn't guess about hoof strength. But I heard of hoof strength of ostriches and giraffe are deadly. Similarly gaur too must be having that due to relatively smaller though thick horns for their size. But it seems pretty interesting that tiger's paw swipe power which I predicted to be extremely strong once is now proving to be correct. Reply

[Polar]

(12-03-2016, 01:09 PM)parvez Wrote: Interesting can you please give me the link to carnivora? I can guess their horns and striking power is strong but I didn't guess about hoof strength. But I heard of hoof strength of ostriches and giraffe are deadly. Similarly gaur too must be having that due to relatively smaller though thick horns for their size. But it seems pretty interesting that tiger's paw swipe power which I predicted to be extremely strong once is now proving to be correct.

We've always established that the paw swipes of big cats and bears are one of the most powerful forces in nature, aside from an elephant/rhino's charge or a whale's tail movement. 

Here is the link to the aforementioned proof of poster Ursus Arctos: Muscle info: Strength and flexibility Reply

[brotherbear]

Nice find Polar. You might wish to consider posting this information on the topic, "Bear Anatomy" also. Reply

[parvez]

(12-02-2016, 09:18 PM)brotherbear Wrote:  Most predators will choose the easiest meal and a bull gaur is anything but.

Not only predators, there are other herbivores or competitors in the gaur's habitat like elephant, buffaloes in some areas, rhinos in nepal etc. In prehistoric times, there used to be rhinos, buffaloes all across indian jungles. So, there must have been severe interspecific fights. Gaur with relatively smaller horns for it's size and with probably poor senses as well should have no doubt be evolved into a muscular thug. Reply

[brotherbear]

I believe that the gaur's horns are better suited for combat than those of the water buffalo. I doubt that other herbivores had anything to do with the size and musculature of the gaur. Perhaps predators contributed some; but most for fighting other bulls.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply

[brotherbear]

One of my favorite animals; the Indian rhinoceros. I don't know about pound-for-pound; but he has a lot of pounds! Only an elephant or another rhino could take down a bull rhino ( excluding man-kind of course ). 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply

[parvez]

I believe gaurs horns are more built for combat than water buffalo. can you explain? Reply

[brotherbear]

(12-03-2016, 07:57 PM)parvez Wrote: I believe gaurs horns are more built for combat than water buffalo. can you explain?

The buffalo's horns are wide-spaced, more of a design for bulls pushing against each other. Not a great design for hooking into a tiger ( for example ). The gaur's horns are about the perfect size and closer together; better for defense. Reply