| Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| African Lion v Marshosaurus bicentesimus | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 13 2014, 08:39 PM (13,656 Views) | |
| Taipan | Apr 13 2014, 08:39 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Administrator
![]()
|
African Lion - Panthera leo The lion (Panthera leo) is one of the four big cats in the genus Panthera, and a member of the family Felidae. With some males exceeding 250 kg (550 lb) in weight, it is the second-largest living cat after the tiger. Wild lions currently exist in Sub-Saharan Africa and in Asia with an endangered remnant population in Gir Forest National Park in India, having disappeared from North Africa and Southwest Asia in historic times. Until the late Pleistocene, about 10,000 years ago, the lion was the most widespread large land mammal after humans. They were found in most of Africa, across Eurasia from western Europe to India, and in the Americas from the Yukon to Peru. The lion is a vulnerable species, having seen a possibly irreversible population decline of thirty to fifty percent over the past two decades in its African range. The African lion is a very large cat, with males weighing between 330 and 550 pounds and females weighing between 260 and 400 pounds. It is 8 to 10 feet long, not including the tail. Its most famous feature is its mane, which only male lions have. The mane is a yellow color when the lion is young and darkens with age. Eventually, the mane will be dark brown. The body of the African lion is well suited for hunting. It is very muscular, with back legs designed for pouncing and front legs made for grabbing and knocking down prey. It also has very strong jaws that enable it to eat the large prey that it hunts. ![]() Marshosaurus bicentesimus Marshosaurus was a genus of medium sized theropod, with a size up to 5 or 6 meters (16 to 20 feet) in length and a skull about 60 cm (2 feet) long. It is known from parts of at least three (possibly four) individuals from the Morrison Formation of Utah and Colorado. The holotype is a left ilium, or upper pelvis bone found at the Cleveland-Lloyd Quarry in central Utah. It was named by James Madsen (1976) for Othniel Charles Marsh, who described many dinosaur fossils during the Bone Wars. The species name was chosen "in honor of the bicentennial of the United States of America". Characters on the skeleton show it was an avetheropod, a member of Avetheropoda, a group of more bird-like theropods including Tyrannosaurus, Velociraptor and Allosaurus. Benson (et al., 2009) found it to be a megalosauroid, using a lot of new characters of new Megalosaurus specimens. It lived during the Kimmeridgian (Late Jurassic), approximately 155 - 150 mya. One right ilium of a Marshosaurus bicentesimus is deformed by "an undescribed pathology" which probably originated as a consequence of injury. Another specimen has a pathological rib. In a 2001 study conducted by Bruce Rothschild and other paleontologists, 5 foot bones referred to Marshosaurus were examined for signs of stress fracture, but none were found. ![]()
Edited by Taipan, Jul 11 2017, 12:29 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Asadas | Apr 22 2014, 02:35 AM Post #76 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The vast majority of Dino predation it is all based on "probability" based on enamel decay and scavenging.![]() The lion's hunt and kill although they may be well feed, or to eradicate competition from lions, leopards, hyena's. Reason and logic, no one has witnessed a single Dino predation, mostly speculative. |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Apr 22 2014, 05:38 AM Post #77 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Umm, yeah, you expect us to go back in time and see what they preyed on? Educated guesses are perfectly fine, so long as they're reasonable. They're also the best we have. Even then, as previously said, megalosaurid diet is poorly understood. Therefore, prey taken is not an argument.
Edited by Ausar, Apr 22 2014, 05:53 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Apr 22 2014, 05:53 AM Post #78 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Rofl!! It quite obviously had to prey on something, and without a doubt it did hunt large prey too, your argument is invalid. We have no evidence of this megalosaurid pack-hunting though, while Lions often do (and yet still fail most of the time). |
![]() |
|
| Asadas | Apr 23 2014, 12:38 AM Post #79 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Morality is relevant, ![]() Abstract Large carnivores inhabiting ecosystems with heterogeneously distributed environmental resources with strong seasonal variations frequently employ opportunistic foraging strategies, often typified by seasonal switches in diet. In semi-arid ecosystems, herbivore distribution is generally more homogeneous in the wet season, when surface water is abundant, than in the dry season when only permanent sources remain. Here, we investigate the seasonal contribution of the different herbivore species, prey preference and distribution of kills (i.e. feeding locations) of African lions in Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe, a semi-arid African savanna structured by artificial waterholes. We used data from 245 kills and 74 faecal samples. Buffalo consistently emerged as the most frequently utilised prey in all seasons by both male (56%) and female (33%) lions, contributing the most to lion dietary biomass. Jacobs’ index also revealed that buffalo was the most intensively selected species throughout the year. For female lions, kudu and to a lesser extent the group “medium Bovidae” are the most important secondary prey. This study revealed seasonal patterns in secondary prey consumption by female lions partly based on prey ecology with browsers, such as giraffe and kudu, mainly consumed in the early dry season, and grazers, such as zebra and suids, contributing more to female diet in the late dry season. Further, it revealed the opportunistic hunting behaviour of lions for prey as diverse as elephants and mice, with elephants taken mostly as juveniles at the end of the dry season during droughts. Jacobs’ index finally revealed a very strong preference for kills within 2 km from a waterhole for all prey species, except small antelopes, in all seasons. This suggested that surface-water resources form passive traps and contribute to the structuring of lion foraging behaviour. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0055182 ![]() http://jzoblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/27/author-spotlight-matt-w-hayward/ Law of total probability \Pr(A \mid C) = \sum_n \Pr(A \mid C \cap B_n) \Pr(B_n \mid C) = \sum_n \Pr(A \mid C \cap B_n) \Pr(B_n) ![]() I avoided using the witness logic, and clearly stated probability as a reasonable causation. Z(dino) was size (x) therefor it hunted size (y), where as the lion prefers 2x its own weight "on average". |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Apr 23 2014, 12:50 AM Post #80 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
and then you assume that marshosaurus hunted smaller prey, which in this case, most of the herbivores it lived with were multiple times heavier then any creature lions had ever came to witness. the predation style of megalosaurs is not properly understood, so you can keep posting info on lions hunting styles all you want, it doesn't mean anything with this animal who could also hunted animals just as big for all we know. we don't know the mortality of marshosaurus. again, your assuming that marshosaurus hunted weaker creatures just because we know how lions hunted, even though marshosaurus likely lived in a much more dangerous environment. I said it once, I say it again. predator/prey relationships do not equal to predator/predator relationships. your argument has limited meaning on this subject |
![]() |
|
| Asadas | Apr 23 2014, 12:59 AM Post #81 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There, group hunting species, such as lions and wild dogs, killed the broadest range of prey, from the largest to the smallest, with a predator:prey body mass ratio ranging from 1:1.0 for lionesses to 1:2.1 for lions and 1:1.2 for wild dogs (Radloff & du Toit, 2004)..We also hypothesize that individually hunting predators, such as caracal Caracal caracal , leopard Panthera pardus , tiger P. tigris , jaguar P. onca , mountain lion Felis concolor , Ethiopian wolf Canis simensis and red fox Vulpes vulpes would have optimal preference for prey species with body masses closer to the mean of their own species and with less of a skew toward large bodied prey. For solitary hunting cheetah and leopard at Mala Mala, the predator:prey ratio was less than 1:1 (Radloff & du Toit, 2004). http://www.ibs.bialowieza.pl/g2/pdf/1595.pdf ![]() I doubt a 200 kg Carnivore was much of a threat when I am assuming much larger Dino's where resident. |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Apr 23 2014, 01:06 AM Post #82 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
you really are stubern aren't you. WE DO NOT KNOW THE HUNTING STYLES OG MEGALOSAURS! not only does your source point to GROUP hunting of lions, not solo, but you are making a baseless assumption that marshosaurus hunted small animals, even though it retained the body style well capable to kill something it's size or larger. a large, robustly build 50 cm skull and large arms and massive thumb claws is not the adaptations an animal uses to be limited to much smaller prey items. I don't know about you, but marshosaurus killing a 200-300 kg baby suropod or camptosaurus sounds likely to me. and then you take the one individual we have and assume its entire species which could number in the thousands can only weigh 200 kg. it could just as well be bigger. so again, you are just posting sources that ,although informative, has absolutely no major relevance in this scenario.
Edited by spinosaurus rex, Apr 23 2014, 01:19 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Asadas | Apr 23 2014, 01:23 AM Post #83 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
![]() I provided sources for group and sole hunting, tactics, injury, breathing technique, sexual positions etc... We know the hunting style of a similar dion is that of a lion source provided. http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/male-lions-do-help-hunting-after-all-f6C10149668 A predator gauges its prey based on risk/reward factor and most of the time lion and predators chose an "Easier prey" as less risk is involved. http://www.livescience.com/41572-male-lion-survival.html The lion by "evolution" is arguably the greatest predator to have existed with the broadest territorial range and most diverse prey diet of any carnivore, this is how nature millions of years in the work. |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Apr 23 2014, 01:33 AM Post #84 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
1. none of witch matter due to the fact we don't have that information on marshosaurus or any megalosaur for that matter. as a matter of fact, you sources that solo lions take prey that could range 300 kg at relatively low success rates (15- 30%) that shows that lions are not the expert killers single handedly as your trying to portray them, and enhances the reason why relationships between predator and prey does not = relationships between two predators. given the theropods anatomy and adaptions, I still don't see why you're saying marshosaurus couldn't hunted prey at that size range. it certainly had the adaptions and the prey items. 2. what the hell type of relevance does that have on this debate. we are not talking about how predators single out the weak, we're talking about how they would fight eachother 3. 3.5 million years of lion evolution compared to marshosaurus lived 155- 150 million years of evolution. the claim you made certainly is arguable, for I do find lions impressive, I do not consider them natures greatest predator Edited by spinosaurus rex, Apr 23 2014, 01:45 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Asadas | Apr 23 2014, 01:53 AM Post #85 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you are truly convinced that predation success rate and or injury is irrelevant to predicting a "probably reasonable estimate of predatory outcome, I would recommend reading more on behavioral science, The heart of nature. |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Apr 23 2014, 02:04 AM Post #86 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
apparently your not getting the point. so let me make this clear. note that I'm not yelling but putting the following words in caps to make it more clear. HOW THE HELL DOES IT CONTRIBUTE TO THE OUTCOME ON THE HYPOTHETICAL SENARIO WHEN A LION OR MARSHOSAURUS DECIDES TO FIGHT EACHOTHER? A LION IS NOT GOING TO VEIW A MARSHOSAURUS AS A POTENTIAL PREY ITEM. IT'S GOING TO ASSUME IT'S A THREAT AND TREAT THE SITUATION AS ONE AS WELL AS THE LATTER. AND HOW CAN YOU ASSUME THE LIONS IS HIGHER EVEN THOUGH THE THEROPODS IS NOT EVEN REMOTELY CLEAR? these are my points. until you give me an agreeable reason that they do matter in a predator vs predator scenario, I'm not considering it major evidence. before bluntly assuming the lion was the the predator more physical capable, I suggest getting a better understanding on marshosaurus anatomical adaptions and physiques, for it was not a predator restricted to animals that would be any smaller then a lions Edited by spinosaurus rex, Apr 23 2014, 02:07 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Apr 23 2014, 02:26 AM Post #87 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hmm, okay, let's play your game then, and bring all the accounts of animals that kill Lions, mostly the ones smaller than themselves (since you refer a lot to size here). Excuse me, but a megalosaurid is not a Giraffe or a Bovid, and they are face-to-face here. The success rates of packs of Lions at hunting prey is 30%, on ambush. 15% for a lone Lion on ambush. How often is it succeeding against a theropod just as big as itself that WILL fight back and will not e caught on ambush? It really makes you think that you are actually overrating the pantherine a little. |
![]() |
|
| Asadas | Apr 23 2014, 03:41 AM Post #88 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So your basing sides based on mythology? Dental decay is a true measure of predatory behaviour, if it eats bones or insides etc, By determining the prey item or size we can make a fair estimate as to the difficulty of the battle. ![]() Hatzegopteryx the hunting success rate should include "injury", lions are open savanah hunters few populations have the luxury of tiger like ambush that is South Africa. ![]() Lions hunted 16 species of prey, but only five species made up 95% of the hunts. Analyses were confined to hunts of these five species, namely springbok (n = 621 hunts), zebra (n = 135), wildebeest (n = 56), gemsbok (n = 16) and springhare (n = 12) ..These results, however, are confounded by prey vulnerability (Table 2). Over 90% of the prey killed during the day were neonates. Lionesses spotted vulnerable prey over long distances (because the terrain was open and flat) ..In the semi-arid environment of Etosha N.P., hunting success is greatly improved by co-operative hunting in large groups. The fundamental advantages of group hunting in securing large and fleet-footed prey in an open habitat (Wilson 1975) are reflected in the higher per capita food intake acquired by lionesses in groups during the long dry season. These results differ from studies in the Serengeti (Packer et al. 1990), an area of much higher prey density (East 1984), where groups do not achieve greater foraging success than solitary lions. ..semi-arid region such as Namibia, where individual hunting success is low, the social foraging habits of lions may have evolved in order to avoid nutritional stres http://www.desertlion.info/reports/lion_huntsuccess.pdf ..The savannas are the most heterogeneous of felid habitats; lions also live at higher densities than other big cats and thus face the most intense competition for good habitat. http://www.cbs.umn.edu/research/labs/lionresearch/research/group-living ![]() Lions were never observed to incur injuries during hunts of wildebeests, and wildebeest never escaped once caught by a lion as zebras may do (Rudnai, 1974; Berry, 1980; present study). This suggests that while hunting wildebeest, they probably expended little extra energy and presented little increased risk than when hunting nyalas, and therefore hunting wildebeest maximised the amount of food received per hunt. However, http://www.carnivoreconservation.org/files/thesis/hunter_1998_phd.pdf ![]() Hunting success rate is different from Serengeti lions which do not factor wind direction, and are far more successful as Nomads and solitary than regions that are dry like desert and South Africa etc.. A wildebeest which is 2x lions weight..lions injured zero, and of 150 elephant attacks only one was fatal without knowing the exact cause. Obviously prey items which are 2-4x the size of a lion is going to have some degree of difficulty. The representation of a population of lion is different from others as well. The case of the dino is not 2-4x the size of a lion is it? |
![]() |
|
| spinosaurus rex | Apr 23 2014, 03:58 AM Post #89 |
![]()
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
okay, let me get this clear, your saying that tooth detition and decay is a good representation on an animals diet? so why doesn't that include marshosaurus? it was also a predator and a finely tuned one as well. the skull was relatively wide and robust and with thick and serrated detition. I think the effects applies to it as well. and again with the assumption of lions having better hunting rates or result in less injuries then marshosaurus. why on earth are you disinclining marshosaurus's predatory status? you have absolutely no idea how marshosaurus would of done, so you can't say that lions were superior to in hunting. it could just as well hunted prey just as large as lions do solo. and again, your source( yet again) points to cooperative hunting to increase success rates.( it's 1 on 1 dude) and your last sentence was pretty dull minded. of course an elephant is going to be limited in it's capabilities to kill a lion because it can barley catch the damn thing. and ( including the bovine hunting strategies) lacks the dexterity or instinctive drive to kill a lion. and their large mass proves to be quite susceptible areas to latch on to. none of these can be applied to the theropod a bovine doesn't have the speed, agility. dexterity, weaponry, or predatory instinct as a theropod. that's why predator and prey relationships are avoided in decisions. because they do not guarantee the outcome of a predator fighting another predator at similar size. Edited by spinosaurus rex, Apr 23 2014, 04:03 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Hatzegopteryx | Apr 23 2014, 04:39 AM Post #90 |
|
Unicellular Organism
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"The luxury of tigers" Excuse me, but what relevance does the Tiger have to this debate? The Tiger has no luxury either, but what is your point to do with it here? And what implies that the megalosaurid had any luxury? Absolutely nothing, your "luxury" argument is not valid. Edited by Hatzegopteryx, Apr 23 2014, 04:39 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |













![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)

Educated guesses are perfectly fine, so long as they're reasonable. They're also the best we have. Even then, as previously said, megalosaurid diet is poorly understood. Therefore, prey taken is not an argument.









10:01 AM Jul 11