| 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: |
| Shoulder height, body mass and shape of proboscideans; Larramendi, A. (2015). Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 60. doi:10.4202/app.00136.2014. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 2 2016, 02:58 PM (1,384 Views) | |
| Taipan | Aug 2 2016, 02:58 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Administrator
![]()
|
Journal Reference: Larramendi, A. (2015). "Shoulder height, body mass and shape of proboscideans" (PDF). Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 60. doi:10.4202/app.00136.2014. Abstract In recent decades there has been a growing interest in proboscideans’ body size, given that mass is highly correlated with biological functions. Different allometric equations have been proposed in the recent decades to estimate their body masses, based on a large number of living examples. However, the results obtained by these formulae are not accurate because extinct animals often had different body proportions and some were outside the size range of extant samples. Here the body mass of a large number of extinct proboscideans has been calculated by the Graphic Double Integration volumetric method which is based on technical restorations from graphical reconstructions of fossils employing photos, measurements and comparative anatomy of extant forms. The method has been tested on extant elephants with highly accurate results. The reconstructions necessary to apply this method give important information such as body proportions. On the other hand, equations to calculate the skeletal shoulder height have been developed, with a large number of published shoulder heights being recalculated. From the shoulder heights, several equations were created to find out the body mass of a series of extant and extinct species. A few of the largest proboscideans, namely Mammut borsoni and Palaeoloxodon namadicus, were found out to have reached and surpassed the body size of the largest indricotheres. Bearing this in mind, the largest land mammal that ever existed seems to be within the order of Proboscidea, contrary to previous understanding. |
![]() |
|
| Nergigante | Aug 7 2016, 04:49 PM Post #2 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Awesome! Looks likes the elephants are indeed the largest land mammals, Palaeoloxodon namadicus looks more formidable than paracetherium with those large straight tusks IMO, and being larger than the largest paracetherium species and weighting bigger than almost 4 african elephants is just truly fantastic.![]() ![]()
Edited by Nergigante, Aug 7 2016, 04:56 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Gyirin | Aug 7 2016, 05:01 PM Post #3 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
22 tons???!?!?!?!? No way!!!! What was its predator? |
![]() |
|
| Nergigante | Aug 7 2016, 05:37 PM Post #4 |
|
Carnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Someone in devianart named SameerPrehistorica (someone who makes size comparisons of animals) said that M.Borsoni could have maybe weighted more because the fact that 2 of it's specimens are not fully grown with the weight estimate of 18 + tonnes. Edited by Nergigante, Aug 7 2016, 05:39 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Gyirin | Aug 7 2016, 06:00 PM Post #5 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Heavier than 22 tons? Starting to make sense why they are gone. |
![]() |
|
| Mammuthus | Aug 7 2016, 07:05 PM Post #6 |
|
Proboscidean Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In Rhino Kings picture of 'The Largest Land Mammals in History' were is Deinotherium? |
![]() |
|
| Gyirin | Aug 7 2016, 07:12 PM Post #7 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No its Palaeoloxodon namadicus. Apparently its 22 tons. |
![]() |
|
| Mammuthus | Aug 7 2016, 09:47 PM Post #8 |
|
Proboscidean Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
22 tons is too much for Palaeoloxodon. I'd say 16-17 Tons Edited by Mammuthus, Aug 7 2016, 09:47 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Aug 7 2016, 10:05 PM Post #9 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It probably had no predators as an adult given its sheer size. |
![]() |
|
| Mammuthus | Aug 8 2016, 01:14 AM Post #10 |
|
Proboscidean Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The only threat for males would be other males |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Aug 8 2016, 03:38 AM Post #11 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A bad joke doesn't get funnier by repeating it. Interesting to see that Elephas isn't really bulkier at the same shoulder height than Loxodonta. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Paper & PDF Share · Next Topic » |





Shoulder_Height__Body_Mass_and_Shape_of_Proboscideans.pdf (2 MB)





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


5:47 PM Jul 11