| 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: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Sperm Whale (Bull) v Carcharocles chubutensis | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 6 2018, 08:00 PM (1,297 Views) | |
| Taipan | Mar 6 2018, 08:00 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Administrator
![]()
|
Sperm Whale (Bull) - Physeter macrocephalus The sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus, is a marine mammal species, order Cetacea, a toothed whale (odontocete) having the largest brain of any animal. The name comes from the milky-white waxy substance, spermaceti, found in the animal's head. The sperm whale is the only living member of genus Physeter. The now outdated synonym Physeter catodon refers to the same species. It is one of three extant species in the sperm whale superfamily, along with the pygmy sperm whale and dwarf sperm whale. A mature male can grow to 20.5 metres (67 ft) long. It is the largest living toothed animal. For large males, the head can represent up to one-third of the animal's length. It has a cosmopolitan distribution across the oceans. The species feeds primarily on squid but to some extent on fish, diving as deep as 3 kilometres (9,800 ft), which makes it the deepest diving mammal. Its diet includes giant squid and colossal squid. The sperm whale is the largest toothed whale, with adult males measuring up to 20.5 metres (67 ft) long and weighing up to 57,000 kilograms (56 long tons; 63 short tons). Average sizes for a Bull: Length, 16 metres (52 ft) Weight, 41,000 kilograms (40 long tons; 45 short tons). ![]() Carcharocles chubutensis Carcharocles chubutensis is a prehistoric megatoothed shark that lived during Oligocene, Miocene, and Pliocene epochs, approximately about 28 - 5 million years ago.This shark is considered to be a close relative of another prehistoric megatoothed shark, C. megalodon. However, as is the case with C. megalodon, the classification of this species is disputed. This species is also known from fossil teeth and some fossilized vertebral centra. Shark skeleton is composed of cartilage and not bone, and cartilage rarely gets fossilized. Hence, fossils of C. chubutensis are generally poorly preserved. Although the teeth of C. chubutensis are morphologically similar to teeth of C. megalodon, they are comparatively slender with curved crown, and with presence of lateral heels feebly serrated. Fossils of this species have been found in North America, South America, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Africa, and Europe. C. chubutensis was larger than C. angustidens. Teeth of C. chubutensis can approach 130 mm in slant height (diagonal length), which according to size estimation method proposed by Gottfried at al, in 1996, indicate 12.2 m (40 ft) long specimen. ![]() I was making this, and then the request was deleted! |
![]() |
|
| Lightning | Mar 6 2018, 08:04 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
thanks Taipan, anyway I'll reply to this now, forget another day, ![]() I think this is a close match but the shark will win because: 1) Its huge jaws and terrifying serrated teeth will cause terrible injuries and huge amounts of blood loss. 2) The whale's jaws are inadequate for killing a 20+ ton shark. 3) The whale's best hope is to ram the shark but I don't see this happening because the shark is smaller, faster and more agile than the whale. To ram a moving target is much harder than biting it because , to ram, the whale needs to move quickly from some distance away. 4) The whale is a big, slower, less agile target, so the shark should be able to get multiple bites on the whale without too much difficulty. With each bite, the whale will lose more blood and get weaker, further decreasing the likelihood of it ramming the shark. 5) The whale's tail is a weak point. 1 or 2 bites on the tail from this shark and the whale will be unable to move and, thus, die. The shark also has a tail and fins but the whale's jaws are too weak to seriously damage them. 6) This shark preyed on whales whereas I have never heard of a sperm whale killing anything larger than a few hundred kg colossal squid. Edited by Lightning, Mar 6 2018, 08:49 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mammuthus | Mar 7 2018, 03:25 AM Post #3 |
|
Proboscidean Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A comparison I made of the two:![]() Sperm whale - 16 metres Carcharocles chubutensis - 12.2m It seems that the Sperm whale does have quite a sufficient size advantage. (that isn’t to say a favour it though) Edited by Mammuthus, Mar 7 2018, 03:42 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Lightning | Mar 7 2018, 04:18 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thanks for the comparison |
![]() |
|
| Taipan | Mar 8 2018, 08:43 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Administrator
![]()
|
Do you think the Shark can overcome the size disadvantage with superior bite weaponary? |
![]() |
|
| Sam1 | Mar 9 2018, 12:08 AM Post #6 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't think this thread should be discussed because the proposed size of the shark is dubious. Unless we are to assume the C.Chubutensis was (significantly even) bigger than the alleged average Megalodon (10.5m). |
![]() |
|
| Lightning | Mar 9 2018, 04:58 AM Post #7 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I actually agree. If megalodon was much smaller on average than previously thought, it might mean the same for other gigantic sharks. Thus, I agree that we shouldn't discuss this until we have further information. |
![]() |
|
| Wolf Eagle | Mar 9 2018, 05:06 AM Post #8 |
![]()
M E G A P H Y S E T E R
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not sure if this shark would approach a Bull Sperm Whale in the first place but, even then, I would probably go with the shark. It wouldn't be easy, but I think after a few bites from the sharks superior jaws, the whale would likely bleed out. With that said, I think the whale would be able to do some damage. I wouldn't say the whale can't keep up with the smaller more agile shark as these whales hunt squid which are pretty fast. But overall, I don't think the sperm whales jaws would do much considering they only have teeth on the lower jaw, and they tend to swallow squid whole. So I'm pretty sure some strong bites at vital areas of mobility would likely make the shark the winner here. |
![]() |
|
| Lightning | Mar 9 2018, 05:17 AM Post #9 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I used to have the same opinion but, apparently, megalodon was probably much smaller on average than previously thought. This study came up with an average length of 10.5m: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4541548/ So if megalodon was much smaller than previously thought, chubutensis probably was too. Also the 12.2m estimate for chubutensis is very old, from 1996. In short, we don't know the true size of chubutensis, hence we can't use it in a vs debate with another animal. |
![]() |
|
| Sam1 | Mar 9 2018, 06:33 AM Post #10 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well actually I need to make a partial personal disclaimer.. in another thread I initially stated that Meg was probably something like 12-13m on average, and it was an opinion I still hold because that study included juvenile specimens..and that affected the result. So while the study officially didn't make that distinction, the average adult size must've been greater than 10.5m.. although not by much. If you look at the graphs of the size distribution, the estimated 10-12m specimens are the majority, and 15+m ones are increasingly rare. Edited by Sam1, Mar 9 2018, 06:36 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Wolf Eagle | Mar 22 2018, 04:36 AM Post #11 |
![]()
M E G A P H Y S E T E R
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Valid point, but for the sake of debate, at that size, the shark in my opinion would still win here. Then again, as I stated, the likelihood of a shark that size even approaching a Bull Sperm Whale is slim. So we're really speaking hypothetically. |
![]() |
|
| Mammuthus | Mar 22 2018, 05:22 AM Post #12 |
|
Proboscidean Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Wait wait wait, what about ramming? Couldn’t the Whale attempt that? Or is no longer considered a viable way of dealing damage to large opponents? I haven’t done my homework on this recently so I honestly have no idea
|
![]() |
|
| Lightning | Mar 22 2018, 05:34 AM Post #13 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well it would be hard to ram a smaller, faster, more agile target. However, the Chubutensis probably wasn't as big as previously thought, so maybe the whale probably wins. Though if we still consider the shark to be 12m, then it wins against an average sperm whale. |
![]() |
|
| Mammuthus | Mar 22 2018, 05:45 AM Post #14 |
|
Proboscidean Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, but Sperm whale ramming as a whole, would it be an effective strategy for dealing quite significant damage? |
![]() |
|
| Lightning | Mar 22 2018, 05:55 AM Post #15 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes, a ram from a 40 ton whale would do a lot of damage. Edited by Lightning, Mar 22 2018, 05:56 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2













![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)
thanks Taipan, anyway I'll reply to this now, forget another day,


10:03 AM Jul 11