Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Megistotherium v Andrewsarchus
Topic Started: Mar 9 2013, 04:36 PM (16,692 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Megistotherium osteothlastes
Megistotherium is an extinct genus of creodonts, the only known species of which is Megistotherium osteothlastes. It is most likely a junior synonym of Hyainailouros sulzeri. Megistotherium osteothlastes was an enormous hyaenodontid creodont that lived during the early Miocene Epoch some 23 million years ago. It has been found in the Ngorora Formation and Muruyur Formation Kenya, Egypt, Namibia, Uganda and Libya. Named by Robert Savage in 1973, it is one of the largest terrestrial carnivorous mammals known to have existed. It was about 1.5 meters high at the shoulders and 3.5 meters in head and body length, with a 1 meter long tail and a 65 cm long skull. Its body mass has been estimated at 500 kg or 880 kg. This can be compared to the other large carnivorous mammals such as: Arctodus, modern polar bears, and Amphicyon ingens. The skull was twice as long as that of a Bengal tiger. The carnassial teeth of Megistotherium (like those of other creodonts) were the upper first molars, and overlapped with their lower molar counterparts like scissors to form a formidable and powerful shearing action. The land that is now the Sahara desert was much more fertile in the Miocene. A considerable amount of it was grassland and rainfall was plentiful. Lakes and ponds provided water for large fauna, which provided Megistotherium and other predators with an ample supply of prey. Large hyaenodontids like this one could have originally evolved as specialized predators or scavengers of large African herbivores. Mastodon bones have been found with its fossils, indicating that Megistotherium may have hunted them for food.

Posted Image

Andrewsarchus mongoliensis
Andrewsarchus mongoliensis was a giant mammalian predator of Central Asia and the largest, and most famous member of the mesonychids, a wholly extinct group of prehistoric mammals. The mesonychids were the only known group of ungulates to become carnivorous, and looked vaguely like wolves, with blunt, hoof-like nails instead of claws. Andrewsarchus (Andrews + Greek ἀñ÷üò, "ruler") was named for the famous explorer and fossil hunter Roy Chapman Andrews, who led the expedition on which it was discovered in 1923.
Andrewsarchus is known only from an enormous skull (83 cm long and 56 cm wide) and pieces of bone, but the skull's similarity to that of smaller mesonychids suggests that Andrewsarchus had the same wolf-like body on a larger scale. Extrapolating from the body proportions of similar mesonychids, as well as large land mammals in general, Andrewsarchus was most likely about 4–6 metres (13–18 feet) long, standing nearly 2 metres (6 feet) at the shoulder, and weighing well over 1,500 pounds, making it the largest terrestrial carnivorous mammal known to have ever existed. Based on the proportion comparisons to mesonychids and modern day ursids, it is believed that the largest of the Andrewsarchus may have weighed nearly a ton (close to 2,000 pounds, or 907 kg). It is open to debate whether the animal was gracile or robust in build. It should be noted that modern white rhinoceros specimens are much heavier than these figures, though rhino bodies are about as long.

Posted Image

______________________________________________________________________

Arcticus
Mar 8 2013, 08:22 PM
Andrewsarchus vs Megistotherium or Sarkastodon
Sarkastodon vs Megistotherium
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Spinodontosaurus
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Sectotl
Mar 10 2013, 02:56 AM
Yeah, except we have a skeleton and scientific research into its size. Pointless post.
"We have a skeleton" - you mean a single (large) skull?
All size estimates are near worthless because nobody even knows what it was closesly related too.

Either way, for what it's worth:
Quote:
 
While it may well be that Andrewsarchus was an entelodont-like predator and/or omnivore , there are, however, indications that Andrewsarchus was freakishly weird, and doing something very special. In fact, the weirdness of its skull is routinely not depicted correctly in life restorations. Its snout is strikingly long and narrow, and ‘pinched in’ about half-way along its length. The result is that the distal end of the rostrum forms a sub-circular rosette that almost resembles that of a spinosaurid theropod. Its orbits are located way down on the sides of its skull and were widely separated by the broad base of the snout, and its entire occipital region looks narrower, and smaller, than expected in an animal of this size. The glenoid fossa is flattened compared to that of ‘proper’ mesonychians, and the associated pre- and post-glenoid structures on the zygomatic arch are small. The sagittal crest is small as well. These features all suggest that the jaws were relatively weak. And while the upper canines were said by Osborn (1924) to be enormous, they aren’t: ‘The canines are very reduced in size and in proportion to the whole dentition and to the whole skull’ (Szalay & Gould 1966, p. 154).

http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/08/11/mesonychians-part-ii/

I would hazard a guess that Megsitotherium would have had the stronger bite, and seeing as that is pretty much the only comparison you can draw between them, I would have to say Megistotherium wins.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sheroo
Member Avatar
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Spinodontosaurus
Mar 10 2013, 11:16 AM
Sectotl
Mar 10 2013, 02:56 AM
Yeah, except we have a skeleton and scientific research into its size. Pointless post.
"We have a skeleton" - you mean a single (large) skull?
All size estimates are near worthless because nobody even knows what it was closesly related too.

Either way, for what it's worth:
Quote:
 
While it may well be that Andrewsarchus was an entelodont-like predator and/or omnivore , there are, however, indications that Andrewsarchus was freakishly weird, and doing something very special. In fact, the weirdness of its skull is routinely not depicted correctly in life restorations. Its snout is strikingly long and narrow, and ‘pinched in’ about half-way along its length. The result is that the distal end of the rostrum forms a sub-circular rosette that almost resembles that of a spinosaurid theropod. Its orbits are located way down on the sides of its skull and were widely separated by the broad base of the snout, and its entire occipital region looks narrower, and smaller, than expected in an animal of this size. The glenoid fossa is flattened compared to that of ‘proper’ mesonychians, and the associated pre- and post-glenoid structures on the zygomatic arch are small. The sagittal crest is small as well. These features all suggest that the jaws were relatively weak. And while the upper canines were said by Osborn (1924) to be enormous, they aren’t: ‘The canines are very reduced in size and in proportion to the whole dentition and to the whole skull’ (Szalay & Gould 1966, p. 154).

http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/08/11/mesonychians-part-ii/

I would hazard a guess that Megsitotherium would have had the stronger bite, and seeing as that is pretty much the only comparison you can draw between them, I would have to say Megistotherium wins.
Bite force doesn't always count. A human with a 50 kg bite would have a lot less effect than a shark using only 20 kg of bite force. Dentition counts more.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vivyx
Member Avatar
Felines, sharks, birds, arthropods
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
yigit05
Mar 10 2013, 06:48 AM
Posted Image
How do we know for sure that's what it looks like? I know it looks like that in Walking with Beasts, but it is only known from half a skull. Here is a picture of it:



Posted Image



It could be almost like a large entelodont, who knows though?
Edited by Vivyx, Jun 8 2013, 01:05 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yigit05
Member Avatar
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Populator
Jun 8 2013, 01:05 AM
yigit05
Mar 10 2013, 06:48 AM
Posted Image
How do we know for sure that's what it looks like? I know it looks like that in Walking with Beasts, but it is only known from half a skull. Here is a picture of it:



Posted Image



It could be almost like a large entelodont, who knows though?
If the build was robust, some specimens of the animal might have weighed up to 4,000 pounds(wikipedia) 83 cm skull
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ripjaw
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Megistotherium, More agile, better bite, and almost the same size.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yigit05
Member Avatar
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Ripjaw
Jun 8 2013, 12:27 PM
Megistotherium, More agile, better bite, and almost the same size.
Posted Image
larger andrewsarchus
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ausar
Member Avatar
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sheroo
Mar 10 2013, 10:31 PM
Spinodontosaurus
Mar 10 2013, 11:16 AM
Sectotl
Mar 10 2013, 02:56 AM
Yeah, except we have a skeleton and scientific research into its size. Pointless post.
"We have a skeleton" - you mean a single (large) skull?
All size estimates are near worthless because nobody even knows what it was closesly related too.

Either way, for what it's worth:
Quote:
 
While it may well be that Andrewsarchus was an entelodont-like predator and/or omnivore , there are, however, indications that Andrewsarchus was freakishly weird, and doing something very special. In fact, the weirdness of its skull is routinely not depicted correctly in life restorations. Its snout is strikingly long and narrow, and ‘pinched in’ about half-way along its length. The result is that the distal end of the rostrum forms a sub-circular rosette that almost resembles that of a spinosaurid theropod. Its orbits are located way down on the sides of its skull and were widely separated by the broad base of the snout, and its entire occipital region looks narrower, and smaller, than expected in an animal of this size. The glenoid fossa is flattened compared to that of ‘proper’ mesonychians, and the associated pre- and post-glenoid structures on the zygomatic arch are small. The sagittal crest is small as well. These features all suggest that the jaws were relatively weak. And while the upper canines were said by Osborn (1924) to be enormous, they aren’t: ‘The canines are very reduced in size and in proportion to the whole dentition and to the whole skull’ (Szalay & Gould 1966, p. 154).

http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2009/08/11/mesonychians-part-ii/

I would hazard a guess that Megsitotherium would have had the stronger bite, and seeing as that is pretty much the only comparison you can draw between them, I would have to say Megistotherium wins.
Bite force doesn't always count. A human with a 50 kg bite would have a lot less effect than a shark using only 20 kg of bite force. Dentition counts more.
Except Andrewsarchus' more entelodont-like dentition doesn't seem to be any more or less deadly than that of its opponent. Megistotherium wins.
Edited by Ausar, Jan 2 2014, 06:40 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Maarten
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
megistotherium was actually really huge, being a candidate for the largest mammalian land predator ever, together with andrewsarchus and sarkastodon. I think megistotherium was more specialised for battle than andrewsarchus, having not only a immense skull (smaller than that of andrewsarchus, but still twice the size of a tiger skull), but also a strongly build body with dangerous claws on the limbs. I would go with megistotherium
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply