[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE; Comments?



> >
> > > A lion is not much bigger than a hyena. Either could kill the same
> > >game.
> > My impression is that lions are much bigger. At least a lion can kill a
> > hyena (as was shown in the show).
>
> Most people have a visions of the Hyaena as being a dog sized animal,
> a bit like a Great Dane.  Having seen a Hyaena loping along next to a
> car, it's haunches and head above roof level I can attest that they
> are large animals (the occupants of the car looking up at the head
> very nervously, undoubtedly wondering is it's true that Hyaena's jaws
> can cut through steel...).

I've never had a first hand experience, so I guess my impression was wrong.

> If it's the same TV show that I saw it was made fairly clear that the
> two kinds of animals are about the same size, the Hyaena shorter but
> taller.
> The largest male lions are the biggest of all and the documentary featured
> a male lion who's role in the pride was Hyaena killer.  This particular
> individual was significantly larger than most of the other lions.

Sounds like it was the same show.

> > > By process of elimination, it must be the small theropods. Several
> > > problems: 1. there is no conclusive evidence that smaller theropods
> hunted
> > > in packs,

> > Agreed. But is there conclusive evidence all small theropods didn't hunt
> > in packs?

> They might have hunted in packs so they must have?

No, no, no. I think there is a sufficient lack of evidence to say
that all theropods did or did not travel in packs. A few probably
did, IMHO.

> Extrapolating on size also appears fraught with problems.  Most of
> the discussion about carnosaurs appears to be small = pack hunter
> (Dienonychus), large = solitary (Tyrannosaurus).  Yet modern analogues
> would say large = pack hunter (Lion, Hyaena), small = solitary (Fox,
> domestic cat) with the medium sized ones employing either method.

> With mammals it would seem that most predators are solitary (or hunt
> as pairs).

Thinking about it, I can't find any reason why or why not predators
travel in packs. Packs would seem efficient where prey travels in herds
and there is food for the whole pack. However, I can think of so many
exceptions that this cannot be a valid assumption.

> Perhaps it was the same with dinosaurs.

This being the case, it seems reasonable that at least one species of
predatory dinosaur could have run in packs. However, 65 million years
is a LONG time. Maybe pack behaviour is a recent development exclusive
to mammals.