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

Re: Tubinates & Nano T.

Mark Sumner writes;

>(snip) But why should decreased size represent a challenge to Nanotyrannus?
>Surely Nano did not compete directly for the same resources as its larger
>cousins.  So why should it require a feature to "give it an advantage over its
>larger contemporaries?"  Its size alone is a feature that provides, not an
>advantage, but a side-step, just as many species of predator overlap today.
>The smaller animal could have subsisted in areas that weren't capable of
>supporting a population of larger carnosaurs.

 For an analogy that may describe my thinking, consider wolves and coyotes.
  In relatively untouched natural areas (an Alaskan State Park was cited in
 one study), these two carnivores live in the same geographical area, and
 co-exist somewhat peacefully (there are some reports of coyotes being
 killed by wolves, but there is some controversey on whether this is a
 common practice or not).  Ultimately, it has been shown that where wolves
 make full use of their territory, using every possible food source, leaving
 very little for any other carnivore to use.  The way coyotes adapt to this,
 is to hunt where wolves will not go, like on a well used roadway or between
 pack boundaries.

Since Nano didn't have roads to work with, it would need something special
 to deal with the larger tyrannosaurs that were certainly in the area,
 something that could help them survive.  I suspect that their well-develped
 nose was what they needed.  They would be able to smell not only prey, but
 the other larger theropods, and thus get out of their way.


"No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!"