The most fascinating predator-prey interactions

[Infinity Blade]

Vultures get almost all of their meat from scavenging. But on rare occasions, they will go after live (small) prey. This just goes to show that even these highly specialized scavengers will still kill if necessary.

Turkey vulture predation on sea turtle hatchlings (Fowler, 1979).


Black vulture capturing a live 6-8 cm fish with its beak and foot (Jackson et al., 1978).


Turkey vulture capturing a live ~10 cm fish with its beak (Jackson et al., 1978).


Turkey vulture capturing and devouring a live juvenile cotton rat (Platt & Rainwater, 2009).


Lesser yellow-headed vulture capturing a live 20-22 cm bay snook with its bill (Gula, 2021).

[Infinity Blade]

This is, to my knowledge, the largest kill a single African wild dog has made. It was an adult greater kudu cow (Courchamp et al., 2002).



The largest prey they have taken as a whole are juvenile cape buffalo and eland (Hayward et al., 2006).

For its size, the wild dog consumes more meat per day than any other carnivore (3.04 kg—Mills and Harvey 2001). Wild dogs have been recorded preying on species as small as hares (Lepus—Creel and Creel 2002) and bat-eared foxes (Otocyon megalotis—Rasmussen 1996) up to the size of juvenile African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) and eland (Taurotragus oryx—Creel and Creel 2002). Within this range of species, however, wild dogs are thought to concentrate on prey weighing between 10 and 120 kg (Creel and Creel 2002).

[Supercommunist]

There is this video of AWD pack killing an adult buffalo:



I imagine they would kill large prey more regularly if they didn't have to worry about lions and hyenas usurping their kills.

[Infinity Blade]

Jul 3, 2021 9:30:44 GMT 5 Infinity Blade said:

A while back I posted a paper documenting further evidence of a tyrannosaurid-ceratopsid interaction (Dalman & Lucas, 2018). NMMNH P-50000 is a chasmosaurine skull that would have been 2 meters long or slightly more when complete (what we have is 1.73 meters long). A cast was made of the orbital horn core before it was lost; judging from it, this ceratopsian was well armed. This skull has bite marks from a tyrannosaurid that are both healed or unhealed. While the bite maker's species cannot be determined, the bite pattern shows only a single row of teeth on each side of the ceratopsian's skull. This indicates the tyrannosaur had a narrow mouth, more like that of Gorgosaurus than Daspletosaurus.

Just to be clear of what happened to this ceratopsid (particularly with regards to the unhealed bite marks), I emailed the authors of this paper for clarification (Lucas conferred to Dalman to answer my question). Turns out while this ceratopsid survived one attack, it wasn't so lucky a second time, and ended up killed and eaten.

View AttachmentView Attachment

I wanted to expand upon this point and make some minor corrections.

Not only do the bite marks indicate a tyrannosaur with a narrow mouth, but at least some of the tooth marks are also labiolingually compressed, not incrassate like the teeth of adult tyrannosaurids.

The overall morphology of the bite traces described here is similar to the bite traces described previously for other tyrannosaurids from Asia and North America (e.g., Erickson and Olsen, 1996; Erickson et al., 1996; Peterson et al., 2009). The bite traces preserved on the right maxilla, the right epijugal, and the proximal portion of the right squamosal are puncture traces, which are full penetrations. The bite traces on the left premaxilla are characterized as bite-and-drag or bite-and- pull and are also full penetrations. Some of the bite traces are narrow, which indicates that the teeth that made them were labiolingually compressed and not bullet-shaped, as are the teeth of Tyrannosaurus rex (e.g., Smith, 2005). Isolated teeth pertaining to tyrannosaurid dinosaurs recovered from the San Juan Basin are all labiolingually compressed (Dalman and Lucas, 2016a, 2016b, 2017, 2018).

Immature tyrannosaurids are known to have possessed narrow snouts and labiolingually compressed teeth. However, while Dalman & Lucas claim that Gorgosaurus had a narrow mouth, unlike Daspletosaurus, we know (certainly by this point) that albertosaurines like Gorgosaurus had broad mouths as adults (here's-> how juvenile and adult Gorgosaurus skulls compare). Adult albertosaurines also had incrassate teeth.

You know what is consistent with a narrow mouth and labiolingually compressed teeth? Juvenile tyrannosaurids. This suggests that the attacker(s) of this ceratopsian (it's since been dubbed Bisticeratops btw) were juvenile tyrannosaurids. Although this ceratopsian was not fully grown itself, it still clearly had a large skull and long horns, and was definitely a formidable prey item. If so, this is a very impressive predation event.

[Supercommunist]

Wasn't the Montana dueling ceratopsian also believed to have been attacked by juvenile tyrannosaurs?

[Creodont]

Oh yeah, I remember reading about the "Bloody Mary" Nanotyrannus specimen years back.

[Infinity Blade]

Apr 10, 2023 4:24:17 GMT 5 Supercommunist said:

Wasn't the Montana dueling ceratopsian also believed to have been attacked by juvenile tyrannosaurs?

It needs to be examined and published on (which I believe they are currently trying to do) and I haven't examined the specimens myself (obviously). But, at least from the info I've found on the two, I don't think it's implausible. Certain details about them make me think it's rather unlikely to be a mere scavenging event or the two carcasses washing up together.

1) There were teeth embedded in the neck and vertebrae of the ceratopsian (and the tyrannosaur itself had several teeth broken off). The neck is a preferred body part for predators to bite, while the spine also seems like a plausible target on a live ceratopsian (compare this with bite marks underneath a sacrum, like in one Trike specimen for instance; those were almost certainly made when the animal was already dead). Otherwise, there doesn't seem to be any other trace of scavenging on the ceratopsian, like bite marks on preferred regions on a carcass (e.g. the hips or the gut) or extensive gnawing. The forelimbs of the ceratopsian seem to be missing, which could be the result of scavenging, but it's certainly not the fault of the juvenile rex it got buried with.

2) The ceratopsian's foot and tail were found on top of the tyrannosaur's tail. If the tyrannosaur was scavenging but died, I would expect the much lighter tyrannosaur to have fallen on top of the ceratopsian, not end up underneath it somehow. I also find it difficult to imagine that the carcasses being washed up together would lead to this arrangement, given how the ceratopsian was obviously the heavier of the two. On the other hand, if the tyrannosaur died first, and then the ceratopsian fell on top of its tail, I could see how this could happen.

3) The tyrannosaur supposedly had a broken finger. This may or may not be evidence that it was actually attempting to prey on the ceratopsian. If it shows signs of healing, it must have gotten the pathology before dying. If it does not, that would suggest it got the pathology around the time of death, and it is conveniently right next to a ceratopsian...

[Creodont]

Tawny frogmouth w/ fresh stick insect kill:

[Infinity Blade]

It shocks me that this got next to no attention, but the holotype of Postosuchus alisonae was not only found with the remains of four different animals in its gut, but it was also found on top of a small predatory crocodylomorph called Dromicosuchus grallator. The Dromicosuchus bears bite marks on its skull and neck. This suggests it was caught and killed by the Postosuchus, only for the predator to die and be buried with it (it was probably mired in the mud) (Peyer et al., 2008).

This Postosuchus was quite a prolific predator/feeder. It hadn't even fully digested the remains of four completely different animals before trying to kill a fifth.

[Infinity Blade]

Apparently Batrachotomus (successfully) targeted the giant labyrinthodont Mastodonsaurus. Not only that, but we literally even have evidence of face-to-face interactions between the two!

The large Nihilichnus found on opposing surfaces of Mastodonsaurus femora (Fig. 3C–E), even preserving the outline of the tooth (Fig. 2A), indicate active predation, as they are strikingly similar to those produced by large Triassic predatory archosaurs (Niedzwiedzki et al. 2011; Drumheller et al. 2014; Qvarnstrom€ et al. 2019), Cretaceous crocodyliforms (Noto et al. 2012; Boyd et al. 2013) and Miocene caimans (Pujos & Salas-Gismondi 2020), all resulting from biting the limbs to disable prey during active hunting. This suggests that Batrachotomus individuals would have attacked Mastodonsaurus on their hindlimbs from the rear, as observed in crocodylians (Cott 1961; Pujos & Salas-Gismondi 2020), to avoid a potentially dangerous face-to-face encounter. Bones with more destructive bite traces, such as Brutalichnus and deep Nihilichnus, show fractures with saw-toothed margins (Figs 2I–J, 3C–D, 4G–I 5G, J), indicative of damage to fresh bones (Britt et al. 2009). However, healed bite traces indicating attack survival (Drumheller et al. 2014) have not been found. Thus, if hunting did occur, all the evidence indicates a predominance of successful attacks. Further interaction between Mastodonsaurus and Batrachotomus is recorded by two Mastodonsaurus tusks showing Linichnus and Knethichnus traces (Data S1). Since no bite traces on Mastodonsaurus skull bones were produced by Batrachotomus (Fig. 6A–C), it is unlikely that these bite traces on teeth represent feeding; rather they probably represent a face-to-face interaction.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/pala.12597

[Infinity Blade]

A brown bear and a wolf attack a mother moose and her calf at the same time. Probably not conscious tag-teaming, but the two predators were certainly aware of each other's presence, and attacked the same prey at the same time anyway. Footage is in the link below.

A moose cow and its calf were recently attacked in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in Gustavus, Alaska by a bear and a wolf at the same time.

In footage shared on Facebook by the Alaska Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Southeast Alaska office, a mother moose and her calf are seen walking in front of a trail camera at night.

Shortly after walking by the camera, a bear appears from the background and attacks, prompting the moose cow to fight back instantly. Within a couple of seconds, a wolf appears as it runs behind the combatants, making a beeline to where the lone calf is, just off camera.

As Live Science explains, brown bears and wolves will both sometimes predate on young moose.

However, seeing both a bear and a wolf trying to make the same kill is exceedingly rare. Further, although it is easy to mistake the coordinated attack as evidence of cooperation, it is likely just a wild coincidence.

“It’s this fantastic, phenomenal dynamic going on in wild Alaska that makes this place so special,” says Rick Steiner, a conservationist who has worked in Alaska for many years.

Per Live Science, Steiner adds that the two animals, while not doing tag-team hunting, were undoubtedly aware of each other. “The bear was certainly aware of the wolf; the wolf was certainly aware of the bear.”

Steiner explains that the wolf, which was potentially hunting in a pack with other wolves, may have been following the brown bear, waiting for an opportunity to strike on unsuspecting prey.

While it is unclear which animal came out on top in the battle, Steiner says he would “put my money on the moose.”

An adult female moose weighs between 800 and 1,300 pounds (364 to 591 kilograms) on average, according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF). While the ADF notes that brown bears, black bears, and wolves all hunt and kill moose of all ages, Steiner says an adult moose has the upper hand against bears, especially in this case, as the attacking bear is probably not a fully grown adult.

As for the wolf and moose calf, Steiner thinks that the mother moose likely chased down the wolf as it pursued the calf and defended her young. “An adult moose is a formidable adversary for anything,” says Steiner.

petapixel.com/2023/09/14/bear-and-wolf-caught-on-camera-teaming-up-against-mother-moose/

[Infinity Blade]

Wild juvenile female peregrine falcon one-shots a mallard drake. Analysis of the video shows that the falcon must have been traveling close to 90 km/h. The duck was the heavier and stronger animal, so this swift, powerful attack minimizes any struggle.

[Supercommunist]

The biggest animals I have seen falcons one shot are pelicans and herons.



Second video is falconry:

[Exalt]

When does the attack actually occur in the second of the three? It looks like the falcon barely touched it in the one moment where they seem to touch. Were they going much faster than they appeared?

[Supercommunist]

It looks like the heron got bopped at 1:20. It's possible it was still alive but unconcious after gettig hit but when you're that high up you're effectively dead.