rock
Senior Member Rank 1
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by rock on Aug 5, 2019 1:44:40 GMT 5
Arctodus simus Arctodus (Greek, "bear tooth") — known as the short-faced bear or bulldog bear — is an extinct genus of bear endemic to North America during the Pleistocene ~3.0 Ma.—11,000 years ago, existing for approximately three million years. Arctodus simus may have once been Earth's largest mammalian, terrestrial carnivore. It was the most common of early North American bears, being most abundant in California. It was native to prehistoric North America from about 800,000 years ago, and became extinct about 12,500 years ago. It has been found from as far north as Ikpikpuk River, Alaska to Lowndes County, Mississippi. It is one of the largest bears in the fossil record and was among the largest mammalian land predators of all time. The type specimen came from Potter Creek Cave in Shasta County, California. In a recent study, the mass of six A. simus specimens was estimated, one-third of them weighed about 900 kg (1 short ton), the largest being UVP 015 at 957 kg (2,110 lb), suggesting specimens that big were probably more common than previously thought. -738x591.jpg) Wood Bison - Bison bison athabascae The wood bison (Bison bison athabascae) or mountain bison (often called the wood buffalo or mountain buffalo), is a distinct northern subspecies or ecotype of the American bison. Its original range included much of the boreal forest regions of Alaska, Yukon, western Northwest Territories, northeastern British Columbia, northern Alberta, and northwestern Saskatchewan. In comparison to plains bison (the other surviving North American subspecies/ecotype), wood bison is heavier, with large males weighing over 900 kg (2,000 lb), making it the largest terrestrial animal in North America. The highest point of the wood bison is well ahead of its front legs, while the plains bison's highest point is directly above the front legs. Wood bison also have larger horn cores, darker and woollier pelages, and less hair on their forelegs and beards.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 5, 2019 17:19:37 GMT 5
The bison most likely wins here, I think.
It's got a good size advantage, has the durability to survive lots of attacks, and can probably pummel and gore the bear
|
|
rock
Senior Member Rank 1
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by rock on Aug 5, 2019 17:58:01 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 5, 2019 18:00:02 GMT 5
I can't, my moderation powers only concern Animal vs Animal sections
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Aug 5, 2019 18:00:20 GMT 5
I moderate that section of the forum. I'll delete it. On the matchup: the greatest mean weight for male wood bison is 910 kg, which they reach at age 13. The mean asymptotic weight is 880 kg, which they reach at age 8 ( reference->). Some A. simus specimens could reach that size. Contrary to Sorkin (2006), it turns out that Arctodus simus had well-developed humeral epicondyles and a high degree of ulna rotation. It had no real cursorial adaptations except some degree of elongation of the limb bones. The limb bones are proportionately longer than in other bears, but even then it still overlaps with Ursus and had stouter limb bones than big cats (i.e. Panthera). So it was indeed still a formidable grappler (where Agriotherium and Huracan were not). It should win. |
|
|
|
Post by Verdugo on Aug 5, 2019 18:07:51 GMT 5
It's got a good size advantage, Why do you think the Bison has the size advantage? Have you seen my post regarding the Bear's size? (i suppose you already had considering your reply in that thread...) |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 5, 2019 18:12:04 GMT 5
It's got a good size advantage, Why do you think the Bison has the size advantage? Have you seen my post regarding the Bear's size? (i suppose you already had considering your reply in that thread...) Wasn't that its very maximum? I thought the short faced bear averaged 500-800 kg and only got to 900 kg or more as very max size By the way. Thanks for scaling the bear (complete skeletal) in your short faced bear vs Daeodon size chart to absolute max size. I was then able to make the size chart with the bear and Pete 3 the Daspletosaurus |
|
|
|
Post by Verdugo on Aug 5, 2019 18:32:03 GMT 5
Wasn't that its very maximum? I thought the short faced bear averaged 500-800 kg and only got to 900 kg or more as very max size Well, you can say it's maximum because i'm not aware of any Arctodus's specimens that can be estimated to be above 1000 kg (perhaps there is but i just don't know). That being said, there are quite a few specimens that can be estimated to be in the 900-1000 kg size range (note Blaze's comments in my post). There are two specimens out of 6 specimens in the study i cited that were estimated to weigh ~850 kg and ~950 kg. The paper even concluded that specimens of 1000 kg 'were more common than previously thought'. The 900 kg weight is more than likely just a representative of large male Arctodus but not the absolute largest size of the species. I understand that the whole notion of 'not all extinct animals are gigantic' but that does not mean that we should downsize everything for the sake of downsizing it. The Giant Short-faced bears may no longer be short-faced but they are still giant, nonetheless. By the way. Thanks for scaling the bear (complete skeletal) in your short faced bear vs Daeodon size chart to absolute max size. I was then able to make the size chart with the bear and Pete 3 the Daspletosaurus Glad it is helpful to you in some ways  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 5, 2019 18:45:40 GMT 5
Wasn't that its very maximum? I thought the short faced bear averaged 500-800 kg and only got to 900 kg or more as very max size 1: Well, you can say it's maximum because i'm not aware of any Arctodus's specimens that can be estimated to be above 1000 kg (perhaps there is but i just don't know). 2: That being said, there are quite a few specimens that can be estimated to be in the 900-1000 kg size range (note Blaze's comments in my post). There are two specimens out of 6 specimens in the study i cited that were estimated to weigh ~850 kg and ~950 kg. The paper even concluded that specimens of 1000 kg 'were more common than previously thought'. The 900 kg weight is more than likely just a representative of large male Arctodus but not the absolute largest size of the species. 3: I understand that the whole notion of 'not all extinct animals are gigantic' but that does not mean that we should downsize everything for the sake of downsizing it. The Giant Short-faced bears may no longer be short-faced but they are still giant, nonetheless. 1: Oh okay, seems to make sense 2: Do any modern bears have similar size ranges? Just curious 3: Err....not quite what I was getting at there. That's merely the mean of the bear's various size estimates By the way, who do you think would win? |
|
rock
Senior Member Rank 1
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by rock on Aug 5, 2019 23:08:28 GMT 5
I moderate that section of the forum. I'll delete it. ty , i did not think this would be such a mismatch in favor of link |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 6, 2019 0:38:09 GMT 5
rock
Does the information presented by Verdugo change your winner?
|
|
|
|
Post by DonaldCengXiongAzuma on Aug 6, 2019 3:34:22 GMT 5
I will go for the larger bison. The arctodus simus does not have the grappling skills nor the heavy built of other bears. It is dangerous for even large male Californian grizzly bears to take on bull bisons which are much larger and more powerful than today's interior grizzly bears.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Aug 6, 2019 7:45:24 GMT 5
So how large is the Cal grizzly? 300-400 kg?
|
|
rock
Senior Member Rank 1
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by rock on Aug 6, 2019 7:57:22 GMT 5
So how large is the Cal grizzly? 300-400 kg? im convinced , ill take the bison here but this seams very close |
|
leo
Junior Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by leo on Aug 8, 2019 19:42:15 GMT 5
I’ll take the bison here , better defense, better weapons and it I should faster and heavier but this seams close
|
|
