|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Sept 13, 2019 17:30:39 GMT 5
In your opinion, what are some of the most formidable herbivorous animals at parity and why?
|
|
|
|
Post by Verdugo on Sept 13, 2019 17:59:08 GMT 5
Cave bear, it's highly herbivorous but i'm not sure if it is eligible for this thread...
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Sept 13, 2019 18:48:52 GMT 5
^The most recent research into cave bear diet is suggestive of herbivory, even calling omnivory “very unlikely” ( Bocherens, 2018). So IMO it should count. I’d personally like to add ankylosaurids. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Sept 13, 2019 19:08:00 GMT 5
Interesting! A completely herbivorous bear; the only other known one is the panda.
For me, the most formidable herbivores of all, are probably ankylosaurs, ceratopsians, and stegosaurs, in that order.
|
|
|
|
Post by Verdugo on Sept 13, 2019 20:28:07 GMT 5
^The most recent research into cave bear diet is suggestive of herbivory, even calling omnivory “very unlikely” ( Bocherens, 2018). So IMO it should count. I’d personally like to add ankylosaurids. There is a study in 2019 that used both isotope and dental microwear in their analysis and they concluded that on average throughout their life time, Cave bear consumed a large amount of plant materials (based on isotope). However, they were more omnivorous during pre-hibernation (before they got into the cave and died there) period (based on dental microwear): "The ability of both proxies to provide data on the diet of U. spelaeus at different times in the life-history (isotopes: average diet of life; microwear: last days/weeks before death), allows us to generate high-resolution and complementary data. Our results show lower values (δ13C & δ15N) in cave bears than in strict herbivores (i.e. Cervus elaphus) recovered from the same level of Toll Cave. On the other hand, 12 lower molars (m1) were analysed through low-magnification microwear technique. The cave bears from Toll Cave show a microwear pattern like that of extant bears with omnivorous and carnivorous diets."I have hard times believing that Cave bears never took any meats throughout their life times. All/Most modern Ursids are capable of omnivory to some extent. Even the highly herbivorous Andean bears have been recorded taking and eating live preys:  Andean bear taking a Tapir Even 'traditional' herbivores like horses, deers, and cows have been recorded taking 'proteins' occasionally: www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEGLsJlcSqsAt 2:57, 3:32 for example However since most researches i have seen pointed out that Cave bears are highly herbivorous, i do agree with you that, for the purpose of this thread, Cave bear should be counted. |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Sept 13, 2019 20:30:43 GMT 5
VerdugoSay, that's a pretty good set of info! I think I'll put it in the cave bear profile when I get the chance
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Sept 14, 2019 10:46:39 GMT 5
Also thought I might add: armored titanosaurs
I'd favor them over macropredatory theropods at parity; the armor is good protectiom
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Sept 14, 2019 14:17:01 GMT 5
Also thought I might add: armored titanosaurs I'd favor them over macropredatory theropods at parity; the armor is good protectiom Titanosaur armour appears to not have been very extensive, even armoured taxa would have likely had many vulnerable spots (the neck, for one) and even a fully armoured titanosaur would still have lacked in weaponery compared to a similar-sized theropod... |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Sept 14, 2019 17:47:55 GMT 5
Also thought I might add: armored titanosaurs I'd favor them over macropredatory theropods at parity; the armor is good protectiom Titanosaur armour appears to not have been very extensive, even armoured taxa would have likely had many vulnerable spots (the neck, for one) and even a fully armoured titanosaur would still have lacked in weaponery compared to a similar-sized theropod... You really think so? I mean yes, they don't have much other weapons* and some aren't THAT heavily armored, but surely the animals with greater armor (Agustinia or Ampleosaurus for instance) would have better protection? There often seems to be armor on the neck, as well as lots more on the back and flanks. Could be wrong but I see no reason why it would not protect them if that was the case. *What I actually meant by 'formidable' is that they likely have the best chance against close sized theropods |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Sept 14, 2019 18:39:11 GMT 5
You didn’t write 'formidable', you wrote that you would 'favor them over macropredatory theropods at parity'.
We are not certain about the exact placement of titanosaur osteoderms on the body, but the relative scarcity of osteoderms (D'Emic et al. 2009) compared to those of crocodiles or ankylosaurs would suggest that they covered far less of the body surface (Curry Rogers et al. 2011). And presence of substantial-sized osteoderms on the neck appears unlikely, as this would add significant weight and restrict movement, which runs counter to all major adaptations of sauropod necks, which serve to maximize stiffness/weight ratio and feeding envelope size.
It is at best doubtful if titanosaur armour would have been substantial protection from large predators, let alone predators the same size as the sauropod in question. They would have provided some limited protection of course, but we aren’t even sure if that was their main purpose. It has been suggested that titanosaur osteoderms may have served an important role as mineral storage for egg-laying (Vidal et al. 2017), which would make a lot of sense.
So no, titanosaur armour wasn’t comparable to crocodilians or ankylosaurs.
And even if they had been, how would you come to the conclusion that they would have been more formidable than a similar-sized theropod? Even so, a theropod could probably still bite through that armour with some effort (you’ve never seen a sea turtle bitten by a tiger shark?), at least in the neck, or attack an unarmoured or less armoured part, like the legs (a likely target for theropods attacking sauropods anyway), belly or head. Whereas the sauropod can do…what exactly?
Curry Rogers, K., D’Emic, M., Rogers, R., Vickaryous, M. and Cagan, A. 2011. Sauropod dinosaur osteoderms from the Late Cretaceous of Madagascar. Nature Communications 2: 564.
D’Emic, M.D., Wilson, J.A. and Chatterjee, S. 2009. The titanosaur (Dinosauria: Sauropoda) osteoderm record: review and first definitive specimen from India. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 29 (1): 165–177.
Vidal, D., Ortega, F., Gascó, F., Serrano-Martínez, A. and Sanz, J.L. 2017. The internal anatomy of titanosaur osteoderms from the Upper Cretaceous of Spain is compatible with a role in oogenesis. Scientific Reports 7: 42035.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Sept 14, 2019 18:58:47 GMT 5
Oh...I did not know any of that. Thanks for telling me!
I think I take back what I said; armored titanosaurs aren't much better off than unarmored ones
|
|
