|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 1, 2024 2:30:03 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 8, 2024 0:19:18 GMT 5
Yes I've long suspected that sauropods in general are more formidable than they look at first glance and how people tend to write them off as. They could theoretically use their tails to bash the heads of other large animals (although, some sauropods had proportionately more massive tails than others), maybe even use the top of their necks to hit with (instead of the throat, which can put their throat in danger). And the thumb claws (at least for those that had them or possessed large ones) could be some nasty weapons in a close quarters scrap. Most of all, I think that just having a lot of body mass (and most sauropods weighed over a tonne) is a weapon in and of itself, useful for body slamming and potentially breaking bones. This is something available to pretty much any multi-ton animal and the effects of which are less potent in much smaller ones. I actually think sauropods in the mass range of Diplodocus hallorum, Daxiatitan, Atlasaurus, or small Apatosaurus would be serious, even deadly opponents to a ~22 tonne Palaeoloxodon. They’re large enough to be able to cause serious blunt trauma in multiple ways. If even tuskless elephants can break even with tuskers in fights to the death (i.e. they manage to mortally wound or kill them), I have no doubt a giant sauropod with five or six whole appendages to use as clubs could do the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 8, 2024 1:01:54 GMT 5
Yes I've long suspected that sauropods in general are more formidable than they look at first glance and how people tend to write them off as. They could theoretically use their tails to bash the heads of other large animals (although, some sauropods had proportionately more massive tails than others), maybe even use the top of their necks to hit with (instead of the throat, which can put their throat in danger). And the thumb claws (at least for those that had them or possessed large ones) could be some nasty weapons in a close quarters scrap. Most of all, I think that just having a lot of body mass (and most sauropods weighed over a tonne) is a weapon in and of itself, useful for body slamming and potentially breaking bones. This is something available to pretty much any multi-ton animal and the effects of which are less potent in much smaller ones. I actually think sauropods in the mass range of Diplodocus hallorum, Daxiatitan, Atlasaurus, or small Apatosaurus would be serious, even deadly opponents to a ~22 tonne Palaeoloxodon. They’re large enough to be able to cause serious blunt trauma in multiple ways. If even tuskless elephants can break even with tuskers in fights to the death (i.e. they manage to mortally wound or kill them), I have no doubt a giant sauropod with five or six whole appendages to use as clubs could do the same. At similar masses, wouldn't the elephant have a decent ability to control the sauropods heads and necks with its trunk? Unless it turns out most sauropods had comparable skin thickness similar to rapetosaurus (7cm thick osteoderms in some areas) I feel like an elephant would dominate a sauropod. Even if the elephant tusks are overrated they seem bulkier and compact. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 8, 2024 3:44:33 GMT 5
I actually think sauropods in the mass range of Diplodocus hallorum, Daxiatitan, Atlasaurus, or small Apatosaurus would be serious, even deadly opponents to a ~22 tonne Palaeoloxodon. They’re large enough to be able to cause serious blunt trauma in multiple ways. If even tuskless elephants can break even with tuskers in fights to the death (i.e. they manage to mortally wound or kill them), I have no doubt a giant sauropod with five or six whole appendages to use as clubs could do the same. At similar masses, wouldn't the elephant have a decent ability to control the sauropods heads and necks with its trunk? Unless it turns out most sauropods had comparable skin thickness similar to rapetosaurus (7cm thick osteoderms in some areas) I feel like an elephant would dominate a sauropod. Even if the elephant tusks are overrated they seem bulkier and compact. I own 1:40 scale models of Diplodocus and a steppe mammoth, meant to represent animals weighing 14,500 kg and 14,000 kg, respectively. While the elephant could wrap its trunk around the entire girth of the sauropod's neck, I can assure you that the sauropod's neck is still clearly the thicker, more heavily muscled structure. I tried to get the two together as best as I could so the difference is visible.  It's also worth noting that Diplodocus has far from the proportionately most robust neck among sauropods (compare Diplodocus to say, Alamosaurus->, for instance). Also, if sauropods had keratinous spines their necks (admittedly this is a more speculative feature), this would make it more difficult for an elephant to wrap its trunk around. It would, of course, be much, much harder to grab if the sauropod is swinging that neck. I know even a baby elephant can grab an ostrich by the neck and control it ( link->), but the ostrich's neck is gracile to such an extent that I don't think any sauropod matches. The ostrich is also a much less massive animal than even an elephant calf overall. As for build, it depends on the species, as not all proboscideans or sauropods were built the same. If you compared say, Palaeoloxodon antiquus (the most robust elephantid, though not the most robust proboscidean) with Diplodocus carnegii (which wasn't exactly the most robust sauropod), you could argue for the elephant being able to overpower it at similar body masses (although I still think the sauropod could get hits in with its limbs and tail, if not its neck).   But if you were comparing a sauropod with the build of say, Apatosaurus, with something like Palaeoloxodon recki, the sauropod comes out on top.   Generally, you can expect an elephant to have proportionately stronger forelimbs for forward propulsion, while the sauropod would have stronger hindlimbs. Elephants did not reduce the olecranon process nearly as much as sauropods did (although some titanosaurs apparently developed a somewhat more developed olecranon), indicating more leverage/attachment area for the triceps muscles. However, sauropods had a much better developed cnemial crest (indicating a much more powerful main thigh extensor), claws on the hindfeet that allowed for firmer traction (almost all of them, anyway), and of course, way more powerful tail muscles to pull the femur back. |
|
|
|
Post by razor45dino on Jun 8, 2024 5:01:02 GMT 5
I actually think sauropods in the mass range of Diplodocus hallorum, Daxiatitan, Atlasaurus, or small Apatosaurus would be serious, even deadly opponents to a ~22 tonne Palaeoloxodon. They’re large enough to be able to cause serious blunt trauma in multiple ways. If even tuskless elephants can break even with tuskers in fights to the death (i.e. they manage to mortally wound or kill them), I have no doubt a giant sauropod with five or six whole appendages to use as clubs could do the same. At similar masses, wouldn't the elephant have a decent ability to control the sauropods heads and necks with its trunk? Unless it turns out most sauropods had comparable skin thickness similar to rapetosaurus (7cm thick osteoderms in some areas) I feel like an elephant would dominate a sauropod. Even if the elephant tusks are overrated they seem bulkier and compact. definitely not. It would be a nuisance at most, sauropods necks are not only thick but the animals would easily be able to overpower something like a trunk anyway. the necks of sauropods are weapons too |
|
|
|
Post by razor45dino on Jun 8, 2024 5:02:49 GMT 5
Yes I've long suspected that sauropods in general are more formidable than they look at first glance and how people tend to write them off as. They could theoretically use their tails to bash the heads of other large animals (although, some sauropods had proportionately more massive tails than others), maybe even use the top of their necks to hit with (instead of the throat, which can put their throat in danger). And the thumb claws (at least for those that had them or possessed large ones) could be some nasty weapons in a close quarters scrap. Most of all, I think that just having a lot of body mass (and most sauropods weighed over a tonne) is a weapon in and of itself, useful for body slamming and potentially breaking bones. This is something available to pretty much any multi-ton animal and the effects of which are less potent in much smaller ones. I actually think sauropods in the mass range of Diplodocus hallorum, Daxiatitan, Atlasaurus, or small Apatosaurus would be serious, even deadly opponents to a ~22 tonne Palaeoloxodon. They’re large enough to be able to cause serious blunt trauma in multiple ways. If even tuskless elephants can break even with tuskers in fights to the death (i.e. they manage to mortally wound or kill them), I have no doubt a giant sauropod with five or six whole appendages to use as clubs could do the same. I guess it depends on how physically powerful the two really are relative to each other,larger sauropods might be more powerful if scaled down from a larger size. I also have a hunch that sauropods in general were very robust and had powerful muscles for their size, but its just a hunch |
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 8, 2024 7:45:17 GMT 5
At similar masses, wouldn't the elephant have a decent ability to control the sauropods heads and necks with its trunk? Unless it turns out most sauropods had comparable skin thickness similar to rapetosaurus (7cm thick osteoderms in some areas) I feel like an elephant would dominate a sauropod. Even if the elephant tusks are overrated they seem bulkier and compact. I own 1:40 scale models of Diplodocus and a steppe mammoth, meant to represent animals weighing 14,500 kg and 14,000 kg, respectively. While the elephant could wrap its trunk around the entire girth of the sauropod's neck, I can assure you that the sauropod's neck is still clearly the thicker, more heavily muscled structure. I tried to get the two together as best as I could so the difference is visible. It's also worth noting that Diplodocus has far from the proportionately most robust neck among sauropods (compare Diplodocus to say, Alamosaurus->, for instance). Also, if sauropods had keratinous spines their necks (admittedly this is a more speculative feature), this would make it more difficult for an elephant to wrap its trunk around. It would, of course, be much, much harder to grab if the sauropod is swinging that neck. I know even a baby elephant can grab an ostrich by the neck and control it ( link->), but the ostrich's neck is gracile to such an extent that I don't think any sauropod matches. The ostrich is also a much less massive animal than even an elephant calf overall. As for build, it depends on the species, as not all proboscideans or sauropods were built the same. If you compared say, Palaeoloxodon antiquus (the most robust elephantid, though not the most robust proboscidean) with Diplodocus carnegii (which wasn't exactly the most robust sauropod), you could argue for the elephant being able to overpower it at similar body masses (although I still think the sauropod could get hits in with its limbs and tail, if not its neck). But if you were comparing a sauropod with the build of say, Apatosaurus, with something like Palaeoloxodon recki, the sauropod comes out on top. Generally, you can expect an elephant to have proportionately stronger forelimbs for forward propulsion, while the sauropod would have stronger hindlimbs. Elephants did not reduce the olecranon process nearly as much as sauropods did (although some titanosaurs apparently developed a somewhat more developed olecranon), indicating more leverage/attachment area for the triceps muscles. However, sauropods had a much better developed cnemial crest (indicating a much more powerful main thigh extensor), claws on the hindfeet that allowed for firmer traction (almost all of them, anyway), and of course, way more powerful tail muscles to pull the femur back. A sauropods neck might be stronger than an elephants trunck, but the same can be said about a buffalo's neck compared to to a lion/tiger's forearms. Granted, at parity, a lion/tigers paws will be more powerful than elephant's trunk but I could see the palaeoloxodon being a serious obstacle if it group a sauropods head or a thinner section of the neck. Edit: for a more extreme and perhaps fairer example. Human arms are far weakier than cattle necks but in some places men are able to effectively grapple smaller cattle breeds: I also think we may be overestimating the lethality of multi ton animal kick. I used to think an elephant could quickly crush any other terrestrial animal if they managed to catch up to it but it seems to take a surprising amount of time to for one to trampel a tethered cow to death. www.youtube.com/watch?v=razNNIik-vsHere is a video of a video of a mugger crocodile escaped an elephant trampling though poor visibility make have been a key factor. In contrast, while elephants drive their tusks into animals they do seem to die rather quickly. Obviously their massive size advantage is a huge factor, but overall it seems their tusks are much more dangerous than their legs. www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpOsNlnU7Xcwww.youtube.com/watch?v=xkqh2sRFeOUI know some sauropods had some nasty claws on their feet but unless they have specific adaptations for kicking with a lot of force, I think an elephant would have the edge over most similar sized non-armored/not-well armed sauropods. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 8, 2024 8:36:08 GMT 5
I own 1:40 scale models of Diplodocus and a steppe mammoth, meant to represent animals weighing 14,500 kg and 14,000 kg, respectively. While the elephant could wrap its trunk around the entire girth of the sauropod's neck, I can assure you that the sauropod's neck is still clearly the thicker, more heavily muscled structure. I tried to get the two together as best as I could so the difference is visible. It's also worth noting that Diplodocus has far from the proportionately most robust neck among sauropods (compare Diplodocus to say, Alamosaurus->, for instance). Also, if sauropods had keratinous spines their necks (admittedly this is a more speculative feature), this would make it more difficult for an elephant to wrap its trunk around. It would, of course, be much, much harder to grab if the sauropod is swinging that neck. I know even a baby elephant can grab an ostrich by the neck and control it ( link->), but the ostrich's neck is gracile to such an extent that I don't think any sauropod matches. The ostrich is also a much less massive animal than even an elephant calf overall. As for build, it depends on the species, as not all proboscideans or sauropods were built the same. If you compared say, Palaeoloxodon antiquus (the most robust elephantid, though not the most robust proboscidean) with Diplodocus carnegii (which wasn't exactly the most robust sauropod), you could argue for the elephant being able to overpower it at similar body masses (although I still think the sauropod could get hits in with its limbs and tail, if not its neck). But if you were comparing a sauropod with the build of say, Apatosaurus, with something like Palaeoloxodon recki, the sauropod comes out on top. Generally, you can expect an elephant to have proportionately stronger forelimbs for forward propulsion, while the sauropod would have stronger hindlimbs. Elephants did not reduce the olecranon process nearly as much as sauropods did (although some titanosaurs apparently developed a somewhat more developed olecranon), indicating more leverage/attachment area for the triceps muscles. However, sauropods had a much better developed cnemial crest (indicating a much more powerful main thigh extensor), claws on the hindfeet that allowed for firmer traction (almost all of them, anyway), and of course, way more powerful tail muscles to pull the femur back. A sauropods neck might be stronger than an elephants trunck, but the same can be said about a buffalo's neck compared to to a lion/tiger's forearms. Granted, at parity, a lion/tigers paws will be more powerful than elephant's trunk but I could see the palaeoloxodon being a serious obstacle if it group a sauropods head or a thinner section of the neck. Edit: for a more extreme and perhaps fairer example. Human arms are far weakier than cattle necks but in some places men are able to effectively grapple smaller cattle breeds: I also think we may be overestimating the lethality of multi ton animal kick. I used to think an elephant could quickly crush any other terrestrial animal if they managed to catch up to it but it seems to take a surprising amount of time to for one to trampel a tethered cow to death. www.youtube.com/watch?v=razNNIik-vsHere is a video of a video of a mugger crocodile escaped an elephant trampling though poor visibility make have been a key factor. In contrast, while elephants drive their tusks into animals they do seem to die rather quickly. Obviously their massive size advantage is a huge factor, but overall it seems their tusks are much more dangerous than their legs. www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpOsNlnU7Xcwww.youtube.com/watch?v=xkqh2sRFeOUI know some sauropods had some nasty claws on their feet but unless they have specific adaptations for kicking with a lot of force, I think an elephant would have the edge over most similar sized non-armored/not-well armed sauropods. Unlike a big cat or a human, an elephant only has one grasping appendage to rely on, not two. This alone will make it a lot harder for one to restrain an animal by holding its neck, so I'm even more skeptical of an elephant's ability to restrain a sauropod by grabbing its neck. The thinnest part of a sauropod's neck would logically be the distal end right behind the head, but most sauropods are going to have that part way out of reach, leaving only the thicker proximal end (and that begs the question, if the elephant is close enough to grasp that, why not just headbutt or gore the sauropod at that point?). Maybe elephants are ineffective kickers, but it's now important to mention the differences in locomotor anatomy between elephants and sauropods, especially in the hindlimb. In addition to the claws, a sauropod's backwards directed kick (imagine the sauropod is standing on three legs and lashes out with one hindlimb) is going to be powered by the femur-retracting tail muscles, which an elephant obviously doesn't have the luxury of. There's also the, as I mentioned, much better developed cnemial crest that allows for more powerful leg extension (and therefore a backward directed kick). Lastly, elephants have relatively small, shallow pelvic girdles, in contrast to the massive, deep pelves of sauropods ( link->). I'm not suggesting every single kick is necessarily going to deliver a serious blow (depending on how hard it hits, how close the elephant is, yadayada), but I definitely think a sauropod has way more going for it in the kicking department than an elephant. I remember you've made points both here and one other time on how elephant kicks seem to not be especially dangerous, but elephants just really seem to have little going for them in that department anatomically. Sauropods at least have relatively more muscle power behind a kick in addition to claws on the hindfeet in the vast majority of genera (I can only think of one exception). But I don't think a sauropod is limited to just kicking with its hindlimbs. Just smacking with its tail or its neck are options. And unless the sauropod is an especially small-tailed one like a brachiosaur, the tail should be massive enough to deliver a powerful blow to an elephant's head*. Or rearing up and pounding down on the elephant's body with all that weight/force concentrated on the forefeet. Or just...shoulder/body slamming at relatively close range I guess. *I wrote a lengthy post a while back with data on the total mass of an elephant's head and the mass of different sauropod tails. I last edited it back in 2020, and it's got a bit of a "got something to prove" tone to it, but I can share it if you're interested. P.S. I'm interested in knowing how well you think an elephant with tusks rather ill-suited for goring (e.g. a mammoth) would fare. I'm assuming you think it'd still have the edge, but I'm just curious. |
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 8, 2024 10:05:32 GMT 5
A sauropods neck might be stronger than an elephants trunck, but the same can be said about a buffalo's neck compared to to a lion/tiger's forearms. Granted, at parity, a lion/tigers paws will be more powerful than elephant's trunk but I could see the palaeoloxodon being a serious obstacle if it group a sauropods head or a thinner section of the neck. Edit: for a more extreme and perhaps fairer example. Human arms are far weakier than cattle necks but in some places men are able to effectively grapple smaller cattle breeds: I also think we may be overestimating the lethality of multi ton animal kick. I used to think an elephant could quickly crush any other terrestrial animal if they managed to catch up to it but it seems to take a surprising amount of time to for one to trampel a tethered cow to death. www.youtube.com/watch?v=razNNIik-vsHere is a video of a video of a mugger crocodile escaped an elephant trampling though poor visibility make have been a key factor. In contrast, while elephants drive their tusks into animals they do seem to die rather quickly. Obviously their massive size advantage is a huge factor, but overall it seems their tusks are much more dangerous than their legs. www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpOsNlnU7Xcwww.youtube.com/watch?v=xkqh2sRFeOUI know some sauropods had some nasty claws on their feet but unless they have specific adaptations for kicking with a lot of force, I think an elephant would have the edge over most similar sized non-armored/not-well armed sauropods. Unlike a big cat or a human, an elephant only has one grasping appendage to rely on, not two. This alone will make it a lot harder for one to restrain an animal by holding its neck, so I'm even more skeptical of an elephant's ability to restrain a sauropod by grabbing its neck. The thinnest part of a sauropod's neck would logically be the distal end right behind the head, but most sauropods are going to have that part way out of reach, leaving only the thicker proximal end (and that begs the question, if the elephant is close enough to grasp that, why not just headbutt or gore the sauropod at that point?). Maybe elephants are ineffective kickers, but it's now important to mention the differences in locomotor anatomy between elephants and sauropods, especially in the hindlimb. In addition to the claws, a sauropod's backwards directed kick (imagine the sauropod is standing on three legs and lashes out with one hindlimb) is going to be powered by the femur-retracting tail muscles, which an elephant obviously doesn't have the luxury of. There's also the, as I mentioned, much better developed cnemial crest that allows for more powerful leg extension (and therefore a backward directed kick). Lastly, elephants have relatively small, shallow pelvic girdles, in contrast to the massive, deep pelves of sauropods ( link->). I'm not suggesting every single kick is necessarily going to deliver a serious blow (depending on how hard it hits, how close the elephant is, yadayada), but I definitely think a sauropod has way more going for it in the kicking department than an elephant. I remember you've made points both here and one other time on how elephant kicks seem to not be especially dangerous, but elephants just really seem to have little going for them in that department anatomically. Sauropods at least have relatively more muscle power behind a kick in addition to claws on the hindfeet in the vast majority of genera (I can only think of one exception). But I don't think a sauropod is limited to just kicking with its hindlimbs. Just smacking with its tail or its neck are options. And unless the sauropod is an especially small-tailed one like a brachiosaur, the tail should be massive enough to deliver a powerful blow to an elephant's head*. Or rearing up and pounding down on the elephant's body with all that weight/force concentrated on the forefeet. Or just...shoulder/body slamming at relatively close range I guess. *I wrote a lengthy post a while back with data on the total mass of an elephant's head and the mass of different sauropod tails. I last edited it back in 2020, and it's got a bit of a "got something to prove" tone to it, but I can share it if you're interested. P.S. I'm interested in knowing how well you think an elephant with tusks rather ill-suited for goring (e.g. a mammoth) would fare. I'm assuming you think it'd still have the edge, but I'm just curious. Wouldn't a diplodocus be roughly at head level with a sauropod? Even if the trunk doesn't prove to be effective grappling tool I think it could knock the sauropods light outs if it clubbed one in the head with its nose. Usually, I think "one hit" ko strikes are too rare to affect the outcome of an average outcome of a fight but snakes are one of the few animals that are consistently battered by paw swipes. Against an equal sized foe I am not sure how useful neck blows would be. Sauropod necks were strong structures but they are still necks so I feel there is a risk of a sauropod damaging its neck if it struck a more compact animal of equal mass. As for tails, I've seen a few videos of monitors making good use of their tail but they don't really seem capable of inflicting fatal injuries. I am not sure if a sauropod would be able to whip a similar sized elephant to death unless it had a dedicated tail weapon like shunosaurus. The claws could probably inflict nasty wounds, but a sauropod would probably need to rear up to strike a similar sized elephants vitals. In this stance it would be less balanced and may be bowled over by the palaeoloxodon. Bit embarrassing but wooly mammoths keep slipping my mind when it comes to AVA discussion lol. I never thought about it before but I suppose a mammoth may arguably be less armed than an average sauropod and its fur would and lack "radiator" would make it more suspectible to exhaustion in a fight. The tusks wouldn't be great weapons, but they still might be decent at amplifying the force of its blows, or at the very least help in a pushing contest. This might be a totally baseless, but its possible some mammoths might have been able to loop their curved tusks around a link and try to trip their foe. I guess my current tentative parity ranking would be this: shunosaurus-like sauropods > straight tusked elephants > sauropodomorphs > armored sauropods without specalized weapons > while mammoths and non-armored sauropods occupy the same tier. I would be interested in reading your previous sauropod vs elephant points. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 8, 2024 15:51:26 GMT 5
Unlike a big cat or a human, an elephant only has one grasping appendage to rely on, not two. This alone will make it a lot harder for one to restrain an animal by holding its neck, so I'm even more skeptical of an elephant's ability to restrain a sauropod by grabbing its neck. The thinnest part of a sauropod's neck would logically be the distal end right behind the head, but most sauropods are going to have that part way out of reach, leaving only the thicker proximal end (and that begs the question, if the elephant is close enough to grasp that, why not just headbutt or gore the sauropod at that point?). Maybe elephants are ineffective kickers, but it's now important to mention the differences in locomotor anatomy between elephants and sauropods, especially in the hindlimb. In addition to the claws, a sauropod's backwards directed kick (imagine the sauropod is standing on three legs and lashes out with one hindlimb) is going to be powered by the femur-retracting tail muscles, which an elephant obviously doesn't have the luxury of. There's also the, as I mentioned, much better developed cnemial crest that allows for more powerful leg extension (and therefore a backward directed kick). Lastly, elephants have relatively small, shallow pelvic girdles, in contrast to the massive, deep pelves of sauropods ( link->). I'm not suggesting every single kick is necessarily going to deliver a serious blow (depending on how hard it hits, how close the elephant is, yadayada), but I definitely think a sauropod has way more going for it in the kicking department than an elephant. I remember you've made points both here and one other time on how elephant kicks seem to not be especially dangerous, but elephants just really seem to have little going for them in that department anatomically. Sauropods at least have relatively more muscle power behind a kick in addition to claws on the hindfeet in the vast majority of genera (I can only think of one exception). But I don't think a sauropod is limited to just kicking with its hindlimbs. Just smacking with its tail or its neck are options. And unless the sauropod is an especially small-tailed one like a brachiosaur, the tail should be massive enough to deliver a powerful blow to an elephant's head*. Or rearing up and pounding down on the elephant's body with all that weight/force concentrated on the forefeet. Or just...shoulder/body slamming at relatively close range I guess. *I wrote a lengthy post a while back with data on the total mass of an elephant's head and the mass of different sauropod tails. I last edited it back in 2020, and it's got a bit of a "got something to prove" tone to it, but I can share it if you're interested. P.S. I'm interested in knowing how well you think an elephant with tusks rather ill-suited for goring (e.g. a mammoth) would fare. I'm assuming you think it'd still have the edge, but I'm just curious. Wouldn't a diplodocus be roughly at head level with a sauropod? Even if the trunk doesn't prove to be effective grappling tool I think it could knock the sauropods light outs if it clubbed one in the head with its nose. Usually, I think "one hit" ko strikes are too rare to affect the outcome of an average outcome of a fight but snakes are one of the few animals that are consistently battered by paw swipes. Against an equal sized foe I am not sure how useful neck blows would be. Sauropod necks were strong structures but they are still necks so I feel there is a risk of a sauropod damaging its neck if it struck a more compact animal of equal mass. As for tails, I've seen a few videos of monitors making good use of their tail but they don't really seem capable of inflicting fatal injuries. I am not sure if a sauropod would be able to whip a similar sized elephant to death unless it had a dedicated tail weapon like shunosaurus. The claws could probably inflict nasty wounds, but a sauropod would probably need to rear up to strike a similar sized elephants vitals. In this stance it would be less balanced and may be bowled over by the palaeoloxodon. Bit embarrassing but wooly mammoths keep slipping my mind when it comes to AVA discussion lol. I never thought about it before but I suppose a mammoth may arguably be less armed than an average sauropod and its fur would and lack "radiator" would make it more suspectible to exhaustion in a fight. The tusks wouldn't be great weapons, but they still might be decent at amplifying the force of its blows, or at the very least help in a pushing contest. This might be a totally baseless, but its possible some mammoths might have been able to loop their curved tusks around a link and try to trip their foe. I guess my current tentative parity ranking would be this: shunosaurus-like sauropods > straight tusked elephants > sauropodomorphs > armored sauropods without specalized weapons > while mammoths and non-armored sauropods occupy the same tier. I would be interested in reading your previous sauropod vs elephant points. I’m going to be working all day, but I wanted to squeeze this reply in before I do that. A sauropod’s neutral neck posture would most likely be with it raised to some degree. For Diplodocus, think less WWD and more this reconstruction from Taylor et al. (2009).  Yeah, I suppose there’s a risk of the neck getting injured during a smack. However, I emailed Matt Wedel about this not terribly long ago, and he thinks that the cervical ribs of sauropods not only probably protected their esophagus, trachea, and major blood vessels, but also may have braced the neck vertebrae against dislocation in many species (and that’s not getting into the apatosaurines, which appear to have specialized their necks for bludgeoning). As for tails, monitors don’t seem to deliver lethal tail smacks, but I think the much greater mass of a sauropod (and by extension its tail) will greatly increase the effects. If we were talking about a sauropod that were say, the size of a cow, I wouldn’t be confident favoring it over a dwarf elephant its mass. As for kicks, given how high up an elephant can raise its hindleg backward, I wonder if a sauropod could do the same and maybe kick a chest or forelimb (admittedly the head of the elephant may be in the way, though). Here’s the post I made a while ago: theworldofanimals.proboards.com/post/53204 |
|
|
|
Post by razor45dino on Jun 8, 2024 18:24:06 GMT 5
Daniel Vidal seems to support supersonic tail whips for sauropods a sauropods can probably leave its tail on the ground to keep its stability when rearing mammoth tusks may not be that great but I believe mammoths are more formidable than at least the modern elephants, they're more robust but also proportionally taller with longer front legs. I don't see straight tusk elephant as that much better here, because they are facing downwards to the ground. face away from eachother and are also making a sort of bowl from the top making it harder to gore and easier to snap off I think  |
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 9, 2024 4:36:19 GMT 5
There don't seem to be many animals that can effectively kick forward with their forelimbs. Heck, even ratites often lack precision even though that is their main method of attack. www.youtube.com/watch?v=pD4GjvmhS0IYour post on sauropod tail weight was interesting but I feel that the length of the sauropods tail would spread out the force of a blow. A human arm is roughly 5 to 6 percent of a human's body mass compared to our 8 percent heads. Obviously they are a lot of cases of people knocking each other out with one punch, but we have relatively fragile faces compared to a lot of other animals, concentrate the force of our punches in a small fist, and even then hand injury is very common, especially if you throw an improper punch. exrx.net/Kinesiology/SegmentsAlligator and crocodiles are fairly rough analogy to sauropods but there aren't many cases of them dealing serious injury to other animals with their tails. For instance, here is a video of an alligator thwacking a woman's leg with her tail. Granted, the tail wasn't moving fast and alligator primary method of defense is it jaws rather than its tail, but the alligators total tail mass was likely a lot higher than the woman's leg, much less her shin. www.youtube.com/watch?v=M56rjU3LpoUIn a fight to the death, I think most sauropods would only get one or two chances to hit an elephant's head with its tail before it closes distance and makes it difficult if not close to impossible to get a head shot off. Daniel Vidal seems to support supersonic tail whips for sauropods a sauropods can probably leave its tail on the ground to keep its stability when rearing mammoth tusks may not be that great but I believe mammoths are more formidable than at least the modern elephants, they're more robust but also proportionally taller with longer front legs. I don't see straight tusk elephant as that much better here, because they are facing downwards to the ground. face away from eachother and are also making a sort of bowl from the top making it harder to gore and easier to snap off I think View AttachmentPretty sure the sonic tail idea is a myth. arstechnica.com/science/2022/12/myth-busted-apatosaurus-didnt-produce-sonic-booms-when-whipping-its-tail/ |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 9, 2024 5:24:57 GMT 5
I was talking about the hindlimbs there. I imagine a sauropod may be able to use one of its hindlimbs by kicking backwards with one and standing on the remaining three legs. And because it's got a long neck that can turn to the sides very easily, it would be easy to see where it's kicking. If a sauropod wanted to use its forelimbs as weapons, I think the most potent thing it could do against a similar sized animal would be to rear up and just crash down on its body with its forelimbs and full body weight. It could rear up and "punch" with them, but while that requires less movement, it would be less powerful. True, it's not an ankylosaur tail club or thagomizer or anything that concentrates the force onto a smaller surface area, so it won't be as damaging relatively. However, one study found that a blunt impact alone from the tail of a Kentrosaurus would be powerful enough to seriously injure even large theropods, even without accounting for slashes or punctures from the tail spikes ( Mallison, 2011). And Kentrosaurus was vastly smaller than the overwhelming majority of sauropods. So if a sauropod could swing its tail at such speeds (and I see no reason why it couldn't), and back it up with more force from its hips and ground reaction forces from its legs, I could see that being a very, very serious blow. Remember, too, that an elephant's skull, while certainly strongly built and robust, is not complete solid bone either. That cranium is actually a massive honeycomb structure built by thin, delicate sheets of bone. Not weaker than a skull of the same mass (similar to how a bird's bone isn't any weaker than a regular bone of the same mass), but anyone who imagines this skull to be a solid bone cranium is in for a surprise (or maybe you were typing your response knowing this full well, in which case...ignore this point).  I was already kinda expecting the two to be at pretty close range if the sauropod could land tail blows to the head tbh. I suppose the two could be closer, but then that means the sauropod could probably smack the ribs or the shoulder blade. |
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 9, 2024 6:37:17 GMT 5
I was talking about the hindlimbs there. I imagine a sauropod may be able to use one of its hindlimbs by kicking backwards with one and standing on the remaining three legs. And because it's got a long neck that can turn to the sides very easily, it would be easy to see where it's kicking. If a sauropod wanted to use its forelimbs as weapons, I think the most potent thing it could do against a similar sized animal would be to rear up and just crash down on its body with its forelimbs and full body weight. It could rear up and "punch" with them, but while that requires less movement, it would be less powerful. True, it's not an ankylosaur tail club or thagomizer or anything that concentrates the force onto a smaller surface area, so it won't be as damaging relatively. However, one study found that a blunt impact alone from the tail of a Kentrosaurus would be powerful enough to seriously injure even large theropods, even without accounting for slashes or punctures from the tail spikes ( Mallison, 2011). And Kentrosaurus was vastly smaller than the overwhelming majority of sauropods. So if a sauropod could swing its tail at such speeds (and I see no reason why it couldn't), and back it up with more force from its hips and ground reaction forces from its legs, I could see that being a very, very serious blow. Remember, too, that an elephant's skull, while certainly strongly built and robust, is not complete solid bone either. That cranium is actually a massive honeycomb structure built by thin, delicate sheets of bone. Not weaker than a skull of the same mass (similar to how a bird's bone isn't any weaker than a regular bone of the same mass), but anyone who imagines this skull to be a solid bone cranium is in for a surprise (or maybe you were typing your response knowing this full well, in which case...ignore this point). I was already kinda expecting the two to be at pretty close range if the sauropod could land tail blows to the head tbh. I suppose the two could be closer, but then that means the sauropod could probably smack the ribs or the shoulder blade. That kentro paper is good evidence. Think that's the first time I've seen anyone actually calculate the blunt trauma of an animal other than an anky. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jun 16, 2024 4:02:37 GMT 5
It looks like no one's discussed rhinos yet. Rhinoceros beetles were brought up before actual rhinos lol (nothing wrong with that ofc, I just thought it was funny). So it looks like in black and white rhinos, intraspecific fighting is one of, if not the leading cause of mortality. Brett (1998) Anderson (1993) (Incidentally I even found a mention of a fight between two dehorned white rhinos that ended in death, that's kind of wild) Rachlow (1997) Rhinos seem to be have lethal intent in combat far more than elephants do (elephants rarely actually fight to the death). They also have proportionately much shorter/stouter leg bones with more flexible joints, giving them more power when pushing forward and attacking. I'd probably rate a white rhino above an equal-sized forest elephant (obviously not against a bush or Asian elephant lol), but ceratopsids seem to have even them beat in physique (which is shocking). Against equally massive terrestrial predators*, I think the white and black rhinos would do better than elephants, but not as well as ceratopsids. I still don't think they'd beat said predators at parity more often than not. *At this weight range they'd be comprised mostly of theropods, but also the biggest entelodonts, bears, and terrestrial pseudosuchians. |
|
