The Velvet Claw – A Retrospective Review

[Infinity Blade]

The Velvet Claw Review


Though I don’t post there anymore, Carnivora forum is what kickstarted my Internet activity and all my learning over the years on animals. I thought I’d pay some sort of a tribute to the titular order of mammals by reviewing an old BBC documentary that is now 30 years old: The Velvet Claw.

The Velvet Claw covers the natural history of the carnivorans. Multiple carnivoran families have an episode dedicated to them. The first episode introduces us to the carnivorans and a background to their evolutionary history, starting with the K-Pg extinction event. The last episode, I believe, discusses their current threats, extinction, future, and conservation. It even has its own companion book (as do a number of British natural history documentaries from the ‘90s and ‘00s, it seems), which you can actually find on Internet Archive (actually, in the middle of writing this review, I think I struck gold and found the entire documentary on there!).

Normally, I review documentaries about prehistoric animals, where it’s very easy (actually, scratch that: guaranteed) to get something wrong, no matter how well-researched. Modern animal documentaries are easier to get right, but it’s been three whole decades since this program first aired (it’s slightly older than the first Jurassic Park film). Why don’t we see how well it holds up today?

Directory:

- The Carnassial Connection (this post)
- Sharpening the Tooth-> (cats)
- Strength in Numbers-> (dogs)


The Carnassial Connection:


With the dinosaurs out of the way, who will become top predator? Screen capture from The Velvet Claw.

• ”65 million years ago”, okay, close enough. Modern works put the K-Pg boundary at 66 Ma, but this is just kind of nitpicking.
• The opening animation features two dromaeosaurids hunting an ornithomimid at the end of the Cretaceous period. All three animals are naked, and today would be restored with a coat of feathers. According to the companion book, these are supposed to be Deinonychus and Ornithomimus (it even claims the two have been preserved as predator and prey). This, of course, is way off. Deinonychus went extinct far earlier than that.
• Derek Jacobi (the narrator) has little time to discuss the dinosaurs, but in the time he does have, he respects them by mentioning some predatory dinosaurs as intelligent and sophisticated hunters. Even as outdated as its dinosaur depiction here is, the documentary still recognizes dinosaurs for what they were.
  
  Their extinction is regarded as a result of long-term decline due to environmental changes (which people still argue about to this day, but IMO is inadequately supported) and possibly an extraterrestrial impact (which we now know definitely killed them off).
• Cue theme song. The theme is epic and is accompanied by an animated Smilodon that roars at the viewer and bites.
• There’s some footage of a zebra grazing and the insides of its digestive system, followed by a lion eating the now-dead zebra. Now that I think about it, I wonder how the technology to do this back then worked.
• There’s an animated sequence (screenshot above) that repeatedly plays of various small K-Pg survivors hanging around the skeleton of a Triceratops. All five of these small animals are meant to represent candidates for top predator after the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs. There is a placental (later identified as Cimolestes, with inexplicably green fur), a marsupial, a bird feasting on a dead snake, a crocodilian (the exact same one animated here is identified as a “Pristichampsus” in the companion book, which is a little puzzling), and a “condylarth” (the exact same one animated here is identified as Arctocyon in the companion book, which is VERY puzzling, considering it looks nothing like Arctocyon). Jacobi gives overviews of these different groups, including some of their modern surviving relatives, and explains why most of them didn’t achieve world domination (which I’m about to go over), with each representative disappearing from the animated sequence until only the inexplicably green eutherian, the ancestor of modern carnivorans, is left.
  
  As an extremely, EXTREMELY nitpick-y side note, if I were the one creating this animation sequence, I would have personally gone with a T. rex skeleton instead. The idea is to show all the contenders for the world’s apex predators after the dinosaurs go extinct. Since T. rex was a predator (and Triceratops wasn’t), a skeleton of it would better convey the now-empty apex predator niche. But I get that they just wanted to convey “extinction of the dinosaurs”, so it doesn’t really matter.
• The marsupials (or more broadly, metatherians) fail because Antarctica froze and were “usurped” in South America (later clarified to be by placental carnivores). While I think the freezing to extinction in Antarctica thing probably still holds true, the outcompetition thing in SA doesn’t. Closer examination would later reveal that sparassodonts (predatory metatherians native to South America) became extinct long before their supposed carnivoran vicars arrived on the continent (link->).
  
  On a side note sometimes Jacobi mentions extinct forms in descriptive terms, but doesn’t name them. For example, a predatory kangaroo (Ekaltadeta). I kind of wish all the extinct forms could be named (some are, but not all). It’s not like it would take a lot of time either.
• The terror birds fail because they were outcompeted by placental predators.
  
  Except they weren’t. See the link I shared in the above point. The only times we can confidently say predatory birds were outcompeted by placental mammal predators are when said placental mammal predators were humans (namely, New Zealand).
• Crocodilians get a mention here as well. The narrator refers to what were then referred to as pristichampsids. Though it’s never called by name, Pristichampsus is now a non-diagnostic nomen dubium, and the material formerly referred to it is now referred to as Boverisuchus (belonging to the family Planocraniidae). We’re even treated to a brief animated sequence of Boverisuchus waking up, walking around (the legs are at weird angles, though), and suddenly dropping to the ground as if it were having a stroke as the Jacobi explains their brief appearance and extinction.
  
  Anyway, the crocodiles fail because they were outcompeted by, you guessed it, placental mammals! Of course, that doesn’t seem to really be clear either. Come to think of it, I don’t know of any studies that try to guess why planocraniids went extinct.
  
  Interestingly, no mention is made of sebecosuchians. The doc mentions extinct South American predators like phorusrhacids and sparassodonts, but curiously sebecosuchians get no mention. They lasted a lot longer than the planocraniids. In fact, they were kicking since the Middle Jurassic and didn’t go extinct until the Miocene.
• The next group to be mentioned are the “condylarths”. Unlike the previous groups, “condylarths” are no longer recognized as a true grouping of animals, and Condylartha is now seen as a wastebasket taxon. Jacobi mentions that these were hoofed animals, so we can instead just take “condylarths" to mean predatory ungulates in general. Mesonyx is given mention, and we also get an animated sequence of Andrewsarchus feasting on an Embolotherium carcass. We also get an animated whale evolution sequence accompanied by some nice music. Tragically, by bois the entelodonts are given no mention.
  
  The predatory ungulates fail because their dentition was apparently not suited to slice and cut like the carnassial teeth of carnivorans, only possessing teeth that could rip. While this appears to be true (link->), I’m not sure if this was really such a killer. Plenty of carnivores today get away with having teeth that aren’t designed to shear or cut, like crocodiles or toothed whales (the latter being surviving predatory ungulates, oddly enough). When carnivorans ventured out into the seas, they certainly didn’t outcompete homodont toothed whales for their dentition. But Idk.
• The odd thing about all of these is that The Velvet Claw simultaneously acknowledges all of these groups’ current success (surviving carnivorous marsupials, carnivorous ground birds, crocodiles, and the success of ungulates as cursorial herbivores and cetaceans), while sort of poo-pooing them in favor of the placentals.
• Cimolestes is regard as an ancestor of today’s carnivorans and later “creodonts”. It appears that cimolestans are just another clade of eutherian as opposed to being the ancestors of placentals.
• ”Maybe these modern forest hogs are something like those ancient creodonts”
  
  In what regard?
• The basic lesson here is that while the “creodonts” had teeth completely devoted to carnivory, the carnivorans (at least basally) had more versatile teeth, allowing them to both slice meat and grind plant matter. It’s noted that both groups coexisted for a while until the “creodonts” went extinct. Communication is also noted to be a driver of carnivoran success.
• Of course, the Felidae toss the first thing out of the window and have become completely dedicated to carnivory like the “creodonts”. Next episode is about them.

Verdict:

So yeah, we can see where the show has become outdated and where it still holds up. I think it was easier to spot in this episode since this provides a broad evolutionary overview of the Carnivora and some of the other “contenders” for Earth’s apex predators. Because subsequent episodes are probably going to be a bit more about extant representatives of their respective families, I predict they will shine a bit more. But we’ll see.

Overall, the basic framework for this introductory episode still works (carnivorans are successful and diverse; I DON’T need a citation for that), but a significant portion of the narrative behind it (particularly the whole outcompetition of other carnivore groups thing) could use some work.

[Infinity Blade]

Sharpening the Tooth:

• Ah yes, the golden boys of the Carnivora.
• One thing TVC does is it’ll show you footage of certain modern animals that might give you an idea of what an extinct animal was like. Here, for instance, linsangs, genets, and fossas are used as an analogy for the earliest felids. While it might be seen as less exciting for some people, it might also be seen as a helpful visualization to others. Plus, animation is/was expensive, so I can understand the creators not creating an animation when it’s not needed.
• So apparently fishing cats taking animals the size of goats isn’t exactly a lie. They can apparently kill animals as large as young goats, eagles, and dogs (Chakraborty, 2021).
• Saber-toothed cats are introduced as specialists of thick-skinned megaherbivores. To this day people still think of them as such. The modern understanding is that sabertooths were not specialized in ripping out the guts of elephants, rhinos, or ground sloths, but in killing the same-sized prey as “normal” cats in a much more efficient manner. The fact that there were ecosystems with sabertooths where none of the prey were an order of magnitude larger than the predator (namely, gorgonopsians in the late Permian) tells us that saber teeth are not an adaptation for gigantic prey (Antón, 2013). Physical experiments with reconstructions of saber teeth also demonstrate this (Wheeler, 2011).
• See my previous episode review on why Smilodon is not the reason for Thylacosmilus’ extinction.
• While I agree that the killing method of sabertooths would simply involve a throat bite as opposed to breaking the neck with the teeth, people are also increasingly understanding that sabertooth fangs are not as delicate as often claimed. There are skulls of predators (including sabertooths themselves) that show evidence of being punctured by the teeth of sabertooths (link->). Sabertooth fangs are built like knives. If you apply enough lateral stress on a knife blade, then sure, it will snap (and there are examples of broken Smilodon fangs). But that doesn’t mean a knife is going to break every time you stab flesh and underlying bone. That’s because the stress isn’t mostly acting in the lateral direction in those cases.
• The cheetah chase sequence is awesome. The track that plays in the background, evocative of a primal chase of predator and prey, is what makes it so fun to watch.
  
  Also, interestingly, this particular gazelle chased by the cheetah trips, and this is what allowed the cheetah to capture it. Cheetahs already have a large, sharp dewclaw to trip prey, but it didn’t even need that this time. Unfortunately, it gets its kill stolen by spotted hyenas.

Verdict:

As I expected, the parts that veer into the prehistoric side of things are the only times I can confidently point out any outdated information. Namely, sabertooth prey, outcompetition, and tooth strength (the last one is actually partially true). Everything else seems to be solid.

I think one of the strengths of this episode is that it conveys the diversity of cats well enough. Sabertooths and cheetahs are brought up as two extremes in cat specialization, with all other cats (like the modern “normal” cats) being in between.

So overall, there is outdated information in this episode to be sure, but overall still a good enough primer on the evolution, function, and diversity of the Felidae.

[Infinity Blade]

Strength in Numbers:

• 63 million years ago?? I don’t usually nitpick dates, but the timing of the extinction of the dinosaurs was always precisely established at either 65 or (nowadays) 66 million years ago. They literally even get it more or less right in earlier episodes.
• ”But across the course of history, the dogs have found a way to turn the tables on the cats.”
  
  “…how the dogs became top predators rivaling the cats…”
  
  Somewhere out there, an Internet cat fan is rolling in his bed.
• Canids are said to have started their evolutionary history by being literal underdogs to the felids around 40 million years ago. The “dawn dog” is mentioned and compared to the living gray fox (the best climber of modern canids, but “still no expert”) but never named. Other forms, including scavengers and cat-like forms evolved are also mentioned (and depicted in drawing), but never named either.
  
  Once again, I have to make a complaint with regards to naming: would it kill them to briefly name these animals? Back then, I at least knew what the scavenger form was (the borophagines, namely Borophagus), but the only reason I knew was because I was a paleo nerd. I didn’t know what this cat-like form was initially, and it was only years later that I figured out what it was supposed to be (Enhydrocyon). The only reason I know what the “dawn dog” was supposed to be (Hesperocyon) is that I looked at the companion book on Internet Archive.
• Jacobi compares these extinct forms, like Enhydrocyon, to the modern bush dog. Interestingly, Enhydrocyon was only ~10 kg (Wang & Tedford, 2008), while the bush dog weighs ~5-8 kg. There is a report of a pack of six bush dogs hunting a 250 kg tapir, which is terrifying. Makes me wonder what a pack of Enhydrocyon could do (if it indeed hunted in packs).
• There is a study which suggests that hesperocyonines (the subfamily Enhydrocyon belongs to) went extinct largely due to competition with the borophagines. In turn, it also borophagines went extinct as a result of competition with cats and canines (Caninae), and to a lesser extent barbourofelids (Silvestro et al., 2015). If true, it would suggest that the borphagines were the real (failed) challengers to the cats (but also modern canines).
  
  However, I’d like some more work to be done on this.
• This just made me realize that there are two small extant canids that became specialized for extremely cold and hot climates (Arctic fox and fennec fox, respectively). Lol, that is so awesome.
• Bat-eared foxes are real fathers unlike the typical deadbeat father cat that leaves its partner. Male bat-eared foxes look after their pups! He even fends off a freaking spotted hyena to guard his family! This is what a real man does!
  
  (This is partially a joke)
• This kind of family life/bond is interpreted as a possible origin to the pack-hunting behavior of dogs.
• The dentition of felids and canids is compared. The Velvet Claw does this thing where they show you this 3D schematic of a carnivore’s skull, with blue lines making up the shape of the cranium and mandible, while the teeth are white and solid. They compare the teeth of the African lion and gray fox; the latter’s scientific name has a slight typo here, being called “Burocyon” when the actual genus name is Urocyon.
  
  Anyway, felids specialized their teeth completely for carnivory, while the canids started out with a more generalist, somewhat more omnivorous diet (grinding molars in the back to eat small bones, insects, and fruit).
• Jacobi mentions that no early dog was as well-armed as the cats. Their forelimbs couldn’t wrestle with prey (although, it seems some borophagines had forelimbs that could be used to pounce or even grapple with prey) nor were their teeth designed for a single killing bite. This actually still holds true for modern felids and canids. Canids kill large prey with multiple slashing bites, and for that reason their canines are actually more blade-like than the canines of modern felids. Now, that’s not necessarily an inferior way of killing, but it’s not meant for a single bite quick kill.
• First hunting with another species (in this case, coyotes and badgers hunting rodents together) and then stealing carcasses with a conspecific are mentioned here as possible precedents for group hunting in canids.
• Random thought: while it’s obviously old footage, the footage of the mother elk chasing off the coyotes trying to take her newborn calf still comes off as a relatively “new” thing to me. That’s obviously due to my bias as someone who grew up in the early 2000s and therefore old footage of animals from the 80s or 90s (which still has its charm to me). The fact that it’s actually thirty years old makes me feel old. Also weird to think that all the animals in that footage are certainly dead by now.
• The dire wolves in the animated sequence almost look more like some generic fantasy warg expy in my honest opinion. Their size is also a bit exaggerated, said to be the size of a modern jaguar (they were really closer to leopard sized). However, the way the lot of them can be seen getting up in preparation of a hunt at the horizon is executed well (even if it’s only a brief scene), and gives off an almost menacing air to them. Given this is a pack of dire wolves we’re talking about, it’s deserved.
  
  I’m still not sure a pack of them could take down a >1 ton ground sloth, though. They could certainly run circles around it, but it’s a rotund, thick animal that will be hard to bite (and if it’s a mylodontid, the dermal ossicles will make it even harder to damage).
• Canids apparently get their breakthrough with the spread of open grasslands (as a result of a cooler, drier climate). Intuitively at least, this makes complete sense, even if I can’t pull up a study on it.
• The following scenes are some of the best in this entire episode. The pack hunting, cursorial dogs turning up almost everywhere on the globe as late as a millennium ago. With strategy (which I didn’t understand how it worked until I saw this episode), they survive in places as harsh as the Arctic, and the wolf is generalist enough to thrive in pretty much the entire northern hemisphere. Lightning on a cold night, wolves snarling, it is as Jacobi says; their triumph seemed complete.
  
  This is a good reminder of why these cursorial pack hunters were as successful as they are. Sure, they don’t have the grappling ability and claws of a cat, nor its powerful bite that kills with a single, drawn-out stranglehold, or even its neck strength and robust build, but that’s clearly not where the dogs’ primary strength lies (although, they obviously are still powerful, well-armed predators). Wolves, African wild dogs, dholes, and dingoes (and similar extinct forms) give all of that the middle finger just by hunting in packs. Remember that next time before you go on about how canids are “inferior” to felids as hunters.
• But then it takes a depressing turn. Another predator arrives on the scene: Homo sapiens. We’ve wiped out wolves and their cousins in a lot of places (the old photograph of a cabin with several hunted wolves hanging down on its side illustrates this point perfectly). In the wild, small-bodied, small prey specialist canids thrive best with humans dominating, and we get a nice montage of red foxes playing in the snow.

Verdict:

This episode is an ode to the Canidae. One that, for the most part, avoids embellishment. It goes out of its way to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the canids compared to the felids that were evolving alongside them. Sure, a dog might not have the weaponry of a cat, but it more than makes up for that with its pack hunting ability, and it’s no less effective of a predator for that. In fact, with their endurance, pack hunting, and even strategy, the canids managed to thrive under conditions where the big cats could not or thrived less under. Even extinct forms of canid, like Enhydrocyon and the borophagines, were mentioned.

Although it ends on a partly depressing note, with wolves and their wild cousins being hunted down in the wild (an issue we still have to deal with even three decades after this program aired->), it also highlights the adaptability of the canids. Arctic foxes and fennec foxes are tiny canids that live in polar opposites of extreme conditions. And of course, the red fox survives as a generalist predator of small prey, surviving under our thumb like their similarly small ancestors did under larger predators.

So overall, great episode. Maybe one thing that made me raise an eyebrow, but definitely still love it.

[creature386]

Okay, that's not a doc I'm familiar with, so my replies will be a bit shorter than usual (no multi-quoting or anything), but you made me interesting. Your posts seem slightly shorter than usual which I take as a testament of there not being super many inaccuracies (or maybe the episodes are just shorter than 40 minutes+, dunno).

A thing I'm confused about though is how prehistory-focused this show is. Your introductory comments made me think "not very", but your actual analysis makes me think otherwise. Then again, it could be that this is a modern animal documentary with a prehistory backdrop and said prehistory backdrop is just where the most errors occur.