|
Post by nocap on Oct 28, 2021 3:03:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on Oct 28, 2021 7:40:30 GMT -5
nocap
That is very good research and info there bro. So we have the average male being over 700 kg (1543 lbs), and the largest specimen on record at over 1300 kg (2866 lbs) if we include the fat/fur. This would of course be the largest single bear specimen out of all species in history. So i wasn't that off when i said that the average was between 1300-1500 lbs with the largest specimens reaching 2500 lbs.
Reply #9:
beargorillarealm.proboards.com/post/1450/thread
Awesome work really Nocap.
|
|
|
Post by nocap on Oct 28, 2021 14:05:16 GMT -5
nocap
That is very good research and info there bro. So we have the average male being over 700 kg (1543 lbs), and the largest specimen on record at over 1300 kg (2866 lbs) if we include the fat/fur. This would of course be the largest single bear specimen out of all species in history. So i wasn't that off when i said that the average was between 1300-1500 lbs with the largest specimens reaching 2500 lbs.
Reply #9:
beargorillarealm.proboards.com/post/1450/thread
Awesome work really Nocap. Thank you very much Kingkodiak! I will be making something similar for Ursus ingressus through this weekend 😃.
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on Dec 9, 2021 22:04:56 GMT -5
Book, In the Shadow of the Sabertooth, by naturalist Doug Peacock:
"The short-faced bear would certainly be a main contender for any kill by any animal within its olfactory range."
"These scientists also implied that its great size and ability to stand made the short-faced bear an intimidating presence (no doubt, but it was also well equipped to fight off other big carnivores during the violent strife that inevitably occurs at kill sites) near carcasses, further demostrating that the big bear was an accomplished scavenger but not a formidable predator. This may be true.
books.google.de/books?id=1ZdwAAAAQBAJ&dq=In+the+Shadow+of+the+Sabertooth+Global+Warming,+the+Origins+of+the+First+Americans,+and+the+Terrible+Beasts+of+the+Pleistocene&source=gbs_navlinks_s
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on Dec 22, 2021 9:19:39 GMT -5
Is that true? Arctodus and Arctotherium are the same thing?
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on Dec 22, 2021 9:39:42 GMT -5
Is that true? Arctodus and Arctotherium are the same thing? Not at all, they are of different genus. You need your eyes checked bro, where in the world did you read that?
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on Dec 22, 2021 10:52:30 GMT -5
/\ many on YouTube inc. my friends say such. They say taht Arctodus and Arctotherium are the same thing, that "Arctodus is simply the Arctotherium of North" and that "they just were the same species in different locations".
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on Dec 22, 2021 11:03:04 GMT -5
/\ many on YouTube inc. my friends says such. They say taht Arctodus and Arctotherium are the same thing, that "Arctodus is simply the Arctotherium of North" and that "they just were the same species in different locations". They were both short faced bears, but scientifically, not only they aren't the same species, but they are of different genus. I mean the names say it all, "Arctodus" is a genus, and "Arctotherium" is another genus. Dont listen to youtube comments, instead read the threads in this forum which have all the scientific info. A quick Wiki search would show you each scientific classification:
Arctotherium:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctotherium
Arctodus:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-faced_bear
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on Mar 17, 2022 8:51:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on Jan 30, 2023 8:41:03 GMT -5
The short-faced bear Arctodus simus from the late Quaternary in the Wasatch Mountains of central Utah
Abstract and Figures
A partial cranium with upper dentition and an isolated rib of the extinct short-faced bear, Arctodus simus, were associated with a nearly complete skeleton of the Columbian mammoth, Mammuthus columbi, at a high elevation site in Huntington Canyon in the Wasatch Mountains of central Utah. This large A. simus was a decidedly short-faced individual. Radiometric dates for the mammoth cluster around the interval ±11,220–11,400 BP; dates for spruce wood in stratigraphic position above and below the mammoth skeleton cluster around ±9,400 BP. Assuming direct association with the mammoth, the occurrence of Arctodus simus at ≤ 11,400 BP is a new terminal date for the species. The mammoth and bear may have been associated with humans in the Huntington Canyon vicinity. The late Quaternary high elevation fauna of Utah includes 30 genera from sites above 1,950 meters above mean sea level. Late Quaternary high elevation faunas of the central and southern Rocky Mountains included the short-faced bear, and may have persisted as relict populations until 10,000 BP or later.
www.researchgate.net/publication/271994320_The_short-faced_bear_Arctodus_simus_from_the_late_Quaternary_in_the_Wasatch_Mountains_of_central_Utah
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jan 30, 2023 9:06:39 GMT -5
Note: Before Present (BP) years, also known as "time before present" or "years before present", is a time scale used mainly in archaeology, geology and other scientific disciplines to specify when events occurred relative to the origin of practical radiocarbon dating in the 1950s.
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on Apr 1, 2023 11:45:30 GMT -5
I think the theory that short faced bear was a "super scavenger" makes no sense because no land animal can be a pure scavenger because if it relies too much on scavenging it would die instantly expanding energy meaning short faced bear must have been obligated to hunt sometimes. The Tyrannosaurus was also victim of that theory (in fact Paul Mattheus quote of "short faced bear was a super scavenger" reminds me of Jack Horner quote "T.rex was 100% a scavenger") but it was later proven wrong, maybe the same will happen to the Arctodus. Maybe the breaking legs in sharp turns will also be proven wrong just like Smilodon's fangs being weak.
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on Apr 1, 2023 11:46:57 GMT -5
And now the Allosaurus is also victimized by a Super Scavenger theory.
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on May 10, 2023 8:10:10 GMT -5
Here's Mauricio Antòn stating that the SF bear was a generalist omnivore that would've hunted occasionally just like modern bears. "Was that the real ecological niche of Arctodus? Well, if the dentition of an animal is our main guide to inferring its diet, then Arctodus was not a specialized scavenger, for one thing it didn´t nearly have the refined adaptations of a hyena for cracking bones. The teeth of Arctodus were, in spite of differences in detail, bear teeth, and that means a broad-spectrum diet. It could certainly steal kills from most predators around it, but it could also consume vegetable matter and kill its own prey now and then." chasingsabretooths.wordpress.com/2017/02/06/reconstructing-a-monster-bear/
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on May 11, 2023 1:27:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on May 11, 2023 5:52:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on May 11, 2023 6:17:22 GMT -5
The study also said that SF bear didn't had long legs. It was an optic illusion created by its short back. If Andean bears are very strong for their size then why won't their larger extinct gigantic relatives who had relatively stronger humerus ?
Inviato dal mio 21061119DG utilizzando Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by arctozilla on May 11, 2023 6:26:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gorilla king on May 11, 2023 6:44:48 GMT -5
The study also said that SF bear didn't had long legs. It was an optic illusion created by its short back. If Andean bears are very strong for their size then why won't their larger extinct gigantic relatives who had relatively stronger humerus ? Inviato dal mio 21061119DG utilizzando Tapatalk Well, nobody said that the SFB wasn't strong, it was just said in most scientific reports that it had "long slender legs" that could break in turns in long chases. Thing is that there are many interpretations of the SFB in different reports in all this thread. But yeah, that bear was strong.
|
|