Hello! Apologies if questions about scavenging T-Rexes have been asked to death…same corpse. I forgot who speculated this, but they said they’d need to run some statistics on the shortening of arms over time: does anyone know if anything came of this?
First question: I heard way back when someone postulated that T-Rex’s short little arms might be a response to defending a corpse: that is, longer arms would present more of bite target (and vulnerability) when fighting off other scavengers for the
Secondly, how big was the potential scavenging niche for T-Rex? Could a species as massive - and possibly energetic - as a T-Rex survive solely on scavenging all the big, dead bodies? Are there ecosystems that exist today where the top predators canfully meet their energy requirements solely by scavenging and, if so, what is generally true about the frequency and biomass of the corpses generated by such a system in relation to the biomass of the living?
Thanks a ton, and apologies if these are naive or stupid questions… I still suck at this, as might have been obvious from my previous posts…Most predators don't turn their noses up at eating free meals. That said, the idea of short arms for "defending" corpses is ridiculous.
Lol… their arms are ridiculous too! I suppose, when it comes to explaining those tiny arms, one must “get used to disappointment”, as the Dread Pirate Roberts said…same corpse. I forgot who speculated this, but they said they’d need to run some statistics on the shortening of arms over time: does anyone know if anything came of this?
As to T-rex being primarily a scavenger, it sounds like that theory has pretty much died…
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:03:28 AM UTC-6, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 9:08:44 AM UTC-7, Sight Reader wrote:
Hello! Apologies if questions about scavenging T-Rexes have been asked to death…
First question: I heard way back when someone postulated that T-Rex’s short little arms might be a response to defending a corpse: that is, longer arms would present more of bite target (and vulnerability) when fighting off other scavengers for the
fully meet their energy requirements solely by scavenging and, if so, what is generally true about the frequency and biomass of the corpses generated by such a system in relation to the biomass of the living?
Secondly, how big was the potential scavenging niche for T-Rex? Could a species as massive - and possibly energetic - as a T-Rex survive solely on scavenging all the big, dead bodies? Are there ecosystems that exist today where the top predators can
Most predators don't turn their noses up at eating free meals. That said, the idea of short arms for "defending" corpses is ridiculous.
Thanks a ton, and apologies if these are naive or stupid questions… I still suck at this, as might have been obvious from my previous posts…
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 9:08:44 AM UTC-7, Sight Reader wrote:same corpse. I forgot who speculated this, but they said they’d need to run some statistics on the shortening of arms over time: does anyone know if anything came of this?
Hello! Apologies if questions about scavenging T-Rexes have been asked to death…
First question: I heard way back when someone postulated that T-Rex’s short little arms might be a response to defending a corpse: that is, longer arms would present more of bite target (and vulnerability) when fighting off other scavengers for the
fully meet their energy requirements solely by scavenging and, if so, what is generally true about the frequency and biomass of the corpses generated by such a system in relation to the biomass of the living?Secondly, how big was the potential scavenging niche for T-Rex? Could a species as massive - and possibly energetic - as a T-Rex survive solely on scavenging all the big, dead bodies? Are there ecosystems that exist today where the top predators can
Thanks a ton, and apologies if these are naive or stupid questions… I still suck at this, as might have been obvious from my previous posts…Most predators don't turn their noses up at eating free meals. That said, the idea of short arms for "defending" corpses is ridiculous.
On 9/13/23 6:37 AM, Sight Reader wrote:the same corpse. I forgot who speculated this, but they said they’d need to run some statistics on the shortening of arms over time: does anyone know if anything came of this?
Lol… their arms are ridiculous too! I suppose, when it comes to explaining those tiny arms, one must “get used to disappointment”, as the Dread Pirate Roberts said…
As to T-rex being primarily a scavenger, it sounds like that theory has pretty much died…
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:03:28 AM UTC-6, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 9:08:44 AM UTC-7, Sight Reader wrote: >>> Hello! Apologies if questions about scavenging T-Rexes have been asked to death…
First question: I heard way back when someone postulated that T-Rex’s short little arms might be a response to defending a corpse: that is, longer arms would present more of bite target (and vulnerability) when fighting off other scavengers for
can fully meet their energy requirements solely by scavenging and, if so, what is generally true about the frequency and biomass of the corpses generated by such a system in relation to the biomass of the living?
Secondly, how big was the potential scavenging niche for T-Rex? Could a species as massive - and possibly energetic - as a T-Rex survive solely on scavenging all the big, dead bodies? Are there ecosystems that exist today where the top predators
Some predators, notably lions an hyenas, take kills away from other predators, and this may form a fair fraction of their diets. Whether T.Most predators don't turn their noses up at eating free meals. That said, the idea of short arms for "defending" corpses is ridiculous.
Thanks a ton, and apologies if these are naive or stupid questions… I still suck at this, as might have been obvious from my previous posts…
rex ever did such a thing is unclear, and I see no way of finding out.
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 8:01:13 AM UTC-6, John Harshman wrote:the same corpse. I forgot who speculated this, but they said they’d need to run some statistics on the shortening of arms over time: does anyone know if anything came of this?
On 9/13/23 6:37 AM, Sight Reader wrote:
Lol… their arms are ridiculous too! I suppose, when it comes to explaining those tiny arms, one must “get used to disappointment”, as the Dread Pirate Roberts said…
As to T-rex being primarily a scavenger, it sounds like that theory has pretty much died…
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:03:28 AM UTC-6, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 9:08:44 AM UTC-7, Sight Reader wrote:
Hello! Apologies if questions about scavenging T-Rexes have been asked to death…
First question: I heard way back when someone postulated that T-Rex’s short little arms might be a response to defending a corpse: that is, longer arms would present more of bite target (and vulnerability) when fighting off other scavengers for
can fully meet their energy requirements solely by scavenging and, if so, what is generally true about the frequency and biomass of the corpses generated by such a system in relation to the biomass of the living?
Secondly, how big was the potential scavenging niche for T-Rex? Could a species as massive - and possibly energetic - as a T-Rex survive solely on scavenging all the big, dead bodies? Are there ecosystems that exist today where the top predators
Great, thanks all!Some predators, notably lions an hyenas, take kills away from other predators, and this may form a fair fraction of their diets. Whether T. rex ever did such a thing is unclear, and I see no way of finding out.Most predators don't turn their noses up at eating free meals. That said, the idea of short arms for "defending" corpses is ridiculous.
Thanks a ton, and apologies if these are naive or stupid questions… I still suck at this, as might have been obvious from my previous posts…
Secondly, how big was the potential scavenging niche for T-Rex? Could a species as massive - and possibly energetic - as a T-Rex survive solely on scavenging all the big, dead bodies? Are there ecosystems that exist today where the top predators canfully meet their energy requirements solely by scavenging and, if so, what is generally true about the frequency and biomass of the corpses generated by such a system in relation to the biomass of the living?
T-Rex, in my pet theory, was the ultimate ambush hunter. It was a land crocodile.
Think of a crocodile... in the water... next to shore... looking like a harmless
log... animal approaches for a drink and >*BAM!*<
The T-Rex was built for strength & speed. But, if it ran for very long it risked
tripping, and many estimates have its head slamming into the ground,
after tripping, with enough force to kill it.
But what if it was an ambush
hunter, running no more than, say, its own body length or two?
Secondly, it had a supreme sense of smell. So if there was anything dead with a mile or so, it knew where it was.
So: Awesome sense of smell = scavenger
Binocular vision, all that strength and potential speed = hunter
This has me wondering… would it be reasonable to expect that T-rex would be limited
to habitats with extensive cover? I would think something that large would need a
fair amount of cover to avoid detection: if something like grass existed back then
(had grass been invented yet?) it would have to have been some AWFULLY tall grass to hide something like a T-rex!
But what if it was an ambush
hunter, running no more than, say, its own body length or two?
Absolutely! But this also has me wondering about some other practicalities… if
prey didn’t happen to wander right in front of T-rex, then I would think it would
need to be capable of a stealthy approach.
Yes, the car may be able to catch the motorcycle in the end, but right at
the starting gun, the motorcycle will have a temporary acceleration
advantage until it is limited by its top speed and the car can start closing in.
Secondly, it had a supreme sense of smell. So if there was anything dead with a mile or so, it knew where it was.
So: Awesome sense of smell = scavenger
Binocular vision, all that strength and potential speed = hunter
Most def! T-rex is clearly evolved to judge distances and strike… it’s hard to
see why you’d want to turn your eyes forward like that if there wasn’t immense evolutionary pressure to be accurate about SOMETHING… like catching me walking out of my door…!
It could and almost certainly did scavenge.
It's also unlikely that they shared their metabolism with mammals or even birds.
It has been suggested that these later dinosaurs maybe started out "warm blooded," grew quickly and then acquired a more "Cold blooded" metabolism. But, being so large, they could have retained body heat and so lived as a warm blooded animal without the overhead.
The point is, a T-Rex may not have required anywhere near as much food as
a mammal of the same body size.
In your scenario they begin at the same time. In the case of an ambush hunter, the prey can only start running AFTER you come after it.(Snip)
If it's close enough, it has very little chance of survival.
A T-Rex only had to wound another dinosaur. It's mouth was so big, it
could create a massive wound which is either going to bleed out or
fester.. that powerful sense of smell telling the T-Rex exactly where to go look.
Also: If we're talking herd animals, and there are many indications that we are, they're not necessarily running away from you. Let's say the animal closest to you flees in a line perpendicular to you... AND THEN others behind it run along that very same line, seeing the lead animal flee they follow it... bringing them to you!
So let’s say I’m a T-rex and I’m hungry… yum yum yum yum! I’m in a forest, lots of cover
for ambushes. Ha! Look! A herd of hadrosaurs in the clearing!
I can’t run at them from here: they’re too far away and faster than me. I’ll
need to stay within the trees so they can’t see me approach. I take my first tiptoe step and…. SNAP CRACKLE POP! Ack! I weigh too much… dang branches! They heard that… they’ve pricked up. How can I possibly get close?
This is a dang FOREST - there’s not a single clear footfall between here and there and no way for me to approach close enough to ambush!
I was also the only predator bursting forth for the herd to react to, so by instinct they’re all moving away from me.
Sight Reader wrote:
So let’s say I’m a T-rex and I’m hungry… yum yum yum yum! I’m in a forest, lots of coverA hadrosaur weighed 8 to 9 tons -- more than an African elephant.
for ambushes. Ha! Look! A herd of hadrosaurs in the clearing!
I don't think a herd of these things is going to be relatively silent.
And they probably didn't have great hearing, either.
Doing the Google just now, suspicions are confirmed: They were
more than likely tuned into the low frequencies.
They didn't have our range of hearing. And there's no reason to
suspect that they were very good at pinpointing sources...
I can’t run at them from here: they’re too far away and faster than me. I’llIf, as an adult, you have all the nutritional needs of a cold blooded animal,
need to stay within the trees so they can’t see me approach. I take my first tiptoe step and…. SNAP CRACKLE POP! Ack! I weigh too much… dang branches! They heard that… they’ve pricked up. How can I possibly get close?
This is a dang FOREST - there’s not a single clear footfall between here and there and no way for me to approach close enough to ambush!
you could just lie down in a promising spot, maybe even for days, and not move. If you smell something dead or very wounded, you can go have
yourself a meal. If not, just snag the first dinosaur that wanders by.
I was also the only predator bursting forth for the herd to react to, so byThey would all most likely be moving in the direction of the first one to run. So if you approach it at a right angle, and it runs forward, this will take the animals behind it directly into your path.
instinct they’re all moving away from me.
But, like I said; I always pictured a land crocodile. They just lie there, waiting for something to get too close then SPRING forward, taking a
huge chunk out of its flesh.
They didn't even have to kill it. If the wound was bad enough, it was
going to bleed out or fester, and the animal was going to eventually drop. At which point, that powerful sense of smell will tell it exactly where dinner is laying..
-- --A cautionary note: JTEM is mainly (maybe completely) a troll. He knows little, reads less and
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/731734264911183872
A cautionary note:
Sight Reader wrote:
So let’s say I’m a T-rex and I’m hungry… yum yum yum yum! I’m in a forest, lots of coverA hadrosaur weighed 8 to 9 tons -- more than an African elephant.
for ambushes. Ha! Look! A herd of hadrosaurs in the clearing!
I don't think a herd of these things is going to be relatively silent.
And they probably didn't have great hearing, either.
Doing the Google just now, suspicions are confirmed: They were
more than likely tuned into the low frequencies.
They didn't have our range of hearing. And there's no reason to
suspect that they were very good at pinpointing sources...
I was also the only predator bursting forth for the herd to react to, so byThey would all most likely be moving in the direction of the first one to run. So if you approach it at a right angle, and it runs forward, this will take the animals behind it directly into your path.
instinct they’re all moving away from me.
But, like I said; I always pictured a land crocodile. They just lie there, waiting for something to get too close then SPRING forward, taking a
huge chunk out of its flesh.
They didn't even have to kill it. If the wound was bad enough, it was
going to bleed out or fester, and the animal was going to eventually drop. At which point, that powerful sense of smell will tell it exactly where dinner is laying..
This brings up interesting ideas on several accounts. Firstly, the notion that
there was no evolutionary pressure for hadrosaurs to develop pinpoint hearing.
Secondly… would that mean T-rex would be limited to attacking dinosaurs with poor hearing?
Then an even WEIRDER idea occurs: could the T-rex’s ecosystem be simply louder than today’s world?
I assume that one would be easy to disprove: all you’d have to do is find another animal in the same ecosystem who clearly relied on hearing to detect and pinpoint others.
otherwise, as you suggest, we’d probably need some “slow metabolism” T-rexes
capable of going for days, weeks or perhaps longer on scavenging alone.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 302 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 97:48:57 |
Calls: | 6,766 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 12,295 |
Messages: | 5,376,382 |
Posted today: | 1 |