Re: The absurdity, the absurdity (was: Cooperating theropods?)

[Jonathon Woolf <jwoolf@erinet.com>]

Chris Campbell wrote:

> Jonathon Woolf wrote:

> > Cats are tree-capable, purely carnivorous ambush hunters,
> > which kill either by breaking the neck or by suffocation.  If
> > you want to find a modern analog for packhunting dromaeosaurs,
> > you could do a lot worse than wolves and African hunting dogs.
>
> Yeah, that's probably true.  Dogs are a helluva lot better candidates
> than cats, that's for sure.  Still, dogs use much more coordination and
> teamwork than I think could be ascribed to a Deinonychus, and they would
> attack their prey in completely different manners.  I very much doubt
> suffocation/strangulation would be part of a Deinonychus attack, for
> example.

Why not?  It's an efficient killing method.  Always has been, always will be, 
so long as the prey has a
vulnerable windpipe.  The presence of sharp teeth and claws doesn't argue 
against a strangulation
kill-tactic -- after all, cats have sharp teeth and claws too.

> > Wildebeest, use their horns in defense?  I think if you look carefully, 
> > you'll find that they use
> > their _mass_ in defense, especially that great blocky head, and the horns 
> > just happen to go where
> > the head goes.  Like most of the smaller antelope, their primary defense is 
> > RLH.  Once a gnu is
> > cornered and surrounded, it's had it unless the attackers decide to give 
> > up.  As for elk and moose
> > -- I did say _most_, didn't I? <g>  Elk and moose both belong to the 
> > Cervidae.  Many cervids have
> > antlers that are usable in defense.
>
> I'll concede the point on wildebeest, since, as you say, their primary
> defense is RLH.  The others, though, use horns/antlers quite
> effectively.  Cervids, bovids; yup, that covers large mammalian
> hervivores.  Well, except for rhinos and elephants.  No one really eats
> them, though (crazy Savuti lions notwithstanding), so they're not an
> issue.

Look again.  _Cervids_ -- elk, moose, deer -- have _antlers_ (in the male only, 
most of them -- I've
never heard of a cow moose or elk with antlers), and antlers tend toward a 
shape that is useful for
defense: widespread with many points.  _Bovids_, which includes all the 
antelope, have _horns_ (in both
sexes, most of them) which are designed for display and are of little use in 
defense.  I don't think
anyone's ever seen an oryx or a springbok or a greater kudu use its huge long 
ornate horns as a defense
against predators.

> >I don't think the big foot claw was used that way.  Matter of fact, I'm not 
> >convinced
> > the foot claw had any practical use at all.
>
> You'll have to elaborate a bit here.  Why go to the trouble of growing
> it if it has no use at all?  Sexual selection?  Its design would make it
> very good for piercing; whether or not it was used in that manner is
> another issue, though I do think it would be a physically feasible
> scenario.

Check the list archives.  There was a thread about _Deinonychus_ and its claws 
some time ago, maybe six
months, where I gave a few thoughts on that topic.

-- JSW