Re: Mesozoic biomass

[FlxLandry@aol.com]

You wrote:

>Does that also mean that  the range of the predators increased by a similar
>factor? If I remember  correctly, solitary predators like tigers have a range
>of around 25 sq  miles (sometimes up to 100) while group predators like lions
>(and  tyrannosaurs?) have ranges of 100 to 200 square miles. 
>
>( A quick  Google search on "tiger range sq mi" and "lion range sq mi"
>reveals that  estimates of range vary wildly, with figures as high as 4000
>sq. mi  reported for lions -- depending on prey density).
>
>So what would  the range of a pack of tyrannosaurs have been?  Surely at
>least 1000  sq mi ... or does it depend entirely on prey density, which in
>turn  depends on available biomass?


Depends very largely on prey density,  and also possibly different food 
requirements, depending on metabolism. It also  depends on the efficiency of 
the 
beast as a predator. Big cats usually kill one  time out of ten hunting 
parties, 
if my memory serves me. If tyrannosaurs were  better (or worse), their range 
could have been relatively bigger or smaller.  That's a lot of things we don't 
know much about, unfortunately, even about  living species, as you pointed 
out.

Félix Landry