Poll: Who wins?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Xenosmilus hodsonae
83.33%
10 83.33%
Grizzly Bear
16.67%
2 16.67%
Total 12 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Xenosmilus hodsonae v Grizzly Bear
#46
I think the cat wins, but not by much, since the bear is quite powerful with a size advantage.
Reply
#47
This is from Ursus on the old forum:

Quote:For now, simply a few of the indexes from the article "Postcranial Morphology and the Locomotor Habits of Living and Extinct Carnivorans" by Samuels et al (2013).
Readers can use this thread as a reference.

Index: Xenosmilus hodsonae - Ursus arctos
Brachial index: 0.7184 - 0.8984
Humeral robustness index: 0.0985 - 0.1081
Humeral epicondylar index: 0.2954 - 0.2997
Crural index: 0.7817 - 0.7572
Femoral robustness index: 0.0984 - 0.0747
Femoral epicondylar index: 0.2295 - 0.21
Tibial robustness index: 0.1048 - 0.0884
Pes length index: 0.2691 - 0.2141
Intermembral index: 0.9583 - 0.9167

I wouldn't say this points strongly in either direction.

To give some perspective on relative size, X. hodsonae limb bone lengths (specimen BIOPSI 101; I averaged the length of the left and right limb for each of the below):
Humerus: 360.5 mm
Radius: 259.0 mm
Femur: 362 mm
Tibia: 284.5 mm

The other X. hodsonae specimen (UF 60000) was less intact; only for the radius were both the left and right limb intact.
Radius: 262.5 mm
Femur: 375 mm
Tibia: 290 mm

Limb bone length averages for the U. arctos specimens (n=5) that the earlier indexes belong to:
Humerus: 330.65 mm
Radius: 277.55 mm
Femur: 386.06 mm
Tibia: 290.4 mm

Bertram and Biewner (1990) mean for n=4 brown bears:
Humerus: 331.0 mm
Radius: 303.4 mm
Femur: 435.0 mm
Tibia: 284.2 mm

HRI and FRI mean based on the above was 0.108 and 0.0789, respectively.

Doyle (2009) had the following means for males:
Humerus length (n=8): 377.9 mm
Femur length (n=8): 443.3 mm
Tibia length (n=7): 321.9 mm
This does indicate that xenosmilus was just as robust and strong as a grizzly.

Xenosmilus was about 700 lbs average, which is the size of a coastal grizzly. Innerland grizzlies average closer to 490 lbs.

At parity I don’t see any advantages for the bear other than stamina. The xenosmilus is just as strong and significantly better armed.
[Image: TR23sAq.jpg?1]
Reply
#48
Quote:Xenosmilus was about 700 lbs average
Eh? That’s about 317kg and blaze put it at smaller than S. fatalis on average. And also sounded pretty annoyed.
blaze Wrote:Sigh

Just a reminder to anyone that has not actually bothered to read the scientific publications on Xenosmilus.

1. It's overall less robust than S. fatalis, let alone S. populator.
2. The scapula is only known from the fragment that articulates with the humerus, do not use that badly done bone clones mount as your source of information, as it exaggerates the size of every unpreserved element, very obvious when looking at Smilodon skeletons and then looking at the comically large ribcage and pelvis they gave to Xenosmilus.
3. Build aside, it's overall dimensions (head-body length, shoulder height) were like those of a male lion.
4. It's head is the same size as a lioness.
5. There are no weight estimates for it in the literature, Martin et al. 2000 never claimed it was 400kg and there is nothing to suggest such weight is possible, remember that Christiansen and Harris estimated 280kg for the largest S. fatalis known from fossil remains, known Xenosmilus specimens are smaller and less robust, very slim chance it even reached 250kg.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/carnivor...-s190.html
Reply
#49
The description in Taipan’s opening post says 230-400 kg, I just took the middle value.

For the sake of the argument, let’s just assume that the two animals are equal in size. There is more than enough overlap in size.
[Image: TR23sAq.jpg?1]
Reply
#50
No argument there; bear would need a larger mass advantage to win. At average or equal sizes the edge goes to Xenosmilus tbh.
Reply
#51
Xenosmilus. Both are heavily built animals with good grappling arms but the cats more effective jaws would give it the win.
Reply
#52
Given that quote from blaze I kinda doubt a Grizzly Bear would lose in all honesty. Xenosmilus being less robust than Fatalis and having a head only as big as a lioness among other less impressive than thought morphological adaptions.
There are many types of people in this world; None of them are as smart as they think they are.
Reply
#53
(11-16-2018, 10:43 AM)Black Ice Wrote: Given that quote from blaze I kinda doubt a Grizzly Bear would lose in all honesty. Xenosmilus being less robust than Fatalis and having a head only as big as a lioness among other less impressive than thought morphological adaptions.

Really now? Last I check wasn't xenosmilus the most robust of any cat or was this a recent study that shows it wasn't?
Reply
#54
Hey DinoMike, long time no seeing.


The study above suggests that xenosmilus = grizzly in robustness.
[Image: TR23sAq.jpg?1]
Reply
#55
(11-16-2018, 10:54 AM)DinosaurMichael Wrote:
(11-16-2018, 10:43 AM)Black Ice Wrote: Given that quote from blaze I kinda doubt a Grizzly Bear would lose in all honesty. Xenosmilus being less robust than Fatalis and having a head only as big as a lioness among other less impressive than thought morphological adaptions.

Really now? Last I check wasn't xenosmilus the most robust of any cat or was this a recent study that shows it wasn't?

Literally look at the post above your last one by zergthe.
There are many types of people in this world; None of them are as smart as they think they are.
Reply
#56
I might just have to give this to the bear in that case still those jaws and teeth are not to be underestimated.
Reply
#57
Bears are the best wrestlers to ever walk earth, that said this cat was robust and had great weaponry. Anyways, the cat might prevail here but it is no mismatch.

Oh, and a Kodiak is just too much.

Update: just read zergethe post, yeah I'm not so sure xeno is winning this anymore
[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply
#58
(11-16-2018, 11:51 AM)Vodmeister Wrote: Hey DinoMike, long time no seeing.


The study above suggests that xenosmilus = grizzly in robustness.

Quote:The radius and hand bones are also curved in such a way to suggest that the animal could exert great force to pull in its prey closer (Martin et al., 2011).The hindlimbs of Xenosmilus hodsonae also show several specializations for prey capture. The femur (Figure 7) is relatively shorter and more robust than even those of bears or giant panda. Compared to other large cats, the lesser trochanter of the femur was larger, suggesting that the psoas major muscle, which attaches there, was well developed. A more powerful psoas major muscle would have had kept the hips of the animal steady while it reared up on its hind legs while wrestling prey with its forelimbs. The femur also has a relatively wide patellar groove, which supported a relatively large patella (Figure 8). This indicates that Xenosmilus hodsonae had large quadriceps muscles which stabilized the knee during prey capture.  However, the femoral condyles of Xenosmilus hodsonae protrude further posteriorly than other large cats, suggesting that this animal also had more flexible knees, which would have been useful while stooping down to ambush prey. Furthermore, features on the tibia and ankle bones suggest that Xenosmilus hodsonae held its foot in a plantigrade position, similar to bears (Martin et al., 2011).

This is not even a secondary source.

Keep in mind, this is from a palatenologist who is well more versed than blaze.
I am not doubting Blaze's analysis but i think this is more reliant.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)