|
Post by brobear on Feb 18, 2020 8:38:23 GMT -5
Mama Bear vs Cave Lion:Velizar Simeonovski Velizar Simeonovski
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 16, 2020 7:42:58 GMT -5
An Ursus spelaeus defends itself against two Panthera spelaea by Petr Modlitba
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Oct 17, 2020 23:56:53 GMT -5
The cave bear is almost as tall as the human when it is on all fours.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Nov 13, 2020 0:03:12 GMT -5
Cave Lion meets Cave bear:
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Nov 13, 2020 1:34:23 GMT -5
Large male cave bears are immune to predation.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Nov 28, 2020 8:56:19 GMT -5
I've found an excellent model for the cave bear provided by digital reconstruction artist Artem Holubiev; I took this opportunity and compared its size with the ancient cave lion (model by Prehistoric Fauna). Panthera Spelaea - Ursus Spelaeus (max. shoulder heights)
Its easy to see why we have no evidence of an adult male cave bear killed by lions.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Nov 28, 2020 9:03:04 GMT -5
The max. shoulder height of the cave bear was estimated to be ~170cm with large males probably weighing ~1 ton.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Nov 28, 2020 9:17:37 GMT -5
The max. shoulder height of the cave bear was estimated to be ~170cm with large males probably weighing ~1 ton. 170 centimeters is equal to 66.93 inches. So, basically ( rounded off ) a big male cave bear could have had a shoulder height of 5 feet 7 inches.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Nov 28, 2020 9:22:29 GMT -5
brobear Yes, a smaller species (Ursus Ingressus) who lived in very high altitudes (hence its smaller size) was estimated to max out at ~500kg with a max. shoulder height of 145cm.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Nov 28, 2020 13:47:07 GMT -5
brobear Yes, a smaller species (Ursus Ingressus) who lived in very high altitudes (hence its smaller size) was estimated to max out at ~500kg with a max. shoulder height of 145cm. The smaller species would be Spelaeus who inhabited mostly low and medium elevation areas. Ingressus was the one inhabiting medium and high elevation areas.
domainofthebears.proboards.com/thread/893/ursus-kanivetz-ingressus?page=1
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Nov 28, 2020 13:52:56 GMT -5
Ursus kanivetz, the Medvezhiya cave bear. The largest of the great cave bears, at up to 1.4m tall at the withers and weighing up to around 400–500kg. It inhabited much of Eastern and Central Europe, the Urals, and, later on, parts of Western Europe. Until very recently, this bear bear was referred to as Ursus ingressus, or the Gamssulzen cave bear (indeed, Wikipedia’s recent article on this bear still refers to it by the old name), by Rabeder and Hofreiter (2004), and almost all of the literature available will refer to this bear by this name. But aDNA analyses in 2016 revealed the type specimen to be a congener with cave bears from Medvezhiya cave in the Urals, once named U. kanivetz in 1973 by N. K. Vereshchagin. Thus the older name has superseded the younger one. From the molecular data, we know that the Medvezhiya cave bear was a sister species U. spelaeus, with an estimated split date of 170,000–400,000 years ago. Largest of the great cave bears: This is Ursus ingressus.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Nov 28, 2020 14:05:25 GMT -5
King Kodiak Living in higher altitudes and being much bigger; that doesn't make sense, there must be an error. Ursus ingressus was definitely smaller and is mostly quoted as being 500kg at max. Lower altitudes always offer richer food sources and access to more viable dietary options, the same can be seen in Yellowstone grizzlies (Rocky Mountains) and coastal brown bears. It would basically be a paradoxon if that was true.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Nov 28, 2020 14:11:45 GMT -5
Well we have to see what's going on. We have always known Ingressus to be the largest cave bear species. From reply #91 above:
Ursus Ingressus
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Nov 28, 2020 14:15:25 GMT -5
King Kodiak Yes, there is something weird about all of this. We know that Ursus ingressus (kanivetz) inhabited higher altitudes than Ursus spelaeus. Carnivores of the same species inhabiting high altitudes are usually smaller than those inhabiting lower altitdues due to previously stated reasons. When I look up their weight, Ursus ingressus is quoted as having a max. weight of ~500kg mostly whereas Ursus spelaeus could approach 1 tonne. Something is definitely wrong here. prehistoric-fauna.com/Ursus-ingressusprehistoric-fauna.com/Ursus-spelaeus
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Nov 28, 2020 14:20:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Nov 28, 2020 14:25:11 GMT -5
King Kodiak The other source claims it was larger than Ursus Spelaeus but at the same time gives a range of 350-600kg for Ursus Spelaeus. Based on complete remains we know that large individuals of Ursus Spelaeus most likely approached 1000kg, I am therefore not really convinced if Ursus Ingressus really was the larger of the two. To me it seems that it was the smaller species and based on what we see in our world today carnivores in high altitudes usually are quite a bit smaller than those inhabiting low/medium altitudes.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Nov 28, 2020 14:34:56 GMT -5
Not about weights, but something interesting:Recent isotopic analyses showed also some dietary differentiation between these cave bear haplogroups (Bocherens et al., 2011; Dotsika et al., 2011). Ursus ingressus was likely better adapted to continental environments and, thus, might have outperformed U. spelaeus during cold and arid climate conditions (Baryshnikov and Puzachenko, 2011). In fact, it was shown that U. ingressus immigrated into the Alps around 50,000 years ago where it replaced two former populations of U. s. eremus and U. s. ladinicus (Rabeder and Hofreiter, 2004; Rabeder et al., 2008). Similarly, the stratigraphically younger U. ingressus replaced quite suddenly the older U. s. spelaeus around 28,000 yr BP (32,000 cal. BP) in three geographically close caves in the Swabian Jura of Germany (Münzel et al., 2011). However, despite the numerous samples that have been genetically analysed so far, there are a number of regions from which no genetic data have been obtained so far and which could contribute to a better understanding of the complex picture of recent cave domainofthebears.proboards.com/post/1902/thread
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Nov 28, 2020 14:41:39 GMT -5
Remember that the largest Cave bear skull is from Ingresus. But, more research will have to be done as you have some great points.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Nov 28, 2020 14:42:40 GMT -5
King KodiakYes, that's a good point for Ingressus as it had the largest skull on record.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Nov 28, 2020 15:22:23 GMT -5
Here is another important report. The cave bear individuals originating from colder periods were larger. The temperature might have been one of the main factors in body size. We know that the higher elevations the colder it is:
Th is paper is aimed at further clarifying the diachronic variations in cave bear body size by studying the material originating from the Southern Alps. The results of the study showed that oscillations in temperature and humidity might have been one of the main factors infl uencing the size variability of cave bears of each sex excavated at the studied sites, with individuals originating from colder (and possibly also damper) periods having been larger. Such a conclusion is in line with the biology of extant brown and black bears and is linked by the authors to the supposed prolongation of the energy-saving dormancy period in harsher climates.
www.researchgate.net/publication/273699464_Body_size_variability_in_cave_bears_from_the_Southern_Alps
domainofthebears.proboards.com/post/26460/thread
|
|