Raptors did not hunt in packs, says study

[Still Waters]

A new University of Wisconsin Oshkosh analysis of raptor teeth published in the peer-reviewed journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology shows that Velociraptors and their kin likely did not hunt in big, coordinated packs like dogs.

The raptors (Deinonychus antirrhopus) with their sickle-shaped talons were made famous in the 1993 blockbuster movie Jurassic Park, which portrayed them as highly intelligent, apex predators that worked in groups to hunt large prey.

"Raptorial dinosaurs often are shown as hunting in packs similar to wolves," said Joseph Frederickson, a vertebrate paleontologist and director of the Weis Earth Science Museum on the UWO Fox Cities campus. "The evidence for this behavior, however, is not altogether convincing. Since we can't watch these dinosaurs hunt in person, we must use indirect methods to determine their behavior in life."

https://phys.org/news/2020-05-jurrassic-wrong-raptors-didnt.html

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S003101822030225X?via%3Dihub

https://news.sky.com/story/jurassic-park-was-wrong-raptors-hunted-alone-and-not-in-packs-says-study-11984477

[SHaYap]

Not that far fetched to see them in frenzied attacking groups to bring down bigger prey like the komodo dragons pulling down a water buffalo... 

~

[Wepwawet]

This shows the problems caused by Jurassic Park. The raptors were so OTT that ever since there has been a move to bring them down to earth, but, at times I think it goes too far in the other direction.

There is still the issue of Tenontosaurus being the prey of Deinonychus, and this is not in doubt. We cannot tell behaviour from the fossils, except when you have a one off like the "Fighting dinosaurs", and even there it is possible that while we have one Velociraptor entangled with one Protoceratops, there may have been other Velociraptors involved, but that is conjecture.

The scenario of multiple raptors attacking a Tenontosaurus not as an organized pack, but individuals just happening upon the same prey, may be true, but unlike far slower Komodo Dragons, Deinonychus was an agile fast moving predator with a far better brain than a Komodo Dragon. A better analogy may be vultures circling around looking for carrion, but then, I don't think we would have a mob of raptors roaming around on the ground like that, or would we. If we did, while we cannot say that we have a pack of vultures, a group of raptors on the ground moving in close proximity to each other, does rather look like a pack. What would separate the raptors from the wolves, or lions, would be if they communicated intention to attack a prey animal. If they did, we have a hunting pack, but we will never know.

For some years Philip Curie has been building a case for Tarbosaurus bataar, a late model tyranosaur, to have been a pack hunter. Whether he is right or wrong, and I suspect he may be right, Deinonychus antirrhopus is better equiped to be a pack hunter. It's all in the brains.

Edited May 7, 2020 by Wepwawet

[Buzz_Light_Year]

They make the claim and then say that they don't really know.

But then that seems to be typical anymore.

[+DieChecker]

I would agree that we cant really know. But I do find their evidence intriguing. So, they were more like tigers, or leopards, rather then lions.

[Wepwawet]

Thomas Holtz had said that if the term "raptor" had never been used, then maybe we would be calling them "panther dinosaurs"

Edited May 8, 2020 by Wepwawet

[jbondo]

4 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

They make the claim and then say that they don't really know.

But then that seems to be typical anymore.

But, somehow, this will be pushed in public schools (socialist incubators) as fact.

Quote

"The problem with th[e pack hunting] idea is that living dinosaurs (birds) and their relatives (crocodilians) do not usually hunt in groups and rarely ever hunt prey larger than themselves."

Many of today's predators do in fact attack animals larger than themselves on a regular basis. So, how is it that they seem to know that these creatures "rarely ever" took down bigger prey?

[+DanL]

In a predatory place like the Cretaceous or Jurassic taking down things that were much larger than you would be a waste. As soon as they took it down something bigger would come along and take their kill from them. You see this happens in Africa all the time. Often when a cheetah makes a kill before they can feed on it a lion comes along and takes it from them. Leopards have the same problem if they kill something too large to quickly carry up into a tree. IF a pack of raptors took down a bigger dinosaur it would attract a bigger predator to the kill and even a pack of raptors can't deal with something like a T-rex. If they were not taking down bigger prey then they were better off and more likely to be single hunters of smaller prey that they could either eat on the spot or pick up and carry away.

[+DieChecker]

On 5/8/2020 at 10:25 AM, jbondo said:

Many of today's predators do in fact attack animals larger than themselves on a regular basis. So, how is it that they seem to know that these creatures "rarely ever" took down bigger prey?

True, but arent those predictors mostly pack a animals, such as lions, wolves, or orcas?