That is, especially with Carcharodontosaurus being the namesake of the broader family, which includes Giganotosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Concavenator, etc.
@@markcobuzzi826 especially being the apex of Africa, probably the only one with the cajones to take on the biggest game on the region. You’d think people would see how badass it was
The weird thing is that Mapusaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were both in the same size bracket as Giganotosaurus, potentially even larger, so it's odd that they don't share its fame, especially given that Mapusaurus actually lived with Argentinosaurus, or that Carcharodontosaurus sounds much cooler than 'gigantosaurus', written like that on purpose, as it seems many people think that's the genus name, which is reasonable lol.
I find it hard to believe it would have exclusively preyed on fish. Spinosaurus despite not being built for hunting large game absolutely likely would have eaten whatever it could get its bit meaty claws on. I like to imagine it like the Kodiak bear of Therapods
Keep in mind, the fish in question could be the length of a car or more. Being primarily a wader it's also good to note that it wouldn't just be fish it was eating, but small crocodiles and whatever else. I kind of doubt Spinosaurus was an active hunter of land animals, but I agree that it would eat whatever it could find, and its sheer size probably meant it was good at bullying smaller predators off their kills.
Yeah, although Spinosaurus probably ate mostly fish, it was so big it could probably take down medium sized dinosaurs from time to time. Of course, it could scavenge dinosaurs when the opportunity arose too.
Being big isn't enough. The fact remains that the spino's snout is this and relatively fragile. Trying to bite a struggling animal of any significant size would very likely result in a broken snout. I would say it wouldn't bother trying to hunt anything larger than 1k pounds. And even then it would be a very rare and opportunistic occurrence. Such as a small animal being stuck in the mud on the river bank, or maybe just something that happened to wander close to the spino by mistake.
Spinosaurus was a capable hunter and by no means weak. Everyone loves to downplay spino, but in reality spino was an apex predator and fully capable of defending itself. Claws, teeth, and all.
"This large, 8 ton animal could have only preyed on fish." "This animal with a bite force of over 30,000 newtons must have only eaten carcasses." "This 30 feet long predator has a bite force less than a lion's. It must have hunted by swinging its upper jaw around like an axe." Why are paleo takes, especially those centered around therapods, so damn wild?
I know right? I guess it is mostly because these sorts of takes can garner the most attention or so. Which either helped benefited the study of the animal, or further misinform about it
We have two entirely different fossils that show active combat between it and Carcharodontosarus. Which *should* mean it was competing for an overlapping food source.
@masterbaiter8961 No, the fossils showed that they had been attacking each other. Completely different set of fossils too. One had a Spinosaurus tooth in the cervical vertebrae of a Carcharodontosaurus. Whilst the other was a Spinosaurus spine bitten off at the mid-section by a Carcharodontosaurus.
@@ThePerfectCell01 they aren't from the same batch of fossils. And a bite to the cervical vertebrae like that would be fatal, so the Carcharodontosaurus almost certainly died then and there.
To be truthful, predators will almost always go after the weak, sick and young rather than the fully grown, healthy adults anyways due to the risk that such adults would oppose to the hunter. That being said, I think a lot of people underestimate Spinosaurus' ability to bully other carnivores away from their meal. Spinosaurus' sail, whilst a hinderance in an all out brawl, was probably developed as a mating display which could also double as an intimidation device. The sail was probably brightly colored compared to the rest of the creature and having a massive, brightly colored sail on its back would've probably intimidated other carnivorous Dinosaurs into believing Spinosaurus was bigger than it actually was. Although, if the carnivorous Dinosaur in question refused to back down than it's fairly unlikely this would result in a battle and instead would just result in Spinosaurus slinking back into the water.
Well if the said carnivorous dinosaur stand it's ground and decides to fight back it will definitely be scared of after getting hit by the spino's claws which is also thought to have delivered powerful and quick blouse on to its opponents with more than enough force to break bone's so it's very likely that spino was capable of bullying other large carnivorous dinosaurs away from its kill
Most fisheaters do branch out every now and then. I've seen seagulls swallow entire rabbits, herons eat anything from snakes, to frogs, to other birds, and likewise, I could see the Spinosaurus snatching up any vulnerable smaller dinosaur it found, and likely hunted the local fresh water plesiosaur species as well.
what about spino claws? I heard somewhere that spino arm didnt have enough mobility to be used as a weapon, but on the other hand, in many documentaries it is shown how he uses them.
Depending on who you ask they'll say different things. In terms of combat and hunting I don't think they'd be overly effective. At least compared to what some documentaries have shown.
There's a chance that the claws double as an intimidation display. For example, if it ever had a standoff against a Carcharodontosaurus, it may have reared up like an anteater and clapped it forelimbs together to rake the face if the enemy came too close.
Claws aren’t particularly useful when tackling large bodied prey because to utilize them to inflict any serious damage you need to get right up onto what you are attacking due to theropod arms range of motion, this puts a big risk to animal especially if it is attempting to claw at something around it size or larger. This is the reason why theropods that hunted large game, like Tyrannosaurs, Abelisaurs and Carcharodontosaurs usually have large heads and proportionally smaller arms, by having larger heads they can inflict damage while having most of their body away from their prey and therefore safe.
I think spinosaurs was fully capable of taking down large game we see this today with grizzlies, and lets not act like a crocodile like skull equals (weak bite force) since “crocodiles” literally have the strongest bite forces of any vertebrate today. Modern animals are constantly keeping scientists on their toes with new behavioral discoveries, and abilities that wasn’t documented before showing just how much we still have to learn about nature(like the new discovery that shows jaguars can actually form active coagulative collations) when it was previously thought they were solitary. I wouldn’t rule this out for ancient animals either especially since they are no longer here for us to see
Spinosaurs have skulls that superficially look like a crocodiles but they lack all the features that make it function like a crocodiles. The closest comparison among crocodiles skulls to spinosaurs are the skulls of predominantly fish eating crocs like freshwater crocodiles and gharials, spinosaurs lack the large jaw muscle attachments and robustness of more generalist “strong jawed” crocodiles.
There is no such thing as "bleed damage" and there never has been. Bleed damage only exists in video games. Thin serrated teeth aren't for causing blood loss, they are for slicing flesh. In fact, if you wanted to try to bleed something to death, the teeth of the trex would be MUCH better suited to that as a giant round hole bleeds more than a thin slice. Also, big animals have a lot of blood. Really big animals like 15+ ton sauropods had so much blood that almost any wound a predator could inflict would close and stop bleeding long before the animal died or passed out from blood loss. Bleed damage is not a thing.
Based on isotope ratios from its teeth, Spinosaurus was still capable of eating dinosaurs. Furthermore, it's teeth and dentition indicate it was more of a generalist compared to other spinosaurids which were gharial mimics. Even more evidence from (unpublished) studies suggests it's jaws are significantly more impressive than any known piscivore.
People are saying it was large enough to take down large prey, but forget the fact that it's ecosystem was almost entirely dominated by fish. All the herbivore niches were filled by fish. So even if It had the occasional opportunity to take down a large hadrosaur like ouranosaurus, it most likely wouldn't risk an injury or extra energy when there is plenty of food everywhere. When it got desperate and the large north African estuary began to dry up a couple million years later, is when we would see it start to take on large prey due to the lack of fish. This would ultimately be the spinosaurus' demise being unable to adapt quickly to taking on large prey where other species such as charcharodontasaurus thrived and quickly dominated these niches.
True spinosaurus bite force wasn't that strong but it's bite force was like a ton anyway and it's quite possible it could ambush it's prey but only for smaller dinosaurs like rugops primus
I see it like large crocodiles today; primarily fish eaters but they would've also taken any not overly-large dinos or pterosaurs that let their guard down at the shore, and juveniles would've likely taken any small animals they could catch.
I will add crocodiles and plesiosaurs to the diet of Spinosaurus, given that it had the tools to catch them and eat them (both being it's conical teeth and big claws) and I would add turtles here but it depends a lot of the type of turtle, since I doubt it could pierce strong shells even at it's size
In my opinion Spinosaurus probably behaved similar to a bear in the sense that it mostly ate fish from riverbanks but also occasionally savaged or even hunted land animals as well. I could also see Spino using its size and intimidating appearance in order to bully smaller predators out of their kills, another tactic used by bears and other large predators today.
What does it take for a Theropod to be a good fighter? There are a few things, but the basis is the "engine" the hips with the hind legs. Spinosaurus' "engine" was amazingly weak for its body weight. His body was very long, and his body's inertia when turning was enormous. The neck was flexible, but only in one plane, and laterally rigid. His nose was full of receptors, like crocodiles, he couldn't risk getting hurt, they were needed for hunting, i.e. survival. In addition, his attack surface was enormous due to the sail. It was very vulnerable on land despite its size. On land, the animal was like the Maus tank in World War 2, huge, but useless in battle. Spinosaurus was not a monster, just a vulnerable animal like all other dinosaurs. Apex predators are not invulnerable these days either, and it was no different a long time ago. I know a lot of people love Spinosaurus because of JP3, but Hollywood has little to do with science.
I can see Spino saurus hunt baby sauropod from few hundred kilo size to under 10 ton and below size baby sauropod and hunt young ouranosaurus like baryonyx
The spinosaurus seemed remarkably weak for its size. Slow, inflexible, massive frail hitbox, bad range on its claws, brittle jaw and weak teeth, even a rhinoceros could probably beat a spinosaurus by just charging headfirst into him. Do you know what dinosaur the spinosaurus would absolutely destroy, though? The nigersaurus. Stephen Hawking would stand a better chance than the nigersaurus.
Spinosaurus is a bottom feeder. It only eats fish & aquatic organisms. Meanwhile Carcharodontosaurus was the apex predator of spino era. There was also Sauroniops that is comparable to carcharodontosaurus in size.
@@TyrannusX Of it’s particular environment, yes it was. All large apex predators have to be somewhat generalists. Just because it had specialized adaptations to wading doesn’t mean that it only waded. There’s a reason it still was terrestrial as well as being one of the largest theropods ever, that doesn’t just happen for no reason. No adult Charcharodontosaurus (5.0-6.5t) and Spinosaurus (7.0-8.0t) would ever fight each other unless starving and they would’ve avoided each other almost always.
@@monsterzero521 where did you even get those numbers from? The most recent studies put C. Saharicus’ weight around 6 tons, & C. Iguidensis’ weight around 4 tons
Spinosaurus was too specialized, hunting fish and other aquatic animals in water. However, the Spinosaurus could have been on the Carcharodontosaurus' menu. On land, the Spino had no chance against the Carcha, and when they met, the Spino fled back into the water in a panic. Carcha vs. Spino = Jaguar vs. Cayman. The Spino probably also ventured out into the open sea, where it could have fallen prey to sharks and predatory sea reptiles. Spinosaurus' life in that environment could not have been easy.
This is really not a good take at all. Spinosaurus was still larger than Carcharodontosaurus and while not having a bite as strong it still could've left bad mark and defend itself effectively. And Jaguars only hunt small caiman, they never go after fully grown black caiman.
Charcharo is underrated, especially being a relative of the gigantic giganotosaurus. You’d think it would get more recognition
It truly deserves more love that it gets
That is, especially with Carcharodontosaurus being the namesake of the broader family, which includes Giganotosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Concavenator, etc.
@@markcobuzzi826 especially being the apex of Africa, probably the only one with the cajones to take on the biggest game on the region. You’d think people would see how badass it was
The weird thing is that Mapusaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were both in the same size bracket as Giganotosaurus, potentially even larger, so it's odd that they don't share its fame, especially given that Mapusaurus actually lived with Argentinosaurus, or that Carcharodontosaurus sounds much cooler than 'gigantosaurus', written like that on purpose, as it seems many people think that's the genus name, which is reasonable lol.
I find it hard to believe it would have exclusively preyed on fish. Spinosaurus despite not being built for hunting large game absolutely likely would have eaten whatever it could get its bit meaty claws on. I like to imagine it like the Kodiak bear of Therapods
Keep in mind, the fish in question could be the length of a car or more. Being primarily a wader it's also good to note that it wouldn't just be fish it was eating, but small crocodiles and whatever else. I kind of doubt Spinosaurus was an active hunter of land animals, but I agree that it would eat whatever it could find, and its sheer size probably meant it was good at bullying smaller predators off their kills.
Saved on my "watch later" list.
Yeah, although Spinosaurus probably ate mostly fish, it was so big it could probably take down medium sized dinosaurs from time to time. Of course, it could scavenge dinosaurs when the opportunity arose too.
Being big isn't enough. The fact remains that the spino's snout is this and relatively fragile. Trying to bite a struggling animal of any significant size would very likely result in a broken snout.
I would say it wouldn't bother trying to hunt anything larger than 1k pounds.
And even then it would be a very rare and opportunistic occurrence. Such as a small animal being stuck in the mud on the river bank, or maybe just something that happened to wander close to the spino by mistake.
Which is why Jack Horner should have his honorary Doctorate taken away for that scene in JP3!
Spinosaurus was a capable hunter and by no means weak. Everyone loves to downplay spino, but in reality spino was an apex predator and fully capable of defending itself. Claws, teeth, and all.
"This large, 8 ton animal could have only preyed on fish."
"This animal with a bite force of over 30,000 newtons must have only eaten carcasses."
"This 30 feet long predator has a bite force less than a lion's. It must have hunted by swinging its upper jaw around like an axe."
Why are paleo takes, especially those centered around therapods, so damn wild?
Bias
I know right? I guess it is mostly because these sorts of takes can garner the most attention or so. Which either helped benefited the study of the animal, or further misinform about it
We have two entirely different fossils that show active combat between it and Carcharodontosarus. Which *should* mean it was competing for an overlapping food source.
@masterbaiter8961 No, the fossils showed that they had been attacking each other. Completely different set of fossils too. One had a Spinosaurus tooth in the cervical vertebrae of a Carcharodontosaurus. Whilst the other was a Spinosaurus spine bitten off at the mid-section by a Carcharodontosaurus.
@@sindieltaylor2147can you tell me the source?
@masterbaiter8961amazing name
@@sindieltaylor2147so the spino was attacked and probably got a bite in before it died
@@ThePerfectCell01 they aren't from the same batch of fossils. And a bite to the cervical vertebrae like that would be fatal, so the Carcharodontosaurus almost certainly died then and there.
To be truthful, predators will almost always go after the weak, sick and young rather than the fully grown, healthy adults anyways due to the risk that such adults would oppose to the hunter. That being said, I think a lot of people underestimate Spinosaurus' ability to bully other carnivores away from their meal. Spinosaurus' sail, whilst a hinderance in an all out brawl, was probably developed as a mating display which could also double as an intimidation device. The sail was probably brightly colored compared to the rest of the creature and having a massive, brightly colored sail on its back would've probably intimidated other carnivorous Dinosaurs into believing Spinosaurus was bigger than it actually was. Although, if the carnivorous Dinosaur in question refused to back down than it's fairly unlikely this would result in a battle and instead would just result in Spinosaurus slinking back into the water.
Well if the said carnivorous dinosaur stand it's ground and decides to fight back it will definitely be scared of after getting hit by the spino's claws which is also thought to have delivered powerful and quick blouse on to its opponents with more than enough force to break bone's so it's very likely that spino was capable of bullying other large carnivorous dinosaurs away from its kill
i can imagine spinosaurus walking on the bottom of rivers and lakes, but not swimming
Yeah I can see it grabbing onto the bottom of a big river and surprise attack some mid sized dinosaurs
Like an alligator snapping turtle?
@peterjones819 yeah, especially since spinosaurus has a fast bite and could move its neck quickly
Most fisheaters do branch out every now and then. I've seen seagulls swallow entire rabbits, herons eat anything from snakes, to frogs, to other birds, and likewise, I could see the Spinosaurus snatching up any vulnerable smaller dinosaur it found, and likely hunted the local fresh water plesiosaur species as well.
Soon they will discover that it could fly 😂
😮
😦
And climb trees
what about spino claws? I heard somewhere that spino arm didnt have enough mobility to be used as a weapon, but on the other hand, in many documentaries it is shown how he uses them.
Depending on who you ask they'll say different things. In terms of combat and hunting I don't think they'd be overly effective. At least compared to what some documentaries have shown.
Spino claws are the most overrated claws in animal Kingdom.
@TheOverseerDebates I mean, when you think about it they're pretty much comparable to a megaraptor
There's a chance that the claws double as an intimidation display.
For example, if it ever had a standoff against a Carcharodontosaurus, it may have reared up like an anteater and clapped it forelimbs together to rake the face if the enemy came too close.
Claws aren’t particularly useful when tackling large bodied prey because to utilize them to inflict any serious damage you need to get right up onto what you are attacking due to theropod arms range of motion, this puts a big risk to animal especially if it is attempting to claw at something around it size or larger. This is the reason why theropods that hunted large game, like Tyrannosaurs, Abelisaurs and Carcharodontosaurs usually have large heads and proportionally smaller arms, by having larger heads they can inflict damage while having most of their body away from their prey and therefore safe.
I think spinosaurs was fully capable of taking down large game we see this today with grizzlies, and lets not act like a crocodile like skull equals (weak bite force) since “crocodiles” literally have the strongest bite forces of any vertebrate today. Modern animals are constantly keeping scientists on their toes with new behavioral discoveries, and abilities that wasn’t documented before showing just how much we still have to learn about nature(like the new discovery that shows jaguars can actually form active coagulative collations) when it was previously thought they were solitary. I wouldn’t rule this out for ancient animals either especially since they are no longer here for us to see
They didn't have croc like teeth, their teeth were more like gharials
@@shafqatishan437 Im just gonna point out that both Croc and Spino have hollow teeths
Except the spinosaur skull is built much more like a gharial or river dolphin than the skull of a Nile croc.
Spinos bite was the strongest in its area as it was stronger than charcharodontosaurus
Spinosaurs have skulls that superficially look like a crocodiles but they lack all the features that make it function like a crocodiles. The closest comparison among crocodiles skulls to spinosaurs are the skulls of predominantly fish eating crocs like freshwater crocodiles and gharials, spinosaurs lack the large jaw muscle attachments and robustness of more generalist “strong jawed” crocodiles.
I noticed that the video description was for a T-Rex video.
Good eye 🤫
There is no such thing as "bleed damage" and there never has been. Bleed damage only exists in video games.
Thin serrated teeth aren't for causing blood loss, they are for slicing flesh. In fact, if you wanted to try to bleed something to death, the teeth of the trex would be MUCH better suited to that as a giant round hole bleeds more than a thin slice.
Also, big animals have a lot of blood. Really big animals like 15+ ton sauropods had so much blood that almost any wound a predator could inflict would close and stop bleeding long before the animal died or passed out from blood loss.
Bleed damage is not a thing.
Based on isotope ratios from its teeth, Spinosaurus was still capable of eating dinosaurs. Furthermore, it's teeth and dentition indicate it was more of a generalist compared to other spinosaurids which were gharial mimics. Even more evidence from (unpublished) studies suggests it's jaws are significantly more impressive than any known piscivore.
Something to keep in mind is that most living piscivores have zero qualms about eating tetrapod prey if it’s of appropriate size.
It was the Piranhadon of the Kem Kem Formation, maybe a mixture of grizzly and giant crocodile, the dino was a monster
People are saying it was large enough to take down large prey, but forget the fact that it's ecosystem was almost entirely dominated by fish. All the herbivore niches were filled by fish. So even if It had the occasional opportunity to take down a large hadrosaur like ouranosaurus, it most likely wouldn't risk an injury or extra energy when there is plenty of food everywhere. When it got desperate and the large north African estuary began to dry up a couple million years later, is when we would see it start to take on large prey due to the lack of fish. This would ultimately be the spinosaurus' demise being unable to adapt quickly to taking on large prey where other species such as charcharodontasaurus thrived and quickly dominated these niches.
TLDR, the spinosaurus could hunt large animals, it just most likely didn't or if so very rarely. There was no need.
True spinosaurus bite force wasn't that strong but it's bite force was like a ton anyway and it's quite possible it could ambush it's prey but only for smaller dinosaurs like rugops primus
You forget to mention that spinosaurus hunted trexs, gigas and sauropods. (I’m coping)
Spinosaurus scales to boundless (coping the hardest I've ever coped)
David Hone have talked about that there were populations that probably mostly ate dinosaurs.
Ah my favorite Dinosaur spinosuarus
The Head and it’s Tail shows that it was a Swimming/ Fishing dinosaur!
4800 N is still a good 6 or 7 times more than a human. There isn't a living land predator capable of putting that kind of force between its canines.
Will you ever make a video about Paleo-botany?
I see it like large crocodiles today; primarily fish eaters but they would've also taken any not overly-large dinos or pterosaurs that let their guard down at the shore, and juveniles would've likely taken any small animals they could catch.
So it’s fair to say that the spinosaurus was “built different”?
Spino IS built different
that graphic at 2:42, where did you find that?
I will add crocodiles and plesiosaurs to the diet of Spinosaurus, given that it had the tools to catch them and eat them (both being it's conical teeth and big claws) and I would add turtles here but it depends a lot of the type of turtle, since I doubt it could pierce strong shells even at it's size
In my opinion Spinosaurus probably behaved similar to a bear in the sense that it mostly ate fish from riverbanks but also occasionally savaged or even hunted land animals as well. I could also see Spino using its size and intimidating appearance in order to bully smaller predators out of their kills, another tactic used by bears and other large predators today.
Surf n turf Chad spinosaur kun
What does it take for a Theropod to be a good fighter? There are a few things, but the basis is the "engine" the hips with the hind legs. Spinosaurus' "engine" was amazingly weak for its body weight. His body was very long, and his body's inertia when turning was enormous. The neck was flexible, but only in one plane, and laterally rigid. His nose was full of receptors, like crocodiles, he couldn't risk getting hurt, they were needed for hunting, i.e. survival. In addition, his attack surface was enormous due to the sail. It was very vulnerable on land despite its size. On land, the animal was like the Maus tank in World War 2, huge, but useless in battle. Spinosaurus was not a monster, just a vulnerable animal like all other dinosaurs. Apex predators are not invulnerable these days either, and it was no different a long time ago. I know a lot of people love Spinosaurus because of JP3, but Hollywood has little to do with science.
The sad thing is that the Jurassic park fans still believe that Spinosaurus from JP 3 was accurate.
But it was a hybrid
I say it was like a haron. Eating fish and everything else
I mean if it was easy meal why wouldn't take it
I can see Spino saurus hunt baby sauropod from few hundred kilo size to under 10 ton and below size baby sauropod and hunt young ouranosaurus like baryonyx
Spino was not equppied to kill a Sauropod.
M a b y e
I wonder how plokute would react to this video…?
The spinosaurus seemed remarkably weak for its size. Slow, inflexible, massive frail hitbox, bad range on its claws, brittle jaw and weak teeth, even a rhinoceros could probably beat a spinosaurus by just charging headfirst into him. Do you know what dinosaur the spinosaurus would absolutely destroy, though? The nigersaurus. Stephen Hawking would stand a better chance than the nigersaurus.
EgyptiAcus.....NOT...Egypticus....there is an A it!!
Spinosaurus is a bottom feeder. It only eats fish & aquatic organisms.
Meanwhile Carcharodontosaurus was the apex predator of spino era. There was also Sauroniops that is comparable to carcharodontosaurus in size.
Brain dead take
@@thunderhawk.7 Nah they are somewhat correct, Spinosaurus was not the Apex.
@@TyrannusX Of it’s particular environment, yes it was. All large apex predators have to be somewhat generalists. Just because it had specialized adaptations to wading doesn’t mean that it only waded. There’s a reason it still was terrestrial as well as being one of the largest theropods ever, that doesn’t just happen for no reason. No adult Charcharodontosaurus (5.0-6.5t) and Spinosaurus (7.0-8.0t) would ever fight each other unless starving and they would’ve avoided each other almost always.
@@thunderhawk.7
Spinosaurus- 8.3t
Carcharodontosaurus- 8.2t
5-6t is Carchar iguidensis
@@monsterzero521 where did you even get those numbers from? The most recent studies put C. Saharicus’ weight around 6 tons, & C. Iguidensis’ weight around 4 tons
Spinosaurus was too specialized, hunting fish and other aquatic animals in water. However, the Spinosaurus could have been on the Carcharodontosaurus' menu. On land, the Spino had no chance against the Carcha, and when they met, the Spino fled back into the water in a panic. Carcha vs. Spino = Jaguar vs. Cayman. The Spino probably also ventured out into the open sea, where it could have fallen prey to sharks and predatory sea reptiles. Spinosaurus' life in that environment could not have been easy.
Laughable take
I don't know how this take even managed to get alike unless you did it yourself
Carchar may be built better for combat and hunting but spino isn’t defenseless and it’s bite is stronger than carchars
This is really not a good take at all.
Spinosaurus was still larger than Carcharodontosaurus and while not having a bite as strong it still could've left bad mark and defend itself effectively. And Jaguars only hunt small caiman, they never go after fully grown black caiman.
@@Ialsowriteandread0291 it’s bite is actually stronger than carchars but carchar is built better for combat and hunting on land