Most mammals today can often "punch" above their weight when it comes to prey, so it's not surprising that prehistoric mammals would have similar traits.
Weasels are probably the "GOATs" in this. When *circumstances call for it, they can take on adult hares which are significantly larger and heavier than them. When extrapolated on lions weight-wise/size-wise, it is as if they were hunting elephants. * - Normally, however, they go for smaller prey, such as squirrels.
Mesozoic Mammals retained so many similarities with their Stem-Mammal cousins, it was an effective design to survive living in the shadows of the mighty Dinosaurs!
The discussion of intelligence in dinosaurs is mostly speculative at best. There’s a lot more to it than just brain to body ratio. Regardless it’s a neat and fascinating concept, even if the fossil evidence is nonexistent.
Another great discussion video! Your knowledge and perspective just make me love prehistoric biology even more, keep up the fantastic work and I hope you have a great rest of your day :D
Are you 100% sure of this assertion? I mean, doesn't it heavily depend on what size the 'constructs' they'd have built would be of and what materials the 'things' would be made out of? I do not dare to believe that completely everything would have turned into 'dust' over the aeons.
@subraxas not dust, but at the very best, inconclusive. Think about the state of early human finds and these are very near to us now. If dinos had clothes, tools and even burial rites, nothing would be visible to us in the ground. If a mummy would pop up, that has fossilized wrapping intact, that would be something.
@@VictorScrooge Fair enough. I see where you're coming from. Although I was rather thinking about much larger and far more complex 'stuff', such as dams, bridges, or steam-powered or manure-powered ice cream tru.... chariots. 🙂
@subraxas I don't want to imagine that. It's like the burp car from the "honey I shrank the children" TV Show. The more complex the artefacts become and the bigger the passed time gets, the fewer remnants you will find. But what complexity concerns, I don't think it gets past tribal structures.
Today mammals dominate. Mammals eat dinosaurs (birds). But also birds eat mammals, snakes eat mammals, and even spiders eat birds. Life is complex. Not surprising that it was the same in the Mesozoic.
Smaller mammalian carnivores like Mongoose or Lynx can take on prey significantly larger than themselves, I don't see why Mesozoic mammals would be any different.
Iam not sure they will ever have the life span, and the females all die after protecting the clutch. How would the parents pass on the tricks and tips of world domination if they are not present?
I think the situation was as follows: the mammal is known to have eaten the young of the dinosaur. It most likely was attacked by an adult which was defending its young (either while the Repenomamus was threatening its young (or eggs), or just on general principle eliminating a threat to said young or eggs). It seem highly unlikely that the Repenomamus would have attacked an animal as much larger than itself.
I love this little guy. In my head, to me he is a mesozoic honey badger. An absolute menace completely unaware of his size who would try to show teeth to all.
I wonder if one day fossils will be found of Mesozoic mammals that lived on a rather large island (say Tasmania size) devoid of dinosaurs? These mammals had radiated into numerous species and often grown large to fill numerous niches. On a similar vein, imagine finding fossils of Flightless Pterosaurs that lived on another rather large island!
Mammals keep on coping while reptiles still hold the most accomplishments Reptiles not only ruled the world for far longer than mammals, but also one-upped the mammals in the first 25 million years of the cenozoic, the largest land carnivore of the cenozoic was a reptile.
Seems like you're the one coping considering how unwaranted this comment was. Also, synapsids were the first large terrestrial animals, so under your logic mammals win
I see all of the illustrations of protomammals have obvious external-ears/scapha in this video, whereas I saw most other illustrations depict them have no external ears evolved yet in such period, is there any new research/evidence supporting they have external ears?
Most mammals today can often "punch" above their weight when it comes to prey, so it's not surprising that prehistoric mammals would have similar traits.
Weasels are probably the "GOATs" in this. When *circumstances call for it, they can take on adult hares which are significantly larger and heavier than them. When extrapolated on lions weight-wise/size-wise, it is as if they were hunting elephants.
* - Normally, however, they go for smaller prey, such as squirrels.
Mesozoic Mammals retained so many similarities with their Stem-Mammal cousins, it was an effective design to survive living in the shadows of the mighty Dinosaurs!
The thought of a Mesozoic Honey Badger is actually hilarious and phenomenal.
The discussion of intelligence in dinosaurs is mostly speculative at best. There’s a lot more to it than just brain to body ratio. Regardless it’s a neat and fascinating concept, even if the fossil evidence is nonexistent.
Another great discussion video! Your knowledge and perspective just make me love prehistoric biology even more, keep up the fantastic work and I hope you have a great rest of your day :D
The thing is, even if these Dinosaurs used Tools or built things, nothing would translate to our time.
Are you 100% sure of this assertion?
I mean, doesn't it heavily depend on what size the 'constructs' they'd have built would be of and what materials the 'things' would be made out of?
I do not dare to believe that completely everything would have turned into 'dust' over the aeons.
@subraxas not dust, but at the very best, inconclusive. Think about the state of early human finds and these are very near to us now.
If dinos had clothes, tools and even burial rites, nothing would be visible to us in the ground.
If a mummy would pop up, that has fossilized wrapping intact, that would be something.
@@VictorScrooge Fair enough. I see where you're coming from. Although I was rather thinking about much larger and far more complex 'stuff', such as dams, bridges, or steam-powered or manure-powered ice cream tru.... chariots. 🙂
@subraxas I don't want to imagine that. It's like the burp car from the "honey I shrank the children" TV Show.
The more complex the artefacts become and the bigger the passed time gets, the fewer remnants you will find. But what complexity concerns, I don't think it gets past tribal structures.
@@VictorScrooge 😀
6:10 If it looks like a badger and fights like a badger, I wonder if it convergently evolved to fill a similar niche?
Today mammals dominate. Mammals eat dinosaurs (birds). But also birds eat mammals, snakes eat mammals, and even spiders eat birds. Life is complex. Not surprising that it was the same in the Mesozoic.
Did mammals truly won? Fun fact. Birds amount of species outnumber mammals amount of species which is crazy
Smaller mammalian carnivores like Mongoose or Lynx can take on prey significantly larger than themselves, I don't see why Mesozoic mammals would be any different.
As the seas rise, my bet is that it'll be the cuttlefish and/or octopodes who develop more general intelligence.
Iam not sure they will ever have the life span, and the females all die after protecting the clutch. How would the parents pass on the tricks and tips of world domination if they are not present?
Rayfish
Merry Christmas, Ryan-san! 🙂❤💚
Will you release again a Christmas special with a yearly palaeontological recapitulation like you did last year?
I think the situation was as follows: the mammal is known to have eaten the young of the dinosaur. It most likely was attacked by an adult which was defending its young (either while the Repenomamus was threatening its young (or eggs), or just on general principle eliminating a threat to said young or eggs). It seem highly unlikely that the Repenomamus would have attacked an animal as much larger than itself.
Given modern mammals like mustelids you'd be surprised
I love this little guy. In my head, to me he is a mesozoic honey badger. An absolute menace completely unaware of his size who would try to show teeth to all.
I wonder if one day fossils will be found of Mesozoic mammals that lived on a rather large island (say Tasmania size) devoid of dinosaurs?
These mammals had radiated into numerous species and often grown large to fill numerous niches.
On a similar vein, imagine finding fossils of Flightless Pterosaurs that lived on another rather large island!
They named that bad boy after me.
Feliformia: _"Do you have any idea how little that narrows it down?"_
Mammals are the greatest animals, truely goated
Mammals keep on coping while reptiles still hold the most accomplishments
Reptiles not only ruled the world for far longer than mammals, but also one-upped the mammals in the first 25 million years of the cenozoic, the largest land carnivore of the cenozoic was a reptile.
Seems like you're the one coping considering how unwaranted this comment was. Also, synapsids were the first large terrestrial animals, so under your logic mammals win
Can be picked up from any local pet store…
We are different. And somewhat not endemic to this planet fully.
I see all of the illustrations of protomammals have obvious external-ears/scapha in this video, whereas I saw most other illustrations depict them have no external ears evolved yet in such period, is there any new research/evidence supporting they have external ears?
Eutriconodonts (the group of mammals that includes Repenomamus) have preserved ears as in the case of its close relative Spinolestes
@Carlos-bz5oo I see, thanks for you detailed explanations
Then what about peregrine falcons they have more species but one is more widespread than the rest
I think any cold-blooded dinosaurs would've been at a disadvantage against the more metabolically active mammalians.
It's pretty well established today that dinosaurs were at least somewhat warm blooded.