HOME | DD
coherentsheaf β Dark Water, Black Blood
Published: 2013-06-24 22:10:19 +0000 UTC; Views: 3383; Favourites: 27; Downloads: 3
Redirect to original
Description
Two Livyatan suffocate a megatooth shark.Related content
Comments: 69
Ugh, too dark to see. *swims more deeper and grabs two bioluminescent squid, then swims up* Now that's better.
π: 0 β©: 1
Jokes aside, this is a masterpiece! You don't see sharks drowning often in paleoart (and possibly in any other art).
π: 0 β©: 1
>lol bull shit on so many levels. Let me drop some knowledge on you real quick.
I am the same coherentsheaf who also posts on carnivora. For example I authored this post carnivoraforum.com/single/?p=8β¦
Given that I think your post comes of as quite presumptous.
>The sizes are off. Livyatan is oversized
based on? I did not specify any sizes in the picture.
> Livyatan's lower jaw is too robust in reality it would have been extremely thin, as indicated by the actual fossil.
Both angle and other potential tissue would obsure how robust or non robust it would look like in the living animal.
>Megalodon's gape is far superior to livyatan's. while livyatan had trouble fitting more than two people with it's extremely thin lower jaw's megalodon could have easily engulfed 2-3+ people even at small sizes. (you've depicted megalodon's gape as . I don't even know what that is. There's not even a single modern shark analogue to that. Whatever that shape is lol.)
Where does it even say that it is "Megalodon"? And for modern shark analogues bullshark have similar broad jaws: www.vangoghscuba.com/wp-contenβ¦
>he biggest prey livyatan hunted were whales, yes. But they were 6-8 meter whales. I think there was a good reason for that.
We do not know what the biggest prey was. And if you know how do you know the depicted shark is substantially larger than 8m
>Forget 6.Β Megalodon went extinct nearly 12 million years after Livyatan. I think it's safe to say Livyatan's weren'tΒ hunting megalodons but rather the whale hunter continued to dominate.
Who goes extinct on ecological timeframes is not informative who would beat who in a fight.
>Megalodon evolved to tackle the biggest of whales. Giants that wereΒ tons heavier than itself.
You are at best speculating.
π: 0 β©: 1
We have evidence for C. megalodon hunting a giant balaenopterid in the Pliocene.
π: 0 β©: 1
I know. Opportunistic predation does not imply spezialisation.
π: 0 β©: 1
Still the point C. megalodon could take prey far bigger than itself applies.
π: 0 β©: 1
No. The evidence of predation is plausibly evidence of scavenging. In any case there was no point in the original tirade. Komodo dragons can kill prey much larger than themselves. This will tell you nothing about wheter they were preyed on by marsupial lions or not.
π: 0 β©: 2
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
>Bull sharks are requieum sharks,Β and your depiction doesn't evenΒ reflect the image you posted to back up your depiction'sΒ gape.
First being a requiem shark does not constitute a developmental constraint for having similar jaws.
Second, I think it does.
>All in all, this is just not an accurate drawing.
It is not an accurate reflection of your imagination. Many things are not, I guess.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
Whatever whales die from.
π: 0 β©: 0
What a tiny shark. Is it meant to be a juvenile?
π: 0 β©: 2
It is about median extrapolated length from a recent study by Piemento et al.
π: 0 β©: 1
Then the Livyatan are way too big. They should be only slightly larger than the shark, since the median for that study is 12m.
π: 0 β©: 1
Where do you get the impression that they are much larger than the shark?
π: 0 β©: 1
Because it looks like there's a giant mouth under the shark.
π: 0 β©: 1
They are about 14 or 15m long. All is in the plausible realm.
π: 0 β©: 1
Iff all three aof them are the same size I doubt the whales would engage the shark (or vice versa). Perhaps if the shark was a 10m juvenile.
π: 0 β©: 1
Median size in Piemento et al is not much larger than that.
π: 0 β©: 1
Because that was the median size for the entire species. Of course there are more juveniles than adults.
π: 0 β©: 1
>Of course there are more juveniles than adults.
Ahm, no that is not obvious with long lived K- strategists like GWS fall into. From the look of the density plots larger specimen are also more common than juveniles in Megalodon to an extent.
π: 0 β©: 1
Still, juveniles are going to die off a lot faster than adults.
π: 0 β©: 0
Or it's because not all megalodons are 16+ meter giants? There are small specimens, as there are large specimens.
The Livyatan in this drawing aren't that much larger than the shark anyway, the darkness and the fact that their full bodies aren't shown just conceals that.
π: 0 β©: 2
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
The tooth count could be chalked up to the art style used here, and that it's not necessarily super-accurate to the very last detail, just accurate in the overall picture.
It's the same case as a lot of dinosaur artwork here that are anatomically accurate but don't have scale texture.
π: 0 β©: 0
Based on the size of the respective dentitions that could correspond to Livyatan at the size of the peruvian holotype attacking a young Carcharocles the size of Hubbell's set, or perhaps smaller. Still a good drawing but, I guess because of artistic limitations, the shark is too much small toothed for its size, when comparing to the teeth in Livyatan in which about 12-15 cm were exposed above the gumline.
π: 0 β©: 1
Xou are right, I did not think about the teeth properly. I did bite myself because of it when the drawing was finnished because of it.
π: 0 β©: 1
But the somewhat darkish atmosphere of the depiction can easily excuse that, the teeth being then hardly visible because of the obscure tone.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Cool!
i hope I can sleep tonight ehehe
but in any case i'm never swimming out very far in the ocean ever again
great job btw, it looks awesome
(i doubt my nightmares will do it justice)
π: 0 β©: 1
*shudder*
This is why I'm afraid of deep and dark water. Freakin' scary ass Megalodon eating monsters...
π: 0 β©: 1
I hope it will follow you in your nightmare, then I have done a good job
π: 0 β©: 1
If I ever sleep again. That's disturbing but great art.
π: 0 β©: 0
Just shows that Megalodon isn't invincible(unlike what many people seem to believe).
π: 0 β©: 2
I highly doubt we have reasons to apply a behavior known among some orcas to Livyatan. And yes, whatever the exact size of Livyatan, the meg is rather smallish.
But nice job.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thx!
Hm, I strongly disagree regarding displaying speculative behavior. I think we should let our minds wander... see things that cannot be inferred as easily. This not only satisfying for the mind but will lead to actual discoveries as people will begin to think about finding out what really was the case.
I also disagree that the Meg I depicted is smallish. Most Megalodon teeth point to a size between 10 and 14m, which is about the size I displayed it as. There are of course remains that indicate that some individuals reached larger size, with record teeth resulting in estimated total lengths around 18-19m, however these teeth are rare indeed. In comparison most great whites are between 3.5m and 5m, despite some giant individuals reaching 6.5-7m.
π: 0 β©: 1
I have seen that the tendency to some orcas to prey on large sharks seems to be a rather recent technic from an evolutionary perspective. This is more a matter of artistic license than real likely or probable natural behavior.
The meg is really small here compared to the two cetaceans. It seems that Livyatan is simply considered as larger than megalodon.
Also, the arguments about the teeth is hardly standable as teeth loose at one part of the lifetime, thus not indicate a maximum size in an individual most of the time. And 6 inches or more teeth are really not that rare, merely uncommon as in any material from a predator at the top of the trophic system. But teeth over 6 inches representing 15 m or more individuals are absolutely not a sheer rarity, unlike the 7 inchers.
π: 1 β©: 3
Regarding license: No, it is entirely possible that Livyatan did similar stuff as modern orcas, that has nothing to do with evolution. Maybe it did maybe it did not.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've yet too see if Livyatan had the same brain/body ratio than in orca. Until more stuff comes about the size and indication of its brain case, I will consider this as artistic creation.
I doubt the cognitive potency of a 13 millions years old stem physeteroid and the cognitive potency of an advanced delphinid can be reasonably compared.
π: 0 β©: 1
I believe Orcas are a lot smarter, but that given the large brain of modern physerteroids (in absolute terms) even stem physeteroids were probabl quite cunning animls. Flipping sharks is not cognitively tasking, though. Even very small brained species can do surprisingly difficult tasks:
[link]
This should make Randal Munroe even more afraid of raptors
[link]
π: 0 β©: 1
Good point.
But that remains speculative. With huge jaws, battering ram, large size and potential social habit, I don't think it may have performed this.
π: 0 β©: 0
4-5 inchers are more frequent than 6 inchers. I have rebutted the lifetime argument at length on carnivoraforum. The short version is that the teeth we find is necessarily representative of the actual population structure.
π: 0 β©: 1
Sorry but I've yet to see your demonstration.
Teeth can be lost at any time in a life time and are found most of the time in rather shallow reason. I've never seen or read anywhere that the normal adult size of megalodon was 10-14 m, with exceptional specimens above that.
π: 0 β©: 2
I have never read that was not the case.
Yes, the teeth we found reflect the actual size of megs that existed, which is the average size. We can ignore immature individuals, and still, that some of these average individuals may have reached bigger sizes does not mean that was the normal size of megalodon.
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>