The giant short-faced bear

[@gravitydefyingturtle]

Another thing to keep in mind with bears and their relatively weak bites are that the jaws are not their only weapons - they also have extremely powerful forelimbs, tipped with meat-hook claws. When you can break a deer's neck or back with one swat of your paw, you don't necessarily need a strong bite. For the polar bear's dentition, could it simply be a matter of evolutionary history as to why they have a surprisingly large grinding surface? They only recently diverged from the (mesocarnivorous) grizzly, if I recall correctly, so they may have not had the time to evolve a more hypercarnivorous dentition, like a cat's. And, as you say they mostly consume blubber rather than meat, so they may not have had the evolutionary pressure to do so, either.

[@RealPaleontology]

Exactly!

[@RealPaleontology]

I don't for a moment doubt that it could kill large animals. And yes, it remains possible that the northern subspecies may have been hyper carnivorous. I think the balance of evidence

[@wyattw9727]

@@RealPaleontology Regarding this it reminds me of how for a while the ability of a Grizzly Bear to decapitate a Moose with a single paw swipe was considered hyperbole until one zoologist witnessed it himself - Moose have apparently a rigid weakness in their neck vertebrae which causes a snapping decapitation when force traumatically jerks the head up. The Grizzly swatted a Moose and sent the head flying a full five meters away. Although Moose are kind of odd animals as megafauna go - very spindly compared to the ice age critters which died out in North America. Powerful or no, swats would probably just get you killed by a rather ticked off Wooly Rhino.

[@GenghisDon1970]

they do, but the short faced bears have powerful bites anyway...although I suppose we need to run the computer models for the various American ones to stake this vampire for good Edit: they have less robust limb bones as well, so they may not smash/claw any better than smaller kin, though

[@williambuchanan77]

From what I know about bears, they tend to be opportunists. Sure they'll hunt but won't turn their noses up at a free meal. I think the short-faced bear was no different. I think this aspect might be linked to their intelligence. It's likely the short-faced bear was an Omnivore that happened to be so big it could bully other predators if it wanted.

[@RealPaleontology]

Will there are certainly people who agree with you on that. Personally I think it's more carnivorous than omnivorous. The term omnivore is really pretty meaningless

[@williambuchanan77]

@RealPaleontology I think it was an opportunist. Why turn your nose up at an easy meal, no need to put any effort in. I'm guessing it kept the herbivorous option open just in case. It's like a chick keeping a small pistol in her handbag or underwear, just in case.

[@RealPaleontology]

@williambuchanan77 for sure no predators will turn their nose up at an easy meal

[@williambuchanan77]

@RealPaleontology that's why bears don't mind mugging tourists 🤣

[@gabrielsmedleysanimaltime5826]

Very well done! I agree. It was an animal whose diet, in terms of the proportion of plant material, depended on location. Granted, while it definitely would've bullied smaller predators off their kills as modern brown bears and black bears will do, I can't imagine it being a full-time scavenger. No terrestrial predator is exclusively a scavenger. For future episode ideas, I'd like to see episodes on Scimitar-toothed cats and the American Lion.

[@RealPaleontology]

Thanks and yes it will definitely do simitar tooth cats

[@messiahmatrix]

Academic and enjoyable KZbin channel!!! 2 thumbs up 👍🏻

[@RealPaleontology]

Thank you very much

[@andrejspi]

Thank you -- interesting! I agree on the meso- to hypercarnivory placement of Arctodus simus. Even brown bears, which are much more herbivorous now, were much more carnivorous during the Pleistocene, at least in the northern tundra-steppe locations.

[@RealPaleontology]

Hey thanks!

[@RealPaleontology]

Thanks for that

[@BiffBrix]

Another great video! I hadn't heard much discussion since the Figueirido et al. paper so this was very refreshing. Anyway, some ideas I had for future videos! -the giant otter Enhydriodon -the largest canid, Epicyon -Daedon (another good omnivore vs carnivore/predator vs scavenger debate) -the cursorial sabertooth Lokotunjailurus -the carnivorous armadillo Macroeuphractus

[@RealPaleontology]

Thanks heaps and yep those are all good suggestions. Epicyon is definitely on the list.

[@SamSays101]

Sick shirt professor ! And nice video on a topic not often discussed :)

[@RealPaleontology]

Thank you

[@jthomas8263]

the Lesser Short-Faced Bear (Arctodus pristinus) was the Oldest, and the Greater or the Giant Short-Faced Bear (Arctodus simus) was the Youngest that lived during the Ice Age.

[@RealPaleontology]

Correct

[@Tyrell-d6o]

One suggestion for a future video might be on Entelodonts. I have heard so many conflicting stories about their bites, their diets and their lifestyle, it might be cool to see the hard facts laid out about these bizarre artiodactyls.

[@RealPaleontology]

Absolutely, intriguing animals that I will definitely cover.

[@ExtermCentral]

Didn't see any paleoartist credits on screen or in the video description. Something that should always be present to support the artists and their work. Solid video however on these majestic bears, I've seen specimens at Chicago Field Museum and also model reconstruction at Toledo Zoo Museum of Natural History.

[@RealPaleontology]

@@ExtermCentral thanks and yes it was remiss of me in this video. I will add credits in the description. Glad you liked the vid.

[@Nebula_Ultra]

Oh yes!! Its our boy! Also.. first?

[@RealPaleontology]

Definitely a hell of a bear!

[@Nebula_Ultra]

2:59 Arctodus pristinus: screams internally

[@RealPaleontology]

A bit too cryptic for me

[@Woodswalker96]

Grizzlies I believe follow a similar pattern, at least in North America. There are grizzlies in the barren grounds of northern Alaska and Canada that rely heavily on a meat-based diet, due to likely the same conditions you mentioned for Alaskan giant short-faced bears. Then there populations like in Yellowstone and elsewhere that are more seasonal mesocarnivores. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought Amphicyon was a beardog of the Amphicyonidae family, a basal clade in Caniformia. Could you have been referring to the dog-bear Hemicyon of Hemicyoninae? I know it’s an early branching subfamily in Ursidae that was supposed to be much more carnivorous than living bears. Also, I love the idea of referring to polar bears as lipidvores/fativores! Just seems right.

[@RealPaleontology]

Thanks and yes you're right on all counts. I did mean Hemicyon! I have to see if I can fix that!

[@jthomas8263]

Dr. Wroe, there are no subspecies of Arctodus simus like the Alaskan and the Mexican Ones, and the California Ones.

[@RealPaleontology]

Hi Thomas. There are two recognised subspecies of Arctodus simus: Arctodus simus simus and Arctodus simus yukonensis.

[@chestfullosixes5808]

Could you do a video on the prehistoric Ngandong tiger 🐅 ? Great channel 👏

[@RealPaleontology]

@@chestfullosixes5808 it's on my list

[@terrypitt-brooke8367]

I think the last commenter is spot on: the living big bears procure meat and other food like roots, grubs, and honey, with their forelimbs. I like the idea of a bear that could chase prey at 70 km/hr for miles, latch on and ride it into the ground. And this beast seems to be built for that.

[@RealPaleontology]

Well, there are certainly others that we agree with you that.

[@tyrannotherium7873]

I heard rumors that there was an Alaskan species specimen that had cavities and its lower jaw, but I do agree, and the Yukon Museum actually agrees with me that the short faced bears from the Yukon and Alaska are more carnivorous, while other specimen, such as California specimens are probably omnivorous

[@RealPaleontology]

that's the consensus

[@MartinAG-c9g]

Could you make a video on prehistoric Antelopes/gazelles? This is something I miss here on youtube and elsewhere. Maybe it is too broad a topic and too much for a single video, but I think it is really missing, so therefore maybe just an outline of the evolution of antelopes?

[@RealPaleontology]

I will get around to the palaeontology of these and other herbivore groups, but in the short term here I will be concentrating on predators.

[@RodrickRex]

Could you do an episode on Hyaenodon? I recall watching a documentary named Prehistoric Predators on NatGeo quite some times ago, in which you mentioned Hyaenodon having very high bite force for their size. However, correct me If I'm wrong but I don't think you have ever published your study regarding Hyaenodon in peer-reviewed format. I have tried looking for it, couldn't find any.

[@RealPaleontology]

Yes I will do an episode on this beast. And you're right although I have the scans for it I never did quite get around to publishing

[@Kyle-ir3bz]

I have always been fascinated about ice age megafauna.

[@RealPaleontology]

Great! I'll be publishing an episode on another one tomorrow!

[@Kyle-ir3bz]

@@RealPaleontology Lookin forward to it.

[@docholiday1476]

It was an omnivore and like all bears a scavenger, hunter and took advantage of opportunities.

[@RealPaleontology]

Yeah most likely

[@fritzd2116]

They weren’t nearly as dangerous as the short giant-faced bears, though! 😂

[@RealPaleontology]

That's debatable.

[@tyrannotherium7873]

Well, since it’s a large bear, and it had competition with big cats and canids I do believe that it would scavenge carcasses. Mostly, it also had a king sense of smell, probably much powerful than the grizzlies, since it had a big nostril and it would probably chase away some scavengers. I don’t get me wrong it would hunt I just think that it would be more of a scavenger.

[@RealPaleontology]

I tend to agree

[@neocortex2043]

yes

[@RealPaleontology]

I'll take that as a positive

[@RodrickRex]

There is another interesting paper regarding dietary ecology of Agriotherium that you did not feature in the video. The name is 'Tooth Root Morphology in the Early Pliocene African Bear Agriotherium africanum (Mammalia, Carnivora, Ursidae) and its Implications for Feeding Ecology' by Deano D. Stynder & Kornelius Kupczik in 2012. In the paper, they argued that Agriotherium was probably not effective predator of large preys because its canine roots (when adjusted for skull size) are quite small, quite a good deal smaller than those of extant solitary predators such as Polar bears and Big Cats. So while its skull might be able to take a beating as you have pointed out in the video, their canines might be not and might be a constraining factor. The study however does support the hyper-carnivory hypothesis cause the Bear has large (skull size adjusted) carnassial roots, more comparable to those of extant hyper-carnivores such as Big Cats, and larger than those of extant omnivorous Ursids such as Black bears.

[@RealPaleontology]

Interesting, thanks for the heads up. I only have the abstract for this, but in the abstract it notes that the roots are actually relatively larger than in the polar bear and all omnivorous bears, but smaller than those of mammalian extant hard object feeders and the most carnivorous tough object feeders. Straight up, I have to say that it’s not necessarily the depth of the tooth roots that are necessarily the limiting factor here, but the strength and morphology of the bone around it. In our FEA of the whole skull there was no obvious weakness here. Also, this is all relative. The African bear has such a massive skull that it might still have taken down very big prey in absolute terms, but maybe not animals much bigger than it.

[@RodrickRex]

@@RealPaleontology Thank you for your reply, I just wanted to hear your thoughts on this. But yeah, you probably got the point on this one. I have seen reports of bones of Mammoths which have bite marks seemingly match the canines of Arctodus simus. If that was the case, I can't imagine their canines being too terribly weak, at least not in absolute terms.

[@RealPaleontology]

@@RodrickRex no worries mate!

[@ericdubert5983]

If we think about game theory, as opposed to the tea leaves of ambiguous dentition, it may shed more light on the dentition. The equator is where summer reigns supreme all year long. The far north and south brings with it the tyrant winter and a war that recedes during a warm period annually. During each season it is likely to pursue different strategies to manufacture that fat necessary to hibernate through winter. Bears run the gamut from fishing, hunting moose, picking berries, sacking beehives. What they do each season probably differs, and what they do most of can be read in their dentition? Long ago bears were likely pushed north, having been outcompeted by cats and canids, pseudosuchians and snakes of warmer climates. The open niche of the north and an inescapable winter for many bear species required a generalist whose size and build were adapted to conserving heat and building fat stores rather than the specialized mechanics of southerly super predators. Just saying...

[@RealPaleontology]

I think there's certainly something that your proposal here, but it's definitely not a universal rule. Remember that there are at least three living best species whose ranges extend into tropical or subtropical zones and a good many others if we include extinct species.

[@SamSays101]

Yeah bears are so odd nowadays.. why do pandas have such a high bite force ?? Who knows.

[@RealPaleontology]

Basically I reckon because bamboo is really hard

[@att1917]

Great video professor! How fast did u think short faced bear can run? There is lot's of websites on google claiming its 40 mph which I am doubtful of. I want to know your thoughts

[@RealPaleontology]

I take all such studies with a grain of salt. Pretty good chance it could run at least as fast as a grizzly

[@att1917]

@@RealPaleontology Agree. 40 mph is a bit of a stretch

[@Dr.Ian-Plect]

3:28 "The first bears" Amphicyon isn't a bear. It is a bear-dog.

[@RealPaleontology]

True need to edit that

[@Dr.Ian-Plect]

@@RealPaleontology 👍

[@bradtrooper5978]

👍

[@benquinneyiii7941]

That was the Vikings

[@RealPaleontology]

If you say so

[@RealPaleontology]

yup - I just double checked

[@derekbates4316]

People are always trying to re-write history just because they think they know better. It's sad, really.

[@RealPaleontology]

Don't be sad

[@derekbates4316]

@@RealPaleontology No, I meant it was pathetic.

[@SamSays101]

Sick shirt professor ! And nice video on a topic not often discussed :)

[@RealPaleontology]

Hey thanks