LikeLike

LikeLike

Thanks, I think that Martin’s overkill hypothesis has over-egged things a bit. It’s striking and dramatic. Mammalian Palaeoecology (/2022/01/27/book-review-mammalian-paleoecology-using-the-past-to-study-the-present/) didn’t really go into that debate as it has been extensively discussed elsewhere, but did present analyses on the strong temporal correlation between humans arriving and large animals disappearing. I think there is mileage in the idea that “just” efficient hunting could be enough pressure for megafauna to go extinct. Out of curiosity, do you remember which book you read this in? Might be interesting for me to look into.

LikeLike

In one of the recent books I’ve read on mass extinctions, computer studies were cited that showed that groups of humans killing only one or two large ‘megafauna’ animals once or twice a year could easily result in their gradual (to human view imperceptible) extermination over what in a geological view is an instant. Megafauna exist at a fine borderline – being big enough that nothing can predate them is the incentive for hugeness. The disadvantages are obvious, they are so big that they require huge amounts of fuel, long gestation periods so slow reproductive rates etc. If something comes along that CAN predate them, it’s actually easy to drive them into extinction.

LikeLiked by 1 person

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

Thanks! I’ll put it on my itinerary if I ever pass through.

LikeLike