Grizzly bear ungulate consumption and the relevance of prey size to caching and meat sharing

2014 ◽  
Vol 92 ◽  
pp. 133-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bogdan Cristescu ◽  
Gordon B. Stenhouse ◽  
Mark S. Boyce
Keyword(s):  
2014 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 56-63
Author(s):  
Josh Sides

In 1916, Cornelius Birket Johnson, a Los Angeles fruit farmer, killed the last known grizzly bear in Southern California and the second-to last confirmed grizzly bear in the entire state of California. Johnson was neither a sportsman nor a glory hound; he simply hunted down the animal that had been trampling through his orchard for three nights in a row, feasting on his grape harvest and leaving big enough tracks to make him worry for the safety of his wife and two young daughters. That Johnson’s quarry was a grizzly bear made his pastoral life in Big Tujunga Canyon suddenly very complicated. It also precipitated a quagmire involving a violent Scottish taxidermist, a noted California zoologist, Los Angeles museum administrators, and the pioneering mammalogist and Smithsonian curator Clinton Hart Merriam. As Frank S. Daggett, the founding director of the Los Angeles County Museum of History, Science and Art, wrote in the midst of the controversy: “I do not recollect ever meeting a case where scientists, crooks, and laymen were so inextricably mingled.” The extermination of a species, it turned out, could bring out the worst in people.


Quaternary ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Miki Ben-Dor ◽  
Ran Barkai

We hypothesize that megafauna extinctions throughout the Pleistocene, that led to a progressive decline in large prey availability, were a primary selecting agent in key evolutionary and cultural changes in human prehistory. The Pleistocene human past is characterized by a series of transformations that include the evolution of new physiological traits and the adoption, assimilation, and replacement of cultural and behavioral patterns. Some changes, such as brain expansion, use of fire, developments in stone-tool technologies, or the scale of resource intensification, were uncharacteristically progressive. We previously hypothesized that humans specialized in acquiring large prey because of their higher foraging efficiency, high biomass density, higher fat content, and the use of less complex tools for their acquisition. Here, we argue that the need to mitigate the additional energetic cost of acquiring progressively smaller prey may have been an ecological selecting agent in fundamental adaptive modes demonstrated in the Paleolithic archaeological record. We describe several potential associations between prey size decline and specific evolutionary and cultural changes that might have been driven by the need to adapt to increased energetic demands while hunting and processing smaller and smaller game.


Author(s):  
Jorge Tobajas ◽  
Carlos Rouco ◽  
Javier Fernandez-de-Simon ◽  
Francisco Díaz-Ruiz ◽  
Francisca Castro ◽  
...  

Ursus ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter H. Singleton ◽  
William L. Gaines ◽  
John F. Lehmkuhl

Behaviour ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 152 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 335-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinya Yamamoto

Food sharing is considered to be a driving force in the evolution of cooperation in human societies. Previously postulated hypotheses for the mechanism and evolution of food sharing, e.g., reciprocity and sharing-under-pressure, were primarily proposed on the basis of meat sharing in chimpanzees. However, food sharing in bonobos has some remarkably different characteristics. Here I report details pertaining to fruit sharing in wild bonobos in Wamba based on 150 events of junglesop fruit sharing between independent individuals. The bonobos, primarily adult females, shared fruit that could be obtained individually without any cooperation or specialized skills. There was no evidence for reciprocal exchange, and their peaceful sharing seems to contradict the sharing-under-pressure explanation. Subordinate females begged for abundant fruit from dominants; this might indicate that they tested the dominants’ tolerance based on social bonds rather than simply begging for the food itself, suggesting existence of courtesy food sharing in bonobos.


2005 ◽  
Vol 267 (04) ◽  
pp. 363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon W. Schuett ◽  
David L. Hardy ◽  
Ryan L. Earley ◽  
Harry W. Greene

2014 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Laberee ◽  
Trisalyn A. Nelson ◽  
Benjamin P. Stewart ◽  
Tracy McKay ◽  
Gordon B. Stenhouse

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document