Talk:Sarkastodon

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

How big was this critter, anyway? What specimens found suggest six feet at the shoulder and ten feet in length? The claims require a citation or a reference. Has anyone heard anything about this particular creodont?

I found this paper estimating it to be 800 kg. It also estimates megistotherium (=HYAINAILOUROS) to be 500 kg Sorkin, B. 2008: A biomechanical constraint on body mass in terrestrial mammalian predators. Lethaia, Vol. 41, pp. 333–347Brisio (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

That estimate is based on molar length assuming geometric similarity with lions, an incredibly poor choice to estimate the mass of an animal with bone cracking adaptations that comes from a group of animals with oversized heads compared to carnivorans, wouldn't be a surprise if such estimate is off by 400% but alas is the only thing we have. Mike.BRZ (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Size limit edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Isn't it presumptuous to assume there's a size limit for terrestrial mammal carnivores, when just about every time someone postulates such a limit, a limit-breaker is discovered? Unless there's some intrinsic reason to believe so, in which case it ought to be listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic