Pavel, why no cats and dogs in your future Australia?

The proposed course of events is the following:
First, after human extinction placental predators dominate and their
number increases greatly.
Next, their populations die because of epizooties. Marsupials are not
sensitive to specific diseases of carnivores, and survive. Tasmania is
the natural reserve for small marsupial predators.
Third, various groups of marsupials try to be predators. Because of
former presence of placentals as a factor of natural selection they
turn to clever predators comparable to placentals.

I think in rainforests we may see dwarf goats like todays African pygmy
goat. In my Neocene goat descendants inhabit Zinj Land fsavanna,
mountains and forests.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel I. Volkov"
<gavial@...> wrote:
>
> I think in rainforests we may see dwarf goats like todays African pygmy
> goat. In my Neocene goat descendants inhabit Zinj Land fsavanna,
> mountains and forests.
>
  How about in the Caribbean? They are quite common there from what I know.

>
> I have my own idea for a species of sheep in New Zealand that is like
a
> combination between sheep and bison but not quite the size (island
> dwarfism).
>
Isn't New Zealand large enough to avoid this? I mean, the Moas were
pretty large!

Isn't it likely that some dogs, cats and foxes would have immunity, and
that their descendants would survive to repopulate the area? Also what
about New Zealand?
--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel I. Volkov"
<gavial@...> wrote:
>
> The proposed course of events is the following:
> First, after human extinction placental predators dominate and their
> number increases greatly.
> Next, their populations die because of epizooties. Marsupials are not
> sensitive to specific diseases of carnivores, and survive. Tasmania
is
> the natural reserve for small marsupial predators.
> Third, various groups of marsupials try to be predators. Because of
> former presence of placentals as a factor of natural selection they
> turn to clever predators comparable to placentals.
>

In NZ it may be a pretty good fauna of placental herbivores and
predators - they have no competitors there. As for Australia - it is
only the assumption. I believe also in success of nature-preservation
activity of people in Australia.

> In NZ it may be a pretty good fauna of placental herbivores and
> predators - they have no competitors there. As for Australia - it is
> only the assumption. I believe also in success of nature-preservation
> activity of people in Australia.

I'll take that as a compliment :D

What do you think the future holds for them?

I think not everything is as hopeless for them, as Dougal Dixon and
John Adams showed in "The Future is Wild". Possible, some species may
survive. Spider monkeys and uacaries are too vunerable. And small
species like marmosets may survive. Also tamarins and squirrel monkeys
have certain chance. I think terrestrial forms may descend from them.
In our Neocene fauna there is barbudo - terrestrial descendant of
squirrel  monkey.

I think terrestrial forms may descend from them.
> In our Neocene fauna there is barbudo - terrestrial descendant of
> squirrel  monkey.

Is it baboon-like in form and habits?

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel I. Volkov"
<gavial@...> wrote:
>
> I think not everything is as hopeless for them, as Dougal Dixon and
> John Adams showed in "The Future is Wild". Possible, some species may
> survive. Spider monkeys and uacaries are too vunerable. And small
> species like marmosets may survive. Also tamarins and squirrel monkeys
> have certain chance. I think terrestrial forms may descend from them.
> In our Neocene fauna there is barbudo - terrestrial descendant of
> squirrel  monkey.
>

In my project, I had a family of ground-dwelling, baboon-like
capuchins called macacacebids.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "grazatt" <grazatt@...>
wrote:
> Is it baboon-like in form and habits?
>
I have a translation of its description at
http://www.sivatherium.h12.ru/systemat.htm
It is Barbudo papioformis.

So, I think I may say something about the possible evolution of seal-
whales. In April and May I worked at the anti-creationist article about
the evolution of whales. I think you know, the recent discoveries of
fossil whales represent the strong counter-evidence against creationist
mind constructions. But the most part of the working material had been
found in English sources, and it had been taken a lot of time to
translate it into Russian.
In these articles the main trends of whale evolution had been described:
1) The increase of the vertebrae number;
2) The relative uniformity of body vertebrae appearance - they poorly
differ to thoracic, lumbar, sacral and caudal ones.
3) The progressive weakening of the sacral joint up to the detaching of
the sacrum from the spine.
4) The maximum amplitude of dorsoventral moving of the body is in
caudal part of the body, and the involvement of the body to the
swimming movements falls progressively.
5) Ribs detach from the vertebrae, diaphragm is reduced; the breathing
acts only due to rib mobility.

Let's look at your seals. I may suppose two types of the anatomy of
whale-like forms.
First, they may turn to long-bodied ones with the increased number of
rather uniform vertebrae. And next, the turtle-like style of swimming
with rigid body and oversized flippers may evolve.
In first way of evolution, the sacrum looks a problem for them. Seals
have short tale and it seems impossible for them to grow long one as at
their ancesors (like fossil seal Semantor macrurus, for example). In
this case hind flippers may transform to a kind of tail flukes. Of
course, the number of toes may decrease, and the hyperphalangy (the
increasing of phalangeal bones number) may evolve. BUT!!!! But there
are pelvic bones and genital ducts of these animals. The posterior end
of the body of such animal must be not too deep to improve the
dorsoventral movements of hind flipper-flukes. because of it the pelvic
bones may not be too large. But, from the other hand, this animal will
give birth to very large and well-developed cubs able to move in water
independently. Because of it the pelvis of the long-bodied whale-seal
must be not contracted. I think pelvic bones will form a small joined
structure at the tip of the body, and pubic bones will reduce to open
it from the front (down at the four-legged animal). in this case, I
think, genitals of the animal must shift to more anterior position, and
their connection to pelvis must reduce.
The second way may produce short-bodied ones with well-developed pelvis
and strongly joined body vertebrae. Next, there may develop a kind of
keel bone, and the body will look short and deep. But the swimming mode
due to up-and-down movements of front flippers needs the strong support
for muscles, and the thorax bones and ribs may be joined like at bats.
It means this type of whale-seals may be bad divers and must feed in
top layer of water. Possible, they may develop to filter-feeders.

First up: the Cryptozoology Forums are currently looking for staff,
specifically: global mods, Cryptid Hunters (cryptozoology forums), and
Men in Black (alien and conspiracy forums). Send me an e-mail if you
are interested. Send to: wsnyder@.... Topic should be "CF"
or something to that extent.

Second: I have revived the Dixonian Interviews from the Hypothesis
Project for Speculative Evolution. Right now, I am looking for
individuals who are willing to be interviewed (Paul? Maybe Tim again?)
Send me an e-mail for this as well. Make sure the topic is "Interviewee".

As far as Tethys, I am working on evolutionary history of various
groups, the new sister taxon for the butterfly crabs, new butterfly
crab species, and the development of the goliaths and their
reef-forming habits.

I am also inspired to do a long series about the future evolution of
various groups (I am currently researching pinnipeds and cetaceans in
preparation for a piece about future seals and sea lions, partially
inspired by Paul's notes on whale/seal evolution).

That is pretty much it for this update.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "William Snyder"
<wsnyder@...> wrote:
>
> Second: I have revived the Dixonian Interviews from the Hypothesis
> Project for Speculative Evolution. Right now, I am looking for
> individuals who are willing to be interviewed (Paul? Maybe Tim again?)
>
I can give you an interview, if you want. Tell in details, please, what
do you want to know? (If you'll send a private message, leave a note
here, please.)

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel I. Volkov"
<gavial@...> wrote:
>
> --- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "William Snyder"
> <wsnyder@> wrote:
> >
> > Second: I have revived the Dixonian Interviews from the Hypothesis
> > Project for Speculative Evolution. Right now, I am looking for
> > individuals who are willing to be interviewed (Paul? Maybe Tim again?)
> >
> I can give you an interview, if you want. Tell in details, please, what
> do you want to know? (If you'll send a private message, leave a note
> here, please.)
>

This is wonderful news. I don't quite have my questions set up yet,
but once I do I'll send you an e-mail through your account here. As
far as details, the interview will pretty much include a quick and
short biography of yourself and then mostly questions concerning
biology, evolution, and of course: speculative biology.

The Cryptozoology Forums are now open, with me and Tim as the
administrators. I hope to see some of you join and partake in the
discussions. I am still looking for one or two global moderators to
help manage the site, if anyone is interested.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "William Snyder"
<wsnyder@...> wrote:
>
> The Cryptozoology Forums are now open, with me and Tim as the
> administrators. I hope to see some of you join and partake in the
> discussions. I am still looking for one or two global moderators to
> help manage the site, if anyone is interested.
>

Ah, stupid me, I forgot the link:

http://cryptozoology.sytes.net/index/

>
> Does anyone else have any ideas as to what might come to inhabit the
> Carpenteria and Arafura lakes?
>
Hey, people, wake up!!!
So, today I bought the fresh issue of Russian "Aquarium" magazine. And
the article of the issue was the article about live-bearing halfbeaks
(Hemiramphidae). I slowly (very slowly) write a chapter about Arafura
Lake, but the main emphasis is on mangrove forest. And there is an
opportunity to describe other lake inhabitants in detail later... And I
think any halfbeak or any greenbone may live here.

In a new study published in the online-open access journal PLoS ONE,
Per Christiansen at the Zoological Museum in Copenhagen, Denmark,
reports the finding that the evolution of skull and mandible shape in
sabercats and modern cats were governed by different selective forces,
and the two groups evolved very different adaptations to killing.

The cat family comprises some of the most specialised carnivores in
the history of mammals, all exclusively eating flesh. The cat family
consists of two major sub-groups: the feline cats (including all
modern species) and the sabertoothed cats (which are all extinct).
Skeletons from the two groups look broadly similar, but their skulls
are often remarkably different, and suggest that members of the two
groups underwent radically different adaptations to predation during
the course of evolution.

Sabertoothed cats have been a particularly difficult group to
understand because their anatomical features are often radically
different from those of modern cats. However, new techniques for
anatomical comparison using digital methods have facilitated a more
detailed comparison of the anatomy of the entire skull and mandible,
and the new results add significantly to our understanding of the
evolution of the cat family.

Modern cats appear to have quite different-looking skulls depending on
their size, and small cats appear all to have rather abbreviated, tall
and domed crania, whereas the skulls in large cats, such as lions,
tigers, or leopards, are much more elongated and rectangular.
Previously these criteria have been used to divide the modern cats
into two distinct sub-groups, the small and large cats, which were
inferred to differ in terms of evolutionary anatomy. However, no such
sub-groups exist, and the actual shape of the skull shows a gradual
transition from the smallest to the largest species.

The most powerful evolutionary selective driving factor behind skull
shape in modern cats appears to have been the need to administer a
powerful, precise killing-bite, irrespective of body size – this is a
very important part of prey capture and killing in all cats. A cat's
brain size decreases, relative to the size of its body, as the size of
the cat increases and thus takes up less room in the back of the
skull. Since a powerful killing bite entails large, powerful jaw
muscles, this imposes strict limits on skull shape, suggesting that
big cats simply need more elongated skulls with large muscle crests in
order to maintain the ability to deliver a very powerful killing bite.

Sabertoothed cats were subjected to very different evolutionary
driving forces. The most important factor governing their evolution
seems to have been the need to administer a precise killing bite with
a shearing action to the throat of large prey that will kill it very
quickly. This led to a major re-organisation of the shape of the
entire skull and mandible in the advanced species compared to all
extant cats, and also to smaller, more primitive sabertoothed cats.
The advanced sabertoothed cats had an entirely different skull and
mandible shape from any modern cat, and they also differ a lot from
more primitive sabertoothed cats, which have smaller upper canines.
But this happened at the expense of powerful bite forces.

Primitive sabertoothed cats were capable of administering powerful
killing bites, roughly of comparable force to modern cats of the same
size, but derived species were only capable of much weaker killing
bites. Such a killing style is probably very effective for killing
large prey quickly, and this would be advantageous in ecosystems with
high predator competition (which appears to have been the case in many
extinct ecosystems).

However, this probably caused the derived sabertoothed cats to prey on
only a limited variety of large prey species, putting them at risk of
extinction if the ecosystems changed too much or too rapidly.

Interestingly, the modern clouded leopards are anatomically similar to
the primitive sabertoothed cats, and Christiansen suggests that, in
time, they may become more specialised and truly sabertoothed.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080729234258.htm

There is one main condition. Saber-toothed cats are mega-predators and
hunt megafauna species. And in "ratworld" lack of large species they
will not evolve ever. And mega-herbivores appear only at stabil
conditions of environment. In other words, the presence of saber-
toothed cats (or other taxa) indicates the stability of the geological
period conditions.

By the way, beyond cats saber-like teeth had been posessed by
therapsids (Inostrancevia and Ivantosaurus, for example), creodonts,
marsupials and others. Even herbivores like Dinocerata, Pantodonta and
some modern deer have it.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel I. Volkov"
<gavial@...> wrote:
>
And in "ratworld" lack of large species they
> will not evolve ever.

What is "Ratworld"?

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "grazatt" <grazatt@...>
wrote:
>
> What is "Ratworld"?
>
If I'm not mistaken, it was the idea of early time of this group
existing. I mean the world lack of megafauna, the world of small
animals having short life duration and life cycle.

A) What is your full name? Also, please tell a little about yourself
so readers can get a better understanding about your background.

B) What sort of education did you receive (this may include college or
pre-college education)?

C) What first got you interested in the topic of speculative biology
(in your case future biology/evolution)?

D) What was the inspiration for your Neocene project, or was it simply
a product of your imagination?

E) What would you say are your favorite Neocenic species? Or do you
not have any paticular favorites?

F) Do you ever take interest in other projects, say the Speculative
Dinosaur Project?

G) Are all your speculative biology ideas associated with the Neocene
Project or do you have any outside of it?

H) When it comes to evolving modern animals into future species, what
is your favorite animal(s) to work with?

I) Do you think speculative biology projects should be as
scientifically accurate as possible, or do you not mind some of the
more spectacular ideas?

J) Would you mind sharing a new or unpublished idea, or at least give
a small glimpse?

I decided I'd post a little question on here, to see what some
people's preferences are.

What is your favorite type of animal to think about in the context of
future evolution?

I like primates myself.


--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Morris"
<tdmorris@...> wrote:
>
> I decided I'd post a little question on here, to see what some
> people's preferences are.
>
> What is your favorite type of animal to think about in the context of
> future evolution?
>

I'm realist. Pigs, rats and crows are the best survivors.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Morris" <tdmorris@...>
wrote:
>
> I decided I'd post a little question on here, to see what some
> people's preferences are.
>
> What is your favorite type of animal to think about in the context of
> future evolution?

Rabbits. I'm actually a bit surprised that they haven't broken through
their small herbivore niche in OTL. It doesn't take too much
imagination to see them as carnivorous after a few modifications. There
are no tree dwelling Lagomorphs either. Why? Beats me.

--- In philosphica-dixonia@yahoogroups.com, "stan_engel"
<stan_engel@...> wrote:
> There
> are no tree dwelling Lagomorphs either. Why? Beats me.
>
You are wrong! Primitive and not specialized to running and burrowing
lagomorph Pentalagus furnessi from Japan is good tree-climber. But, of
course, it looks an exclusion from the general rule.
In my opinion rabbits are bounded to holes in their evolutional
development, because their cubs are born blind and helpless. That's why
I think D. Dixon's rabbucks a kind of fantasy.
Then, ochotonas may represent another possible stock of future tree-
dwelling lagomorphs.