Indeed, the 'rilla has exceptional puissance when compared to it's ilk, the great apes but has it dawned on you that apes are quite unimpressive when compared to animals from the Order Carnivora? The brazen fact that there exists accounts of these apes being taken down by felines half their size is testament to the comparative weakness of apes in contrast to bears and felines. Here is the source: "Leopard attack on and the consumption of gorillas in the Central African Republic", by J.M Fay et al, Journal of Human Evolution (1995), 29, 93-99.
They clearly state that the other reported cases are recognized as factual evidence that adult male gorillas have been killed by leopards. They conclude by saying "it appears that gorillas are vulnerable to leopard predation in all their range".
I can list many pragmatic advantages in corner of animals from the Order Carnivora possessing flexible forelimbs:
1) A morphology better-suited for wrestling and striking. Surely you realize dorsally situated shoulders are impractical at such movements. This book: The Natural History of the Gorilla, by A. F. Dixson, seems to discuss their dorsally situated shoulder blades -- something that suggests despite their larger chests relative to size, that they would very likely have much poorer strength/efficiency in certain grappling/running movements of the forequarters as similarly sized members of the Order Carnivora.
Not only that but, I'm afraid the short, thickset arms possessed by felines and bears are far more useful in close-quarter grappling than the long, lean arms the gorilla has. Furthermore, at the end of these long arms, you get terrible leverage. It takes twice as much force to lift a 50lb object at the end of a 6 foot limb as it would for a 3 foot limb.
2) Claws - these bestow greater traction when wrestling. Hands are great for manipulating objects, playing piano and using chop sticks but for manipulating the whole bodies of animals? I think not, animals don't have handles on their bodies. And grabbing the stronger, shorter and thicker limbs of similar sized feline is folly.
Additionally, claws are a cut above hands(no pun intended) in dealing damage, this should be obvious, and apes when compared to the prey of felines and bears with thicker hides are quite defenseless in the face of a feline's claws. Why? Woolly fur is no defense against the powerful swipes of a similar sized feline(one of these swipes, if placed accurately is capable of crushing the skull of domestic cattle, this is documented in Perry, Richards The World of the Tiger, here are the snapshots of the accounts from the book) and a gorilla's skin is actually thinner than ours. This:
states that the skin of the Gorilla averages 1.5 mm in thickness. This study states that, prior to treatment, the average skin thickness in the arms of Humans was 1.64 mm, and 2mm on the abdomen.
3) Muscle mass - The only feline, that is comparable in size to the gorilla is the lion. And the lion will have a hefty advantage in muscle mass, according to this source, it has the highest skeletal muscle per body mass amongst mammals:
4) Killing method - Animals form the Order Carnivora, possess great acumen in the craft of killing and each of these animals have ways of killing their opponents or prey. Most animals from the Order Carnivora, when in danger or on the attack, have an instinctual imperative to go for the throat. These carnivores make their bread essentially, by killing other animals, and thus are imbued with the predatory knowledge of how to inflict a kill bite. Felines happen to have some of the most devastating kill bites in their "weapons depot". Apes? They have strong bites and formidable canines, indeed, but can they be used proficiently to end lives, when on the offensive against a similar sized opponent? No but in a life-threatening situation against similar sized opponents they can bite defensively in abject desperation, on whatever body part it can reach. This is hardly effective. So what are other tenable ways for which the apes can kill similar-sized animals as effectively as animals from the Order Carnivora? Many people posit that blunt trauma, by dint of it's arms would be one such way. This would be plausible if an ape or any other animal is facing against an opponent a quarter of it's size or less but not against a similar sized opponent. Eg. Gaur trampling a tiger with it's hard hooves, this is incredibly effective because the gaur outweighs the tiger by about 1500lbs or more.
This analysis of the practical disadvantages apes have against similar sized animals from the Order Carnivora is exiguous for I have little time to spare.
Any thoughts?
I want to thank Ursus for finding some of these sources.
Edited by Leto, : Wrong word used.
Edited by Leto, : No reason given.
Edited by Leto, : Punctuation Error.
Edited by Leto, : No reason given.
Edited by Leto, : One more point to be made.
Edited by Leto, : Tidying up post. Lol.
Edited by Leto, : No reason given.
Edited by Leto, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
