A Dutch Life

I remember as a kid, in primary school, having these endless, in depth, and very serious debates about what would win in a battle between various dangerous creatures. The practicalities associated with such debates was never all that important, for example there was no problem with pitting a gorilla against a great white shark, although the only remaining neutral territory, the air, did make it difficult to decide who would actually win. You can imagine my surprise when I found this article on the BBC, it seems some scientists never actually moved on:

The study showed that although the tiger was the bigger, more efficient biter, the dingo was better equipped to deal with prey that struggles.

What this study suggests is that the thylacine had a much more restricted range of prey,” explained Dr Stephen Wroe from the University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney.

“The dingo, on the other hand, is adept at taking anything from invertebrates through to kangaroos. The dingo can also be a social hunter and it’s most unlikely that the thylacine was; and we know that the more specialised an animal is, the more vulnerable it is.”

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Dingo had measure of Tassie tiger