Thylacoleo: Herbivore or Carnivore?

i-041a8564e90106483dc3b085ddb1e5a2-thylacoleo-skull-ancient.JPG


A restoration of the skull of Thylacoleo. From The Ancient Life History of the Earth.


Without a doubt, the extinct marsupial predator Thylacoleo was one of the strangest carnivorous mammals ever to have evolved. This predator from ancient Australia did not have piercing canines but instead bit into prey with large, forward facing incisors, and it sheared flesh from its kills with huge, cleaver-like premolars. Even though it evolved from herbivorous ancestors, we now know that Thylacoleo was most certainly a carnivore.

The preferred diet of Thylacoleo has not always been so clear-cut, however. In 1859 the famed anatomist Richard Owen identified it as a carnivore, "one of the fellest and most destructive of predatory beasts", and he thought it was related to living marsupial carnivores like quolls and the Tasmanian devil. When more of the skull was found, however, Owen changed his mind about its relationships. The incisor teeth linked it more closely to diprotodonts, a group of herbivorous marsupials including giant wombat like creatures and living kangaroos (among many others), so somehow a carnivorous mammal had been derived from herbivorous ancestors.*

*[I am not sure if Owen made this connection or tried to square it with his own thoughts on evolutionary theory. I will look into the question, but I am not sure if I will turn up anything.]

William Henry Flower, another London anatomist, disagreed. In 1868 he read a paper before the Geological Society on the "probable habits of the extinct Australian marsupial", but he did not dive into discussion of Thylacoleo right away. A few years earlier the paleontologist Hugh Falconer had described the lower jaw of a fossil animal he called Plagiaulax. (This mammal is now known to belong to an extinct group called the multituberculates.) The jaw looked superficially similar to the lower jaw of Thylacoleo, but Falconer thought it belonged to a small, herbivorous marsupial like the living rat-kangaroos.

i-5b42db8e574c770a35595875763833a7-kangaroo-rat-geol-soc.JPG


The skull of a rat-kangaroo. From The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London.


Owen, by contrast, thought that Plagiaulax was a carnivorous marsupial, perhaps based upon conclusions he had previously come to about Thylacoleo. Together Thylacoleo and Plagiaulax would represent a previously unknown form for mammalian carnivores. Flower sided with Falconer, though, and if the jaw of Plagiaulax belonged to an herbivore, was it possible that Owen had misidentified the habits of Thylacoleo, too?

Comparative anatomy held the key. While Owen made the case that the premolars of Thylacoleo had the same function as the more pointed carnissal shearing teeth of carnivores, Flower thought that the incisors and premolars of Thylacoleo more closely resembled those of rat-kangaroos. Other features, like the large areas of the skull used for jaw muscle attachment, could be chalked up to differences in comparing large animals to small ones, and all in all it seemed that Thylacoleo was a super-sized version of a rat-kangaroo or a phalanger.

Flower's reasoning was sound. In surveying marsupials and carnivorous mammals the jaws of Thylacoleo most closely resembled those of herbivores, and it seemed to be more closely related to herbivorous marsupials than carnivorous ones. The simplest explanation based upon anatomy and family relationships was that Thylacoleo was an herbivore, too. But what was it eating? This was more difficult to determine;

What was the particular form of food associated with the most singular dentition of Thylacoleo, it would be hazardous to do more than conjecture. As the flora of the country in which this strange animal existed has probably undergone as great a change as the fauna, it is not unlikely that the material upon which it subsisted has passed away with the creature itself. It may have been some kind of root or bulb ; it may have been fruit ; it may have been flesh. But the hypothesis that Thylacoleo was the destroyer of the gigantic herbivorous marsupials (many times as large as itself) with which its remains are found associated, the Diprotodons and the Nototheres, appears to me to require more proof than has yet been adduced in its favour.

i-edbdaba2f434b1d5f71d026cadd909c6-thylacoleo-skull-front.JPG


Restoration of the skull of Thylacoleo. From The Ancient Life History of the Earth.


Owen was not convinced and later fired back a defense of his views, but other naturalists were sympathetic to Flower's hypothesis. It was a stretch to turn Thylacoleo into a terrifying carnivore when its skull was so similar to those of marsupial herbivores, but there was one important factor that had not been given due attention. Thylacoleo lacked grinding teeth to chew up the vegetation it supposedly ate. Its teeth looked better adapted to piercing, stabbing, and shearing; it could slice and dice, but not properly pulverize the plants it consumed like other herbivores.

Thus the notion that Thylacoleo was a carnivore was revived by paleontologist Robert Broom in 1898, but his considerations were not unanimously well-received. In a communication to the American Naturalist the American paleontologist H.F. Osborn called Broom's hypothesis "quite unjustifiable", but the zoologist B.A. Bensley agreed with Broom's conclusions. The case was still open.

Most of these considerations were based upon studies of the skull. When more of Thylacoleo came to light, however, there could be little doubt that it was a predator. A bit larger than a leopard, but smaller than the average lion, Thylacoleo had long arms, semi-opposable thumbs, retractable claws, and a bite force stronger (for its size) than any other terrestrial meat-eating mammal. Isotope tests of its teeth, as well, have confirmed that it ate meat, and it certainly was as fearsome a predator as Owen surmised.

Ultimately Flower's hypothesis was rejected, but this did not mean his science was bad. He compared what little evidence was available at the time to other creatures and urged caution in trying to reconstruct the life of Thylacoleo on the basis of teeth alone. Flower's views may not longer make it into textbooks, but his exchange with Owen is a good example of how science operates.

More like this

Restoration of the skull of Thylacoleo. From The Ancient Life History of the Earth. Thylacoleo was one strange mammal. A close relative of living koalas, kangaroos, and wombats, the largest species of Thylacoleo were lion-sized carnivores that stalked the Australian continent between 2 million and…
The famous footage of "Benjamin," a Thylacine that died in captivity due to neglect on September 7, 1936. It was the last known living member of its species.Convergent evolution can be a tricky thing, and one of the most celebrated examples of it (at least among creationists) is the case of the…
One of Charles R. Knight's paintings of Smilodon fatalis, this one menacing a giant sloth stuck in tar (off panel).There are few fossil mammals that are as impressive as the saber-toothed cat Smilodon fatalis, but despite it's fearsome dentition some recent reports have suggested it was more of a…
The Australian mainland's largest extant native mammalian predator is the Spotted-tailed quoll or Tiger quoll Dasyurus maculatus. It weighs, at most, 7 kg. While rumours of Thylacine Thylacinus cynocephalus (15-30 kg) survival persist both in Tasmania and on the Australian mainland (and,…

a small, herbivorous marsupial like the living rat-kangaroos.

â¦which are actually somewhat omnivorous, like many small diprotodonts.

By David MarjanoviÄ (not verified) on 09 Jun 2009 #permalink

Any prey specimens known with tooth marks? I'm at work at the moment so can only do so much browsing right now.

Since Thylacoleo was a carnivore from a family of herbivores, and killed with it's incisor teeth, it's not surprising that early paleontologists didn't know what it's lifestyle was; this creature's very unusual, if not unique. I'm just glad modern technology can answer questions that were once out of our grasp.

By Raymond Minton (not verified) on 09 Jun 2009 #permalink

Wasn't it the tiny thylacoleonid Priscileo which had an even stronger bite-force for its size? BTW, Thylacoleo carnifex was very probably much more than a bit larger than a leopard (even considering the wide range of sizes in which leopards exist), but more in the size range of a big jaguar or a lioness. Some specimens even indicate weights close to male lions. Steven Wroe wrote a lot about the updated weights for Thylacoleo and several other marsupials, which is very interesting.

Wasn't it the tiny thylacoleonid Priscileo which had an even stronger bite-force for its size? BTW, Thylacoleo carnifex was very probably much more than a bit larger than a leopard (even considering the wide range of sizes in which leopards exist), but more in the size range of a big jaguar or a lioness. Some specimens even indicate weights close to male lions. Steven Wroe wrote a lot about the updated weights for Thylacoleo and several other marsupials, which is very interesting.

>> a small, herbivorous marsupial like the living
>> rat-kangaroos.

> â¦which are actually somewhat omnivorous, like many small
> diprotodonts.

*Burramys*, the other living plagiaulacoid genus, eats a lot of Bogong Moths, and the extinct giant rat-kangaroo *Propleopus* might have been even more carnivorous than its smaller relatives. Strangely, people fear *Propleopus*-like cryptids even in places like NA and the Balkans that were never inhabitated by macropods for obvious geographical reasons and had lost their native plagiaulacoid animals at the end of the Cretaceous (polidolopids) or in the Palaeogene (multis, carpolestids).

Some other examples of creatures with diprotodont (if not plagiaulacoid) dentition and insectivorous or carnivorous tendencies: grasshopper mice, caenolestids and the baby in It's Alive :D.

When I first saw Thylacoleo many years ago I was also skeptical of it being a meat eater and thought that maybe it was shearing into tough plants or fruits instead, based on it's relations and lack of carnivore-like canines. It's certainly a very weird animal...

Another thing that made me skeptical of it's predatory habits was its forelimbs, since they seemed so well adapted to tree climbing, almost like a koala or primate. It made it seem less likely that it could chase after prey, but I guess it could always drop down on it. I'd love to find some research on that particular issue.