No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Demography of late Miocene rhinoceroses (Teleoceras proterum and Aphelops malacorhinus) from Florida: linking mortality and sociality in fossil assemblages
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 April 2016
Abstract
Among polygynous mammals, a heightened risk of mortality is linked to the intensity of intragender competition and life-history stages, such as sexual maturity, where inexperienced individuals are vulnerable to the aggressive behaviors of dominant individuals. In this respect, the age- and sex-specific mortality patterns found in fossil assemblages could be informative of sociality in extinct species. This possibility was explored by comparing the age- and sex-specific demography of attritional rhinoceros assemblages, Teleoceras proterum (n = 2) and Aphelops malacorhinus (n = 1), from pond and fluvial sedimentary facies of the late Miocene of Florida, with modern skeletal assemblages of extant rhinos and other large mammals.
Subadult and young adult males (between 15–40% of potential life span) numerically dominate the Teleoceras assemblages, indicating a disproportionately high frequency of localized young male mortality. The estimated age-specific mortality rates indicate elevated mortality risks among males at an age equivalent to the years encompassing male physiological and social maturity in modern rhinos, a pattern that suggests a high frequency of socially mediated mortality. Age-specific mortality rate curves of modern black rhino populations are essentially identical. A high frequency of intraspecific fight-related mortality characterizes modern rhinos and strongly suggests that elevated Teleoceras mortality was influenced by intragender competition. Although Teleoceras is widely believed to have been the analog of extant Hippopotamus, mortality rates of young males are not elevated in a modern Hippopotamus population. The Aphelops assemblage is not significantly male-biased and does not indicate elevated mortality rates of young males, suggesting that aspects of Aphelops sociality differed from modern rhinos. Although the nature of Aphelops sociality is not clear, aggression toward young males may have been less extreme or less frequent in Aphelops populations.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society
References
Literature Cited
Agenbroad, L. D. 1990. The mammoth population of the Hot Springs site and associated fauna. Pp. 32–39in Agenbroad, L. D., Mead, J. I., and Nelson, L. W., eds. Megafauna and man: the discovery of America's Heartland. Mammoth Site of Hot Springs, Hot Springs, S.D.Google Scholar
Barnosky, A. D. 1985. Taphonomy and herd structure of the extinct Irish elk, Megaloceras giganteus. Science 228:340–344.Google Scholar
Berger, J. 1986. Wild horses of the Great Basin: social competition and population size. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Berger, J. 1994. Science, conservation and black rhinos. Journal of Mammalogy 75:298–308.Google Scholar
Berger, J., and Cunningham, C. 1994a. Bison: mating and conservation in small populations. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Berger, J., and Cunningham, C. 1994b. Phenotypic alterations, evolutionarily significant structures, and rhino conservation. Conservation Biology 8:833–840.Google Scholar
Berger, J., and Cunningham, C. 1995. Predation, sensitivity, and sex: why female black rhinoceroses outlive males. Behavioral Ecology 6:57–64.Google Scholar
Berger, J., Dulamtseren, S., Cain, S., Enkkhbileg, D., Lichtman, P., Namshir, Z., Wingard, G., and Reading, R. 2001. Back-casting sociality in extinct species: new perspectives using mass death assemblages and sex ratios. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 268:131–139.Google Scholar
Brain, C., Forge, O., and Erb, P. 1999. Lion predation on black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) in Etosha National Park. African Journal of Ecology 37:107–109.Google Scholar
Byers, J. A. 1997. American pronghorn: social adaptations and the ghosts of predators past. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Byers, J. A., and Kitchen, D. W. 1988. Mating system shifts in a pronghorn population. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 22:355–360.Google Scholar
Cerdeño, E. 1995. Cladistic analysis of the family Rhinocerotidae (Perissodactyla). American Museum Novitates 3143:1–25.Google Scholar
Clutton-Brock, T. H., and Iason, G. R. 1986. Sex ratio variation in mammals. Quarterly Review of Biology 61:339–374.Google Scholar
Cope, E. D. 1879. On the extinct American rhinoceroses and their allies. American Naturalist 13:771a–771j.Google Scholar
Cunningham, C., and Berger, J. 1997. Horn of darkness: rhinos of the edge. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Currie, P. J. 1998. Possible evidence of gregarious behavior in Tyrannosaurids. Gaia 15:271–277.Google Scholar
Dalquest, W. 1983. Mammals of the Coffee Ranch local fauna, Hemphillian of Texas. Pearce-Sellards Series No. 38. Texas Memorial Museum, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Deevey, E. S. 1947. Life tables for natural populations of animals. Quarterly Review of Biology 22:283–314.Google Scholar
Dinerstein, E. 1991. Sexual dimorphism in the greater one-horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis). Journal of Mammalogy 72:450–457.Google Scholar
Dinerstein, E., and Price, L. 1991. Demography and habitat use by greater one-horned rhinoceros in Nepal. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:401–411.Google Scholar
Dittus, W. P. 1975. Population dynamics of the Toque monkey, Macaca sinica. Pp. 125–152in Tuttle, R. H., ed. Socioecology and psychology of primates. Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
Dittus, W. P. 1977. The social regulation of population density and age-sex distribution in the Toque monkey. Behaviour 63:281–322.Google Scholar
Dittus, W. P. 1979. The evolution of behaviors regulating density and age-specific sex ratios in a primate population. Behaviour 69:266–302.Google Scholar
Eltringham, S. K. 1999. The hippos: natural history and conservation. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Geist, V., and Bayer, M. 1988. Sexual dimorphism in the Cervidae and its relation to habitat. Journal of Zoology 214:45–53.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. D. 1981. Variation, sexual dimorphism, and social structure in the early Eocene horse Hyracotherium (Mammalia, Perissodactyla). Paleobiology 7:443–455.Google Scholar
Goddard, J. 1970. Age criteria and vital statistics of a black rhinoceros population. East African Wildlife Journal 8:105–121.Google Scholar
Hillman-Smith, A. K. K., Owen-Smith, N., Anderson, J. L., Hall-Martin, A. J., and Selaladi, J. P. 1986. Age estimation of the white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum). Journal of Zoology 210:355–379.Google Scholar
Hirth, D. H. 2000. Behavioral ecology. Pp. 756–791in Demarais, S. and Krausman, P. R., eds. Ecology and management of large mammals in North America. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.Google Scholar
Hitchins, P. M. 1978. Age determination of the black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis Linn.) in Zululand. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 8:71–80.Google Scholar
Hitchins, P. M., and Anderson, J. L. 1983. Reproduction, population characteristics and management of the black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis minor in the Hluhluwe/Corridor/Umfolozi game reserve complex. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 13:78–85.Google Scholar
Hulbert, R. C. 1982. Population dynamics of the three-toed horse Neohipparion from the late Miocene of Florida. Paleobiology 8:159–167.Google Scholar
Hulbert, R. C. 1984. Paleoecology and population dynamics of the early Miocene (Hemmingfordian) horse Parahippus leonensis from the Thomas Farm site, Florida. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 4:547–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, C., Colbert, M., Coombs, M. C., Lambert, W. D., MacFadden, B. J., Mader, B. J., Prothero, D. R., Schoch, R. M., Shoshani, J., and Wall, W. P. 1998. Perissodactyla and Proboscidea. Pp. 511–524in Janis, C., Scott, K. M., and Jacobs, L. L., eds. Evolution of Tertiary mammals of North America, Vol. I. Terrestrial carnivores, ungulates, and ungulate-like mammals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Jarman, P. 1983. Mating system and sexual dimorphism in large, terrestrial, mammalian herbivores. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 58:485–520.Google Scholar
Jarman, P., and Jarman, M. V. 1973. Social behavior, population structure and reproduction potential in impala. East African Wildlife Journal 11: 329–38.Google Scholar
Kidwell, S. M., and Behrensmeyer, A. K. 1993. Taphonomic approaches to time resolution in fossil assemblages. Short Courses in Paleontology No. 6. Paleontological Society, Knoxville, Tenn.Google Scholar
Klein, R. G. 1981. Ungulate mortality and sedimentary facies in the late Tertiary Varswater formation, Langebaanweg, South Africa. Annals of the South African Museum 84:233–254.Google Scholar
Klein, R. G., and Cruz-Uribe, K. 1983. The computation of ungulate age (mortality) profiles from dental crown heights. Paleobiology 9:70–78.Google Scholar
Klingel, H. 1991. The social organization and behavior of Hippopotamus amphibius. Pp. 73–75in Kayanja, F. I. B. and Edorama, E. L., eds. African wildlife: research and management. International Council of Scientific Unions, Paris.Google Scholar
Kurtén, B. 1953. On the variation and population dynamics of fossil and recent mammal populations. Acta Zoologica Fennica 76:1–121.Google Scholar
Laurie, A. 1982. Behavioural ecology of the greater one-horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis). Journal of Zoology 196:307–341.Google Scholar
Laurie, A., Lang, E. M., and Groves, C. P. 1983. Rhinoceros unicornis. Mammalian Species 211:1–6.Google Scholar
Laws, R. M. 1968. Dentition and aging of the hippopotamus. East African Wildlife Journal 6:19–52.Google Scholar
Leidy, J., and Lucas, F. A. 1896. Fossil vertebrates from the Alachua clays. Transactions of the Wagner Free Institute of Science of Philadelphia 4:1–61.Google Scholar
Loison, A., Gaillard, J.-M., Pélabon, C., and Yoccoz, N. G. 1999. What factors shape sexual size dimorphism in ungulates? Evolutionary Ecology Research 1:611–633.Google Scholar
MacFadden, B. J., and Webb, S. D. 1982. The succession of Miocene (Arikareean through Hemphillian) terrestrial mammalian localities and faunas in Florida. Pp. 186–199in Scott, T. and Upchurch, S. B., eds. Miocene of the Southeastern United States. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Resource Management, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee.Google Scholar
Martin, R. E. 1999. Taphonomy: a process approach. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Matthew, W. D. 1924. Third contribution to the Snake Creek Fauna. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 50:59–210.Google Scholar
Matthew, W. D. 1932. A review of the rhinoceroses with a description of Aphelops material from the Pliocene of Texas. Bulletin of the University of California Publications in Geological Sciences 20:411–480.Google Scholar
Mead, A. J. 1999. Enamel hypoplasias in Miocene rhinoceroses (Teleoceras) from Nebraska: evidence of severe physiological stress. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 19:391–397.Google Scholar
Mead, A. J. 2000. Sexual dimorphism and paleoecology in Teleoceras, a North American rhinoceros. Paleobiology 26:689–706.Google Scholar
Mihlbachler, M. C. 1999. Population structure and implications of social behavior in Miocene Florida rhinoceroses. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 19(Suppl.):64a.Google Scholar
Osborn, H. F. 1898a. A complete skeleton of Teleoceras fossiger: notes upon the growth and sexual characteristics of this species. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 10:51–59.Google Scholar
Osborn, H. F. 1898b. A complete skeleton of Teleoceras the true rhinoceros from the Upper Miocene of Kansas. Science 7:554–557.Google Scholar
Owen-Smith, R. N. 1988. Megaherbivores: the influence of very large body size on ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pike-Tay, A., Morcomb, C. A., and O'Farrell, M. 2001. Reconsidering the quadratic crown height method of age estimation for Rangifer from archaeological sites. Archaeozoologia 11:145–174.Google Scholar
Plavcan, J. M. 2000. Inferring social behavior from sexual dimorphism in the fossil record. Journal of Human Evolution 39:327–344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prins, H. H. T. 1996. Ecology and behavior of the African buffalo: social inequality and decision making. Chapman and Hall, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prothero, D. R. 1998. Rhinocerotidae. Pp. 595–605in Janis, C., Scott, K. M., and Jacobs, L. L., eds. Evolution of Tertiary mammals of North America, Vol. I. Terrestrial carnivores, ungulates, and ungulate-like mammals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Prothero, D. R., Manning, E., and Hanson, C. B. 1986. The phylogeny of the Rhinocerotoidea. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 87:341–366.Google Scholar
Prothero, D. R., Guerin, C., and Manning, E. 1989. The history of the Rhinocerotoidea. Pp. 321–340in Prothero, D. R. and Schoch, R. M., eds. The evolution of the perissodactyls. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Putman, R. J. 1996. Competition and resource partitioning in temperate ungulate assemblies. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
Radinsky, L. 1966. The families of Rhinocerotiodea (Mammalia, Perissodactyla). Journal of Mammalogy 47:631–639.Google Scholar
Ralls, K., Brownell, R. L. Jr., and Ballou, J. 1980. Differential mortality by sex and age in mammals, with specific reference to the sperm whale. Report of the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue 2:233–243.Google Scholar
Schaller, G. B. 1972. The Serengeti lion: a study of predator-prey relationships. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1930. Tertiary land mammals of Florida. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 59:149–211.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. R. E. 1977. The African Buffalo: a study of resource limitation of populations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Straus, L. G. 1987. Upper Paleolithic ibex hunting in southwest Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 14:163–178.Google Scholar
Turnbull, W. D., and Martill, D. M. 1988. Taphonomy and preservation of a monospecific titanothere assemblage from the Washakie formation (Late Eocene), Southern Wyoming: an ecological accident in the fossil record. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 63:91–108.Google Scholar
Van Ballenberghe, V., and Ballard, W. B. 1997. Population dynamics. Pp. 223–245in Franzmann, A. W., Schwartz, C. C., and McCabe, R. E., eds. Ecology and management of the North American moose. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Van Strien, N. J. 1986. The Sumatran rhinoceros Dicerorhinus sumatrensis (Fischer, 1814) in the Gunung Leuser National Park Sumatra, Indonesia. Paul Parey, Berlin.Google Scholar
Voorhies, M. R. 1969. Taphonomy and population dynamics of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska. Contributions to Geology, University of Wyoming, Special Paper 1:1–69.Google Scholar
Voorhies, M. R. 1985. A Miocene rhinoceros herd buried in volcanic ash. Research Reports of the National Geographic Society 19:671–688.Google Scholar
Webb, S. D. 1977. A history of savanna vertebrates in the New World, Part I. North America. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 8:355–380.Google Scholar
Webb, S. D. 1983. The rise and fall of the late Miocene ungulate fauna in North America. Pp. 267–306in Nitecki, M., ed. Coevolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Webb, S. D., MacFadden, B. J., and Baskin, J. A. 1981. Geology and paleontology of the Love Bone Bed from the late Miocene of Florida. American Journal of Science 281:513–544.Google Scholar
Witmer, L. M. 1995. The extant phylogenetic bracket and the importance of reconstructing soft tissues in fossils. Pp. 19–33in Thomason, J. J., ed. Functional morphology in vertebrate paleontology. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar