Talk:Sarkastodon

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

How big was this critter, anyway? What specimens found suggest six feet at the shoulder and ten feet in length? The claims require a citation or a reference. Has anyone heard anything about this particular creodont?

I found this paper estimating it to be 800 kg. It also estimates megistotherium (=HYAINAILOUROS) to be 500 kg Sorkin, B. 2008: A biomechanical constraint on body mass in terrestrial mammalian predators. Lethaia, Vol. 41, pp. 333–347Brisio (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That estimate is based on molar length assuming geometric similarity with lions, an incredibly poor choice to estimate the mass of an animal with bone cracking adaptations that comes from a group of animals with oversized heads compared to carnivorans, wouldn't be a surprise if such estimate is off by 400% but alas is the only thing we have. Mike.BRZ (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Size limit

Isn't it presumptuous to assume there's a size limit for terrestrial mammal carnivores, when just about every time someone postulates such a limit, a limit-breaker is discovered? Unless there's some intrinsic reason to believe so, in which case it ought to be listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]