Why dogs like to roll in shit and carcasses?
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
- Status
So. You have no time for anecdote? Then why should you pust something such as the following?
Funny. I could have sworn that the quote you gave from this guy said something about people saying stuff rather than peremptorily stating with authority anything about wolf and/or dog behavior. Also, funny how the quote mentions "main".
Hmm.
You haven't learned anything.
Imagine that.
I've contributed quite a bit. I've been trying to teach you the meaning of fact and how science works, but you just don't seem to get it as evidenced by your previous anecdotal evidence which you seem to claim as greater than that.
Also. I've been trying to teach you some morality. Yet you keep posting lies such as the following:
More evidence of your disreputable character.
I demand an apology for lying.
I never said this.
You've misquoted me.
Last edited:
blah blah blah blah
blahblah blah
blah blah
blah
blahblah blah
blah blah
blah
There you go again.
You just can't stop lying, can you?
Disgusting little creep.
The word "actually" is politely used in English. You don't like English?
Contrary, I taught you that bears eat crustaceans and clams - something you first denied (review) - and cited numerous examples of Brown Bears being larger than Polar Bears (2,500 pds. vs 1,970 pds.). It's much easier to drag a Polar Bear across solid Arctic ice than to cut a new road into Alaskan boreal forest and tundra on permafrost to get it out just to have it weighed. How could this be done? Who would finance such a ridiculous astronomical investment just to get their name in a book? Brown bears also gorge on moths and lilies - an excellent source of nutrition. One study I read said that Grizzlies sometimes eat up to 20,000 moths per day.
Last edited:
Hmm.
Contradictory little twerp.
blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah?
Blah.
Blah blah blah?
"Blah blah blah blahblah::"
Blah.
Retard.
And a dishonest one to boot.
Nothing worse.
blah blah blah?
Blah.
Blah blah blah?
"Blah blah blah blahblah::"
Blah.
Retard.
And a dishonest one to boot.
Nothing worse.
I am an honest man. I do not lie. And I do my best to be an objective scientist, weighing all the facts: pros and cons. Constantly and actively researching and gathering as much factual data as I possible - time permitting. I readily admit when I am wrong and apologize when it is due, as you can quickly rereview on this thread - something unknown to the man with "The "Twisted" Broken Brain" who is too proud and stubborn because he is nothing more than a senile, stubborn old man who speaks in vain riddles, tooting his horn to entertain a pitiful increasingly faultering ego. Not a "man," a "thing" that finds sadistic pleasure in cutting down and belittling others - a most solid sure subtle sign of intellectual immaturity and egotistic vanity. I wonder if you even managed to graduate from high school you little stubborn old twerp?
Now the "thing" - the "it" - only has a one-word vocabulary: "blah." A very concise overview of what goes round in that little egg you carry on top of your neck.
Now the "thing" - the "it" - only has a one-word vocabulary: "blah." A very concise overview of what goes round in that little egg you carry on top of your neck.
One fact highlighted by the Alaskan NPS biologist, supported by my correspondences with the NPS, is that they only roll in herbivore scat and carcasses: food and prey, not rival predators. We have no accounts that Canidae roll in other Carnivora scat or carcasses.
If scent rolling was just to bring info back to the pack, wouldn't it be more important to bring info back about potential competitors and other predators?
This new fact adds important clarity to delineate the hypothesis.
Still, no one has yet addressed the issue of why bears also scent roll? They have no predators and are not pack animals. Therefore, no hypothesis, except for "inherited shared primitive allomemitic trait" has yet to be stated that takes this into account.
If scent rolling was just to bring info back to the pack, wouldn't it be more important to bring info back about potential competitors and other predators?
This new fact adds important clarity to delineate the hypothesis.
Still, no one has yet addressed the issue of why bears also scent roll? They have no predators and are not pack animals. Therefore, no hypothesis, except for "inherited shared primitive allomemitic trait" has yet to be stated that takes this into account.
Two lies.
If you were worth the time, I could show it beyond a reasonable doubt. In this thread and in so many others in which you've taken part.
However, you're not worth the time.
You're just a pathetic miserable wretch.
A retard.
And a liar.
Heh.
Too stupid to even think up your own insults.
What a pitiful example of a human you are.
You really should commit suicide. Do the Earth a favor.
Please tell me you don't have children. And don't plan to ever have any.
And who, if I may be so bold, ever suggested any such thing?
Retard.
Note to members
dogs and shit do not mix,
the length of this thread is ridiculous and the insults more so
how about instead discussing why a dog can't let go of it's bone?
I only resort to such lame insults when referring to pieces of shit such as Valich.
They took my zyprexa away!
They took my zyprexa away!
Why do bears roll in pepper spray? One NPS biologist - his name is Smith, John Smith I think - advocates against using pepper spray as a bear defense. I think he advocates this because some dumb users think pepper spray is just like mosquito repellent and so they then spray it on their clothing and tents thinking that this will "prevent" bear attacks, but this "attracts" bears. But why would bears roll in it - scent roll?
Some say they like the way it tastes.
And I couldn't imagine spraying that stuff on my clothes and tent. You ever get pepper sprayed? It hurts like hell, and I've never even got a faceful of the stuff.
Yes, I did! But just from a slight touch of the trigger or from some residue. The one time we had to evacuate the tent after I accidently threw the canister next to me before going to bed, causing a slight squirt. My eyes burned for about an hour afterwards as I kept flushing them out in the stream we camped next to.
I also love hot food and often pour tons of pepper on what I cook. Maybe bears like it for the same reason, but this doesn't seem to explain why they would roll in it - only lick it.
I also love hot food and often pour tons of pepper on what I cook. Maybe bears like it for the same reason, but this doesn't seem to explain why they would roll in it - only lick it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6183379.stm
It seems humans aren't as bad at smelling scents as we like to think. We walk upright, but if we put our noses to the ground we can move with the dogs.
It seems humans aren't as bad at smelling scents as we like to think. We walk upright, but if we put our noses to the ground we can move with the dogs.
I've read this study some where before, or one similar. Canidae have a long snout for a reason - it contains a long olfactory mucous membrane system lined with billions of olfactory receptors that can distinguish tens of thousands - probably more - unique scents: at least 10,000 times more smells than humans can detect. Dogs have over 2 billion olfactory receptors while humans only have about 10 million. The olfactory information is used for individual recognition, to maintain affiliations, to reduce competition - such as by marking their territory - and to bring back information to the pack, etc.
Dogs only have 30% more olfactory receptors (OR) genes that encode for their olfactory receptors than humans - rats and mice about 60% more - but 70% of the human OR genes are nonfunctional pseudogenes (see: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/6/2870 and http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=16022). Dogs have about 1200 (1178) OR genes compared to 350 for humans. However, even though the number of genes that encode for olfactory receptors are only about four times as great, the big difference in olfactory ability lies in the much greater number of olfactory nerve cells and the way that they are processed in the brain. The olfactory receptors send signals to the olfactory lobe in the brain, and canids' olfactory lobes are much larger than humans'.
"Although humans do have a good sense of smell—we can detect about 10,000 different odors—our olfactory capability is not as good as those of many vertebrates, especially fish and other mammals. A dog, for example, has up to 40 million nerve endings per square centimeter of nasal epithelium, many more than we do." http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/biog105/pages/demos/105/unit10/tastesmell.html
"Dogs have 40 times more olfactory cells – the cells that allow the recognition of a smell – than humans do. As a result, a dog has 200 million olfactory cells against 5 million in humans." http://expasy.org/prolune/pdf/prolune014_en.pdf.
The key in Canidae's superior scent recognition is the plethora of volatile odorant molecules that they are able to detect through their large and long complex olfactory epithelium. Canids have seven transmembrane domains in their olfactory system that are enervated by thousands of nerve cells spread across their olfactory epithelium. Each neuron has one distinct odorant receptor that can bind with many specific and different odorants with different affinities. But if more than one bind with many different affinities then this enables the differences in scent that they can detect to be exponential.
"The size of the epithelium is a good indicator of the acuity of an animal's sense of smell. For example, the surface area of a human epithelium is 10 cm, whereas the surface area of a dog's epithelium is 170cm^2. Dogs also have 100 times more receptors per square centimeter than humans, so, needless to say, dogs have a much better sense of smell." http://www.macalester.edu/psychology/whathap/UBNRP/Smell/nasal.html
The size of the snout does matter a lot. Consequently, I think that breeder's who breed short muzzle pug-faced dogs - for whatever reason they do so? - are doing the dog an injustice because they are artificially genetically engineering a loss to its original wolf-like olfactory ability. Not to be a racist, but aren't they breeding toward an inferior canid subspecies? Why deprive the dog of its inherent sense of smell?
"Gene Studies:
From rodents through the primate series to humans there is a progressive reduction in the proportion of functional olfactory receptor genes. Mice have approximately 1,300 olfactory receptor genes, of which some 1,100 are functional, whereas humans have only some 350 functional genes of approximately 1,000. The conclusion seems obvious: the low number of functional olfactory receptor genes in humans compared with rodents—and presumably most other mammals—is directly correlated with the evolutionary decline in the human sense of smell." http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020146
See also: The Human Sense of Smell: Are We Better Than We Think? http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=406401
TOP SECRET: On the Prowl with the Secret Bomb Dogs
"These dogs enjoy their work: There is no greater demonstration of vocational happiness than a bomb dog on the scent of something explosive. And it's lucky for us that they love it like they do....Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, the government's primary center for bomb-dog training, used to talk to reporters about its training program, but since Sept. 11, officials there have been under orders from the Pentagon to keep all bomb-dog information classified. The closest they'll come to actual data is saying that the number of dogs being trained there has "increased." The Federal Aviation Administration, which gets many of its dogs from Lackland, plans to have 300 bomb-dog teams at 80 airports by 2003, but officials there won't say what, exactly, those dogs will be doing, how many will be at each airport or how the dogs have been trained." http://www.salon.com/people/2002/03/04/bomb_dogs/
Dogs only have 30% more olfactory receptors (OR) genes that encode for their olfactory receptors than humans - rats and mice about 60% more - but 70% of the human OR genes are nonfunctional pseudogenes (see: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/6/2870 and http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=16022). Dogs have about 1200 (1178) OR genes compared to 350 for humans. However, even though the number of genes that encode for olfactory receptors are only about four times as great, the big difference in olfactory ability lies in the much greater number of olfactory nerve cells and the way that they are processed in the brain. The olfactory receptors send signals to the olfactory lobe in the brain, and canids' olfactory lobes are much larger than humans'.
"Although humans do have a good sense of smell—we can detect about 10,000 different odors—our olfactory capability is not as good as those of many vertebrates, especially fish and other mammals. A dog, for example, has up to 40 million nerve endings per square centimeter of nasal epithelium, many more than we do." http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/biog105/pages/demos/105/unit10/tastesmell.html
"Dogs have 40 times more olfactory cells – the cells that allow the recognition of a smell – than humans do. As a result, a dog has 200 million olfactory cells against 5 million in humans." http://expasy.org/prolune/pdf/prolune014_en.pdf.
The key in Canidae's superior scent recognition is the plethora of volatile odorant molecules that they are able to detect through their large and long complex olfactory epithelium. Canids have seven transmembrane domains in their olfactory system that are enervated by thousands of nerve cells spread across their olfactory epithelium. Each neuron has one distinct odorant receptor that can bind with many specific and different odorants with different affinities. But if more than one bind with many different affinities then this enables the differences in scent that they can detect to be exponential.
"The size of the epithelium is a good indicator of the acuity of an animal's sense of smell. For example, the surface area of a human epithelium is 10 cm, whereas the surface area of a dog's epithelium is 170cm^2. Dogs also have 100 times more receptors per square centimeter than humans, so, needless to say, dogs have a much better sense of smell." http://www.macalester.edu/psychology/whathap/UBNRP/Smell/nasal.html
The size of the snout does matter a lot. Consequently, I think that breeder's who breed short muzzle pug-faced dogs - for whatever reason they do so? - are doing the dog an injustice because they are artificially genetically engineering a loss to its original wolf-like olfactory ability. Not to be a racist, but aren't they breeding toward an inferior canid subspecies? Why deprive the dog of its inherent sense of smell?
"Gene Studies:
From rodents through the primate series to humans there is a progressive reduction in the proportion of functional olfactory receptor genes. Mice have approximately 1,300 olfactory receptor genes, of which some 1,100 are functional, whereas humans have only some 350 functional genes of approximately 1,000. The conclusion seems obvious: the low number of functional olfactory receptor genes in humans compared with rodents—and presumably most other mammals—is directly correlated with the evolutionary decline in the human sense of smell." http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020146
See also: The Human Sense of Smell: Are We Better Than We Think? http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=406401
TOP SECRET: On the Prowl with the Secret Bomb Dogs
"These dogs enjoy their work: There is no greater demonstration of vocational happiness than a bomb dog on the scent of something explosive. And it's lucky for us that they love it like they do....Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, the government's primary center for bomb-dog training, used to talk to reporters about its training program, but since Sept. 11, officials there have been under orders from the Pentagon to keep all bomb-dog information classified. The closest they'll come to actual data is saying that the number of dogs being trained there has "increased." The Federal Aviation Administration, which gets many of its dogs from Lackland, plans to have 300 bomb-dog teams at 80 airports by 2003, but officials there won't say what, exactly, those dogs will be doing, how many will be at each airport or how the dogs have been trained." http://www.salon.com/people/2002/03/04/bomb_dogs/
Last edited:
Femal rodents scent-mark when is estrus. Male rodents then overmark the female's scent-mark. Source: "Scent Marking in Rodents," by Thomas, Shawn A. and Jerry O Wolff. 2003 Symposium. http://www.nri.org/ratzooman/docs/MN96 Chapter 2.pdf
- Status