Who or What Killed The Wrangel Island Mammoths?

  • Thread starter Mammo
  • Start date
In summary, Wrangel Island in the Siberian Arctic was the last refuge of the mammoths until just a few thousand years ago. This can be seen from the fact that the island became separated from the mainland around 12,000 B.P. and mammoths were able to survive on the island until the mid-Holocene, about 6000 years after their estimated extinction on the Siberian continent. While some argue that human hunting may have played a role in the mammoth's extinction, the evidence is not robust and it is more likely that climate change, particularly the increase in rain and resulting destruction of their habitat, was the main contributing factor. The island's unique microclimate may have also played a role in sustaining the mam
  • #1
Mammo
208
0
Wrangel Island in the Siberian Arctic was the last refuge of the mammoths until just a few thousand years ago. Wikipedia Dwarf Elephants states that the island became separated from the mainland around 12,000 B.P. Is it reasonable to assume that they were saved from hunting due to the rising sea levels of deglaciation? Wikipedia Wrangel Island

This http://packrat.aml.arizona.edu/Journal/v37n1/vartanyan.html concludes:
During the last glacial maximum (ca. 20 ka ago), environmental conditions on Wrangel Island proved capable of sustaining habitation by mammoths. Our data show that woolly mammoths persisted on Wrangel Island in the mid-Holocene, from 7390-3730 yr ago. 14C dating has shown that mammoths inhabited Wrangel Island for as long as 6000 yr after the estimated extinction of Mammuthus primigenius on the Siberian continent.

Was it man or was it the weather?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #2
Mammo said:
Wrangel Island in the Siberian Arctic was the last refuge of the mammoths until just a few thousand years ago. Wikipedia Dwarf Elephants states that the island became separated from the mainland around 12,000 B.P. Is it reasonable to assume that they were saved from hunting due to the rising sea levels of deglaciation?

That overhunt idea is so mighty persistent. What is the evidence of hunting of mammoths in Siberia? Most of the fossil mammoth remains are on places where there were no human/aerchelogoical remains found, and furthermore, as far as I know, the only known modified mammoth bone by possible hunting in Siberia is this vertebra:

20gb0bn.jpg


http://www.yukonmuseums.ca/mammoth/abstrt-z.htm#82

So did this fluted point spear penetrate through the fur, skin, lung, to enter the vertebra with considerable force? Or was it target practice?

Wikipedia Wrangel Island

This http://packrat.aml.arizona.edu/Journal/v37n1/vartanyan.html concludes:

Was it man or was it the weather?

The last Mammoth remains in North Siberia are early Holocene ~11,200 cal BP when the mammoth steppe gave way to marshes, swamps and boreal forest (McDonald et al 2000) due to the severe climate changes, especially the increase in rain. This could be attributed to Atlantic waters penetrating high into the Arctic. Islands like Wrangel are having their own climate logic. Apparantly the conditions were so that the steppes stayed, providing the proper niche for the Mammoths.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
Mammoths also survived on the Bering Sea island of Saint Paul until 6000 B.C.E. Wikipedia Dwarf Elephants states:

St. Paul Island shares this characteristic of geographic isolation, implying that human hunting played a role in the disappearance of the woolly mammoth.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Mammo said:
Mammoths also survived on the Bering Sea island of Saint Paul until 6000 B.C.E. Wikipedia Dwarf Elephants states:
St. Paul Island shares this characteristic of geographic isolation, implying that human hunting played a role in the disappearance of the woolly mammoth.

Again no, islands don't share the climate of the mainland because of the limited size.
 
  • #5
The evidence for human caused extinction is not at all robust. It is probable that human predation contributed to the extinction, but climate change is believed to be the major contributing factor.

I would tend to agree with Andre that the island micro climates are the likely answer.
 
  • #6
Large bodies of water act as thermal "flywheels", damping rapid swings in temperature. Here in Maine, we have had some record cold this winter, but it has all been well inland. Coastal areas are routinely significantly warmer. I would tend to give credence to the island microclimate concept just from experience.
 
  • #7
Skyhunter said:
The evidence for human caused extinction is not at all robust. It is probable that human predation contributed to the extinction, but climate change is believed to be the major contributing factor.

I would tend to agree with Andre that the island micro climates are the likely answer.

turbo-1 said:
Large bodies of water act as thermal "flywheels", damping rapid swings in temperature. Here in Maine, we have had some record cold this winter, but it has all been well inland. Coastal areas are routinely significantly warmer. I would tend to give credence to the island microclimate concept just from experience.
Why are mammoths found to survive longest on a northern polar arctic island then? The climate argument doesn't make sense. Mammoths should have survived longest at more southerly latitudes if this was correct. There should even be mammoths alive today.
 
  • #8
Mammo said:
Why are mammoths found to survive longest on a northern polar arctic island then? The climate argument doesn't make sense. Mammoths should have survived longest at more southerly latitudes if this was correct. There should even be mammoths alive today.

The Siberian mammoth died out 11,000 years ago due to the destruction of its habitat, the cold and dry steppe of North Siberia, when the warm atlantic waters penetrated deeply into the Artic, causing torrential rains (McDonald et al 2000).

The generation of rain clouds is sometimes depending on warmer airmasses above the ocean, cooling above land. Small islands don't have enough "inertia" for that and are often drier. That could have caused Wrangel island to remain drier, retaining its steppe.
 
  • #9
Andre said:
The Siberian mammoth died out 11,000 years ago due to the destruction of its habitat, the cold and dry steppe of North Siberia, when the warm atlantic waters penetrated deeply into the Artic, causing torrential rains (McDonald et al 2000).
Do you have a direct link for this report? The end of the ice age should be linked with a declining Atlantic current in my opinion.
Andre said:
The generation of rain clouds is sometimes depending on warmer airmasses above the ocean, cooling above land. Small islands don't have enough "inertia" for that and are often drier. That could have caused Wrangel island to remain drier, retaining its steppe.
I don't think any expert would agree with this idea. Show me one if you can.


Professor Guthrie of Alaska University states in his book 'Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe':
After the last interglacial, trees again entered the north around 12,000-13,000 years ago, and people came north with the new trees; this time they were not stopped at 60' but pushed northeastward into the then exposed Bering-Chuckchi Platform and farther, into North America. We know from archaeological sites that these people were hunting the mammoth fauna, especially bison.
 

Attachments

  • Hunting0.jpg
    Hunting0.jpg
    39.3 KB · Views: 580
  • Hunting1.jpg
    Hunting1.jpg
    29 KB · Views: 577
  • Hunting2.jpg
    Hunting2.jpg
    34 KB · Views: 566
  • #10
Mammo said:
Do you have a direct link for this report?

Download them and memorize them, this is the umpteenth time that I refer to McDonald et al 2000 which in the introduction already refers to Atlantic waters penetrating deep into the Arctic. We are running around in circles again, which is also true for the rest of your post. There is not a single human remain or artifact around at Taymyr in the early Holocene, the place where the last Siberian mammoth died out.

Try http://epic.awi.de/Publications/Kie2005a.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
Andre said:
Download them and memorize them, this is the umpteenth time that I refer to McDonald et al 2000 which in the introduction already refers to Atlantic waters penetrating deep into the Arctic.
Is it you or is it me who is delusional? There is no reference to this in the introduction.
Andre said:
We are running around in circles again, which is also true for the rest of your post. There is not a single human remain or artifact around at Taymyr in the early Holocene, the place where the last Siberian mammoth died out.
The last mammoth is known to have died out on Wrangel Island, thousands of years after the last mammoths died out on the island of Saint Paul, which itself was thousands of years later than the mainland mammoths.

There is the common sense logical argument of course: Why did the megafauna take millions of years to evolve, surviving a multitude of earlier glacial cycles, but just happen to die off when humans became technologically advanced?

The Wrangel Island refuge became isolated by rising sea levels around 12,000 years ago. This coincides with the development of sewing, so that humans could have fully protective clothing and transportable shelter. This technological advance also took place around 12,000 years ago. It's just too much of a coincidence in my mind. The megafauna would have retreated but been caught at the bottle-neck of Beringia into the American continent. Human populations would have swelled until all the large mammals were gone. It's the simplest, most logical conclusion.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
I wonder... These islands are not very large. Were they able to sustain reasonably large populations for a long time? And by reasonably large I mean - large enough, so that they won't be endangered by interbreeding. Mammoth is a large animal, and as such requires a lot of terrain to feed on, especially in the harsh climate.

Edit: OK, I read some more. Wrangel island mammoths were smaller (not surprisingly).
 
  • #13
Borek said:
I wonder... These islands are not very large. Were they able to sustain reasonably large populations for a long time? And by reasonably large I mean - large enough, so that they won't be endangered by interbreeding. Mammoth is a large animal, and as such requires a lot of terrain to feed on, especially in the harsh climate.

Edit: OK, I read some more. Wrangel island mammoths were smaller (not surprisingly).

No they were not smaller, a widespread misconception based on a misinterpreation of a small molar of a senile mammoth. It was later corrected but as usual, the wrong hypotheses will never die.

http://www.citeulike.org/user/EsepBib/article/2858560

Long bone dimensions of Holocene mammoths from Wrangel Island indicate that these animals were comparable in size to those on the mainland; although they were not large animals, neither can they be classified as dwarfs.

The last mammoths of the species Mammuthus primigenius (Woolly mammots) were clearly smaller than their ancestors, the Mammuthus meridionalis and Mammuthus trogontheri. Moreover the earlier woolly mammoths ca 350ka ago were generally much larger than the last ca 10,000 years ago
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Andre said:
No they were not smaller

So we are back to the question whether island was large enough to sustain the population.
 
  • #15
As usual things may be a lot more complex, take for instance some recent publications:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6R-4V9S498-1&_user=10&_coverDate=01%2F06%2F2009&_alid=867554439&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=5821&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=321&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=e71bb74a85fb68b3632f35b6a1bc31d9

Remains of a woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) were found in Qagnax̂ Cave, a lava tube cave on St. Paul Island in the Pribilof Islands, 500 km west of the Alaskan mainland in the Bering Sea. Several dates converge on 5725 14C yr BP, making these the youngest mammoth remains discovered in North America, and among the few Holocene mammoths known...

......

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WH6-4THB4JB-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2008&_alid=867554439&_rdoc=4&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=6842&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=321&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=f03c00d6a7e0018880f6b4c3cb6fa887

The combination of ... .., suggest that the bone complexes at Yudinovo were constructed from body parts and bones that were extracted from freshly killed mammoths and that mammoth hunting was practised at this site during the Epigravettian.

which begs the question: if the mammoth went extinct due to overhunting, wouldn't that require the finding of many more of this kind of sites all over Siberia? However, just about all other remains in the north don't show any signs of hunting.
 
  • #16
Andre said:
As usual things may be a lot more complex, take for instance some recent publications:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6R-4V9S498-1&_user=10&_coverDate=01%2F06%2F2009&_alid=867554439&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=5821&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=321&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=e71bb74a85fb68b3632f35b6a1bc31d9



......

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WH6-4THB4JB-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2008&_alid=867554439&_rdoc=4&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=6842&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=321&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=f03c00d6a7e0018880f6b4c3cb6fa887



which begs the question: if the mammoth went extinct due to overhunting, wouldn't that require the finding of many more of this kind of sites all over Siberia? However, just about all other remains in the north don't show any signs of hunting.
Firstly, I apologise for using the word 'delusional' in post #11, it was only meant in light jest. It would appear that you have given the wrong report link in post #10. Also, why do you keep avoiding my main argument? You haven't answered my question, namely:

Why did the megafauna take millions of years to evolve, surviving a multitude of earlier glacial cycles, but just happen to die off when humans became technologically advanced?

Although I have a lot of respect for your knowledge, it is a paradox which needs answering. BTW a simple answer to the apparent lack of hunting wounds could be due to the large size of the animal. It would be difficult to penetrate all the way to the bone (but please answer my question first before you reply to this quick speculation).
 
  • #18
Well, I think that the article is rather speculative. Remember that the Mammoth was completely specialized on steppe and steppe only. It's diet as recovered from several independent mummies invariable produce remains of steppe vegetation. Also the large gender diversity of the tusks versus near equal tusks of Elephants hint to that

http://home.hetnet.nl/~alad/rec-animals/12.jpg

mammoth.jpg


Paintings by http://home.hetnet.nl/~alad/index2.html (Twins) of a female and the Yukagir male mammoth based on anatomical correct reconstructions. Those guys are real good.

One could speculate that the no-nonsense rather straight tusks of elephants are suitable of bringing down trees, especially those of the extinct straight tusked or forest Elephant (Elephas (Palaeoloxodon) antiquus). But the Woolly Mammoth had other plans for its tusks without trees on the steppe. Female tusks degenerated while males develloped big ornaments for a better competition. However, how would you walk around in forests with those large curls. If you trap a tree a inside how would you get loose again?

So the Siberian mammoth must have been rather annoyed when the large dry steppe suddenly turned into marshes, swamps and boreal forests at the beginning of the Holocene (Mac Donald et al 2000 see older posts)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
Andre said:
So the Siberian mammoth must have been rather annoyed when the large dry steppe suddenly turned into marshes, swamps and boreal forests

Annoyed to death?
 

Related to Who or What Killed The Wrangel Island Mammoths?

1. What is Wrangel Island and why is it important in the study of mammoths?

Wrangel Island is a small, isolated island located in the Arctic Ocean. It is important in the study of mammoths because it is one of the last known habitats for these ancient creatures, and it is believed that the Wrangel Island mammoths were some of the last surviving mammoths in the world.

2. How did the Wrangel Island mammoths go extinct?

The exact cause of extinction for the Wrangel Island mammoths is still debated among scientists. However, the most widely accepted theory is that a combination of factors, including climate change, human hunting, and limited genetic diversity, led to their eventual extinction.

3. Was the Wrangel Island mammoth extinction sudden or gradual?

Based on the evidence available, it is believed that the extinction of the Wrangel Island mammoths was a gradual process. While there is evidence of a sudden and drastic drop in population, it is likely that factors such as climate change and human hunting played a role in the slow decline of the species.

4. How are scientists able to determine the cause of death for the Wrangel Island mammoths?

Scientists use a variety of methods to determine the cause of death for the Wrangel Island mammoths, including analyzing DNA, studying fossil remains, and examining the environment in which the mammoths lived. By combining these different pieces of evidence, scientists can develop a more complete understanding of what led to the extinction of these creatures.

5. Could the Wrangel Island mammoths have been saved from extinction?

It is unlikely that the Wrangel Island mammoths could have been saved from extinction, even if humans had not hunted them. The small population and limited genetic diversity of these mammoths made them particularly vulnerable to environmental changes, and it is likely that they would have gone extinct regardless of human interference.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
7K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
33
Views
19K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top