Could Giant Ground Sloths have been a good pack animal for the ancient Mayans?Could the Roman Empire have survived if it existed alongside an advanced feudal state?Could the populations of the New World have advanced themselves to be on par with Enlightenment Europe had they been left to themselves?Could a society exist, if the species have no concept of past?What's the lowest Type on the Kardashev Scale a civilisation could be for us to take it for God?How fast can a society be 'upgraded'?Could mankind have domesticated the zebra as a riding animal?Could the Aztecs have domesticated the Collared PeccaryMight a ritually cannibalistic society gain a head start or have an advantage in the study and development of the sciences?
What is GPS' 19 year rollover and does it present a cybersecurity issue?
What causes the sudden spool-up sound from an F-16 when enabling afterburner?
Was there ever an axiom rendered a theorem?
Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?
Does a dangling wire really electrocute me if I'm standing in water?
How can I plot a Farey diagram?
Calculate Levenshtein distance between two strings in Python
Is "plugging out" electronic devices an American expression?
Why did the Germans forbid the possession of pet pigeons in Rostov-on-Don in 1941?
Is this food a bread or a loaf?
New order #4: World
Does bootstrapped regression allow for inference?
Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?
Unbreakable Formation vs. Cry of the Carnarium
I see my dog run
Is there a way to make member function NOT callable from constructor?
Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?
Landlord wants to switch my lease to a "Land contract" to "get back at the city"
Add an angle to a sphere
"listening to me about as much as you're listening to this pole here"
Ideas for 3rd eye abilities
Does the average primeness of natural numbers tend to zero?
Is every set a filtered colimit of finite sets?
Why airport relocation isn't done gradually?
Could Giant Ground Sloths have been a good pack animal for the ancient Mayans?
Could the Roman Empire have survived if it existed alongside an advanced feudal state?Could the populations of the New World have advanced themselves to be on par with Enlightenment Europe had they been left to themselves?Could a society exist, if the species have no concept of past?What's the lowest Type on the Kardashev Scale a civilisation could be for us to take it for God?How fast can a society be 'upgraded'?Could mankind have domesticated the zebra as a riding animal?Could the Aztecs have domesticated the Collared PeccaryMight a ritually cannibalistic society gain a head start or have an advantage in the study and development of the sciences?
$begingroup$
In my world, the Mayan Empire expanded into the Caribbean and met the relict ground sloths of the Caribbean. In this same world, the Mayan empire saw the use of these creatures as good domestic animals that they could bring to the mainland. With pack animals, the Mayans could build even more amazing structures, and form an even more powerful civilization. They may not even have been dominated by the Spanish. Sadly, there is a problem with this idea. Could the Ground Sloths have been made in to viable pack animals?
civilization domestication
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
$endgroup$
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
In my world, the Mayan Empire expanded into the Caribbean and met the relict ground sloths of the Caribbean. In this same world, the Mayan empire saw the use of these creatures as good domestic animals that they could bring to the mainland. With pack animals, the Mayans could build even more amazing structures, and form an even more powerful civilization. They may not even have been dominated by the Spanish. Sadly, there is a problem with this idea. Could the Ground Sloths have been made in to viable pack animals?
civilization domestication
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
By pack animal, you mean using them for things like driving carts, right?
$endgroup$
– Renan
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Yes, and carrying things. They could also possibly being mounts for humans, though this isn't required.
$endgroup$
– Sengiwizard42
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Renan you could just dump packs on them, eg. !pack llama
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Not sure if I know enough about the ground sloths to tell if they would be a good fit for domestication. Here's a really well made video about the requirement for domesticating animals with stone-age level tech, done by CGP Grey: youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo Might give you a better idea about the feasibility of this concept.
$endgroup$
– abestrange
10 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
keep in mind there are several species of horse, a giant camelid, and all the toxodontids available at the same time that would make for better candidates. although with domestication temperament and behavior rain supreme.
$endgroup$
– John
8 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
In my world, the Mayan Empire expanded into the Caribbean and met the relict ground sloths of the Caribbean. In this same world, the Mayan empire saw the use of these creatures as good domestic animals that they could bring to the mainland. With pack animals, the Mayans could build even more amazing structures, and form an even more powerful civilization. They may not even have been dominated by the Spanish. Sadly, there is a problem with this idea. Could the Ground Sloths have been made in to viable pack animals?
civilization domestication
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
$endgroup$
In my world, the Mayan Empire expanded into the Caribbean and met the relict ground sloths of the Caribbean. In this same world, the Mayan empire saw the use of these creatures as good domestic animals that they could bring to the mainland. With pack animals, the Mayans could build even more amazing structures, and form an even more powerful civilization. They may not even have been dominated by the Spanish. Sadly, there is a problem with this idea. Could the Ground Sloths have been made in to viable pack animals?
civilization domestication
civilization domestication
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
edited 5 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
11.2k12453
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
asked 10 hours ago
Sengiwizard42Sengiwizard42
885
885
1
$begingroup$
By pack animal, you mean using them for things like driving carts, right?
$endgroup$
– Renan
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Yes, and carrying things. They could also possibly being mounts for humans, though this isn't required.
$endgroup$
– Sengiwizard42
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Renan you could just dump packs on them, eg. !pack llama
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Not sure if I know enough about the ground sloths to tell if they would be a good fit for domestication. Here's a really well made video about the requirement for domesticating animals with stone-age level tech, done by CGP Grey: youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo Might give you a better idea about the feasibility of this concept.
$endgroup$
– abestrange
10 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
keep in mind there are several species of horse, a giant camelid, and all the toxodontids available at the same time that would make for better candidates. although with domestication temperament and behavior rain supreme.
$endgroup$
– John
8 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
1
$begingroup$
By pack animal, you mean using them for things like driving carts, right?
$endgroup$
– Renan
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Yes, and carrying things. They could also possibly being mounts for humans, though this isn't required.
$endgroup$
– Sengiwizard42
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Renan you could just dump packs on them, eg. !pack llama
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Not sure if I know enough about the ground sloths to tell if they would be a good fit for domestication. Here's a really well made video about the requirement for domesticating animals with stone-age level tech, done by CGP Grey: youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo Might give you a better idea about the feasibility of this concept.
$endgroup$
– abestrange
10 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
keep in mind there are several species of horse, a giant camelid, and all the toxodontids available at the same time that would make for better candidates. although with domestication temperament and behavior rain supreme.
$endgroup$
– John
8 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
By pack animal, you mean using them for things like driving carts, right?
$endgroup$
– Renan
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
By pack animal, you mean using them for things like driving carts, right?
$endgroup$
– Renan
10 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
Yes, and carrying things. They could also possibly being mounts for humans, though this isn't required.
$endgroup$
– Sengiwizard42
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, and carrying things. They could also possibly being mounts for humans, though this isn't required.
$endgroup$
– Sengiwizard42
10 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
@Renan you could just dump packs on them, eg. !pack llama
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Renan you could just dump packs on them, eg. !pack llama
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Not sure if I know enough about the ground sloths to tell if they would be a good fit for domestication. Here's a really well made video about the requirement for domesticating animals with stone-age level tech, done by CGP Grey: youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo Might give you a better idea about the feasibility of this concept.
$endgroup$
– abestrange
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Not sure if I know enough about the ground sloths to tell if they would be a good fit for domestication. Here's a really well made video about the requirement for domesticating animals with stone-age level tech, done by CGP Grey: youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo Might give you a better idea about the feasibility of this concept.
$endgroup$
– abestrange
10 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
keep in mind there are several species of horse, a giant camelid, and all the toxodontids available at the same time that would make for better candidates. although with domestication temperament and behavior rain supreme.
$endgroup$
– John
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
keep in mind there are several species of horse, a giant camelid, and all the toxodontids available at the same time that would make for better candidates. although with domestication temperament and behavior rain supreme.
$endgroup$
– John
8 hours ago
|
show 9 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Based on assessments of them being slower-paced in motion, having osteoderms, inturned claws on the front paws capable of tearing apart large branches, no incisors, and exclusively vegetarian diet in coproliths, I'd say it'd be possible, but probably no picnic to domesticate such a beast.
We cannot, of course, assess intelligence / intransigence, herd / individuated behaviour easily, so it's equally possible that they might be characterlogically unsuited to domestication; I'd guess though that if the people in question had a significant observational base of the behaviours of this mega-critter, it'd probably be do-able.
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sloths are not very social but they are still mammals
Most domesticated animals come from species that form packs in the wild, with cats as a notable exception. Social species are able to live together in a confined space more easily than solitary species (try to lock two adult tigers in a barn and you'll get an idea). Moreover, their social brains allow them to "empathize" with human moods and feelings (e.g. dogs, camels, horses).
Unfortunately, it seems sloths are not very social animals.
This is an excerpt from a paper on social behaviour between sloth mothers and their young offspring.
Social interactions among sloths are considered to be rare, mainly because these animals are known for their solitary habits. However, some reports represent attempts to understand to a greater extent some of the sloths' social interactions in captivity or in the wild. In this context, a study focused on indirect contact through vocalization between mother and young of Choloepus hoffmanni and Bradypus infuscatus (= Bradypus variegatus) (Montgomery & Sunquist, 1974). It showed that vocalization is quite intense and important to communication in the first 6 months of total infant dependence.
However, since sloths are mammals, they do depend on mom and learn a lot of things from her. If your Mayans find a way to substitute sloth mothers and make them addicted to humans somehow, you could have some type of sloth domestication but very different from that of horses or dogs. Maybe you could look into the process of cow domestication to get some inspiration.
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143504%2fcould-giant-ground-sloths-have-been-a-good-pack-animal-for-the-ancient-mayans%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Based on assessments of them being slower-paced in motion, having osteoderms, inturned claws on the front paws capable of tearing apart large branches, no incisors, and exclusively vegetarian diet in coproliths, I'd say it'd be possible, but probably no picnic to domesticate such a beast.
We cannot, of course, assess intelligence / intransigence, herd / individuated behaviour easily, so it's equally possible that they might be characterlogically unsuited to domestication; I'd guess though that if the people in question had a significant observational base of the behaviours of this mega-critter, it'd probably be do-able.
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Based on assessments of them being slower-paced in motion, having osteoderms, inturned claws on the front paws capable of tearing apart large branches, no incisors, and exclusively vegetarian diet in coproliths, I'd say it'd be possible, but probably no picnic to domesticate such a beast.
We cannot, of course, assess intelligence / intransigence, herd / individuated behaviour easily, so it's equally possible that they might be characterlogically unsuited to domestication; I'd guess though that if the people in question had a significant observational base of the behaviours of this mega-critter, it'd probably be do-able.
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Based on assessments of them being slower-paced in motion, having osteoderms, inturned claws on the front paws capable of tearing apart large branches, no incisors, and exclusively vegetarian diet in coproliths, I'd say it'd be possible, but probably no picnic to domesticate such a beast.
We cannot, of course, assess intelligence / intransigence, herd / individuated behaviour easily, so it's equally possible that they might be characterlogically unsuited to domestication; I'd guess though that if the people in question had a significant observational base of the behaviours of this mega-critter, it'd probably be do-able.
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
$endgroup$
Based on assessments of them being slower-paced in motion, having osteoderms, inturned claws on the front paws capable of tearing apart large branches, no incisors, and exclusively vegetarian diet in coproliths, I'd say it'd be possible, but probably no picnic to domesticate such a beast.
We cannot, of course, assess intelligence / intransigence, herd / individuated behaviour easily, so it's equally possible that they might be characterlogically unsuited to domestication; I'd guess though that if the people in question had a significant observational base of the behaviours of this mega-critter, it'd probably be do-able.
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
answered 9 hours ago
GerardFallaGerardFalla
4,845729
4,845729
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sloths are not very social but they are still mammals
Most domesticated animals come from species that form packs in the wild, with cats as a notable exception. Social species are able to live together in a confined space more easily than solitary species (try to lock two adult tigers in a barn and you'll get an idea). Moreover, their social brains allow them to "empathize" with human moods and feelings (e.g. dogs, camels, horses).
Unfortunately, it seems sloths are not very social animals.
This is an excerpt from a paper on social behaviour between sloth mothers and their young offspring.
Social interactions among sloths are considered to be rare, mainly because these animals are known for their solitary habits. However, some reports represent attempts to understand to a greater extent some of the sloths' social interactions in captivity or in the wild. In this context, a study focused on indirect contact through vocalization between mother and young of Choloepus hoffmanni and Bradypus infuscatus (= Bradypus variegatus) (Montgomery & Sunquist, 1974). It showed that vocalization is quite intense and important to communication in the first 6 months of total infant dependence.
However, since sloths are mammals, they do depend on mom and learn a lot of things from her. If your Mayans find a way to substitute sloth mothers and make them addicted to humans somehow, you could have some type of sloth domestication but very different from that of horses or dogs. Maybe you could look into the process of cow domestication to get some inspiration.
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sloths are not very social but they are still mammals
Most domesticated animals come from species that form packs in the wild, with cats as a notable exception. Social species are able to live together in a confined space more easily than solitary species (try to lock two adult tigers in a barn and you'll get an idea). Moreover, their social brains allow them to "empathize" with human moods and feelings (e.g. dogs, camels, horses).
Unfortunately, it seems sloths are not very social animals.
This is an excerpt from a paper on social behaviour between sloth mothers and their young offspring.
Social interactions among sloths are considered to be rare, mainly because these animals are known for their solitary habits. However, some reports represent attempts to understand to a greater extent some of the sloths' social interactions in captivity or in the wild. In this context, a study focused on indirect contact through vocalization between mother and young of Choloepus hoffmanni and Bradypus infuscatus (= Bradypus variegatus) (Montgomery & Sunquist, 1974). It showed that vocalization is quite intense and important to communication in the first 6 months of total infant dependence.
However, since sloths are mammals, they do depend on mom and learn a lot of things from her. If your Mayans find a way to substitute sloth mothers and make them addicted to humans somehow, you could have some type of sloth domestication but very different from that of horses or dogs. Maybe you could look into the process of cow domestication to get some inspiration.
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sloths are not very social but they are still mammals
Most domesticated animals come from species that form packs in the wild, with cats as a notable exception. Social species are able to live together in a confined space more easily than solitary species (try to lock two adult tigers in a barn and you'll get an idea). Moreover, their social brains allow them to "empathize" with human moods and feelings (e.g. dogs, camels, horses).
Unfortunately, it seems sloths are not very social animals.
This is an excerpt from a paper on social behaviour between sloth mothers and their young offspring.
Social interactions among sloths are considered to be rare, mainly because these animals are known for their solitary habits. However, some reports represent attempts to understand to a greater extent some of the sloths' social interactions in captivity or in the wild. In this context, a study focused on indirect contact through vocalization between mother and young of Choloepus hoffmanni and Bradypus infuscatus (= Bradypus variegatus) (Montgomery & Sunquist, 1974). It showed that vocalization is quite intense and important to communication in the first 6 months of total infant dependence.
However, since sloths are mammals, they do depend on mom and learn a lot of things from her. If your Mayans find a way to substitute sloth mothers and make them addicted to humans somehow, you could have some type of sloth domestication but very different from that of horses or dogs. Maybe you could look into the process of cow domestication to get some inspiration.
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
$endgroup$
Sloths are not very social but they are still mammals
Most domesticated animals come from species that form packs in the wild, with cats as a notable exception. Social species are able to live together in a confined space more easily than solitary species (try to lock two adult tigers in a barn and you'll get an idea). Moreover, their social brains allow them to "empathize" with human moods and feelings (e.g. dogs, camels, horses).
Unfortunately, it seems sloths are not very social animals.
This is an excerpt from a paper on social behaviour between sloth mothers and their young offspring.
Social interactions among sloths are considered to be rare, mainly because these animals are known for their solitary habits. However, some reports represent attempts to understand to a greater extent some of the sloths' social interactions in captivity or in the wild. In this context, a study focused on indirect contact through vocalization between mother and young of Choloepus hoffmanni and Bradypus infuscatus (= Bradypus variegatus) (Montgomery & Sunquist, 1974). It showed that vocalization is quite intense and important to communication in the first 6 months of total infant dependence.
However, since sloths are mammals, they do depend on mom and learn a lot of things from her. If your Mayans find a way to substitute sloth mothers and make them addicted to humans somehow, you could have some type of sloth domestication but very different from that of horses or dogs. Maybe you could look into the process of cow domestication to get some inspiration.
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
edited 5 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
answered 8 hours ago
Chuck RamirezChuck Ramirez
3206
3206
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Im not sure you answered the question here, i think you have misinterpreted the phrase “pack animals”. The phrase is not referring to a pack of animals, such as a wolf pack, it is refering to load-bearing animals, such as donkeys. Essentially, its asking “would giant sloths make good beasts of burden”.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris He is talking about the social patterns as relevant to ease of domestication. An animal that cannot be domesticated does not make a good pack animal. By contrast most animals of sufficient size that can be domesticated can be used as pack animals and bred to be better at it over generations. So he is answering the correct question, he just forgot to say it.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@VilleNiemi The way it is phrased indicates they have not fully understood the question “So on one side, based on the knowledge we have from extant species, sloths are not pack animals.” This phrase comes directly after explaining the social interactions and solitary nature of sloths. That phrase does not make sense unless they were refering to sloths not being good as a pack of animals. If they were refering to pack animals as the OP meant, then they would have talked about the physiology or biology of sloths, not how they socialise.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LiamMorris dogs are good pack animals but poor beasts of burden, with notable exceptions. Except for cats, domesticated animals come from animals that form packs in the wild, I assumed this was common-knowledge, my fault. I´ll edit my post later. Maybe you could comment this issue directly to @Sengiwizard42?
$endgroup$
– Chuck Ramirez
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ChuckRamirez Its not the knowledge thats the problem, its the wording (or rather, the lack of words to provide clarification). It doesnt make sense without that context you added. Also, i would argue that them being solitary creatures as no effect on their physical capabilities. Even if they are not social creatures by nature, if they can carry heavy loads and be directed to move in a direction, they would make good pack animals.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143504%2fcould-giant-ground-sloths-have-been-a-good-pack-animal-for-the-ancient-mayans%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
By pack animal, you mean using them for things like driving carts, right?
$endgroup$
– Renan
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Yes, and carrying things. They could also possibly being mounts for humans, though this isn't required.
$endgroup$
– Sengiwizard42
10 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Renan you could just dump packs on them, eg. !pack llama
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Not sure if I know enough about the ground sloths to tell if they would be a good fit for domestication. Here's a really well made video about the requirement for domesticating animals with stone-age level tech, done by CGP Grey: youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo Might give you a better idea about the feasibility of this concept.
$endgroup$
– abestrange
10 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
keep in mind there are several species of horse, a giant camelid, and all the toxodontids available at the same time that would make for better candidates. although with domestication temperament and behavior rain supreme.
$endgroup$
– John
8 hours ago