Talk:List of apex predators

Spinosaurus

Why isnt it listed as an apex predator? By definition an apex predator is an animal that 1. Kills and consumes prey. 2. Is not hunted regulary by another animal. Spinosaurus was a giant | Spinosaurid. who are believed to be oppurtunistic Theropods who hunted fish, Dinosaurs and ate carrion. So Spinosaurus fills the first point. Was Spinosaurus regulary hunted? Only Theropods with the size to do so, Bahariasaurus and Carcharodontosaurus. Bahariasaurus was an omnivore, Carcharodontsaurus was a fair bit smaller than Spinosaurus, and specialised in hunting Sauropods. Enough Said, Spinosaurus was an apex predator. Ill change the page to match. Spinodontosaurus (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Randy Orton WWE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.35.170.14 (talk) 13:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

humans

I just can't agree with this reasoning of putting an asterisk next to "human". If some *other* species had introduced *itself* into a new habitat (something that, arguably, *all* the animals on this list did in one way or another - and some did via migration, just like humans) there would be no asterisk. So, biologically speaking, in terms of understanding the world, it's just incorrect. It may have some utility for conservation practice and understandng the effect of our unique sepcies on the rest of the system however, I can buy that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.176.22 (talk) 03:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I'm removing it. —Pengo 02:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Someone stuck human for aquatic, that should probably be removed.--97.81.126.252 (talk) 23:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

List verification needed.

As a matter of field observation fact, the list of the supposedly apex predators (i.e. the species which is NOT hunted upon in a healthy adult state) needs drastic shrinkage or at east serious commenting. Because right now it contains huge amount of mistakes. True apex predators are very rare creatures and for instance on land there are only several species of the mightiest of biggest of them. The status of apex predator has NOTHING to do with a creature like African Wild Dog - it is hunted upon by lions on a regular basis, or a chimpanzee - it is a regular target for a leopard with up to 70% of adult deaths caused by this cat in certain areas. If you mean that those creatures are apex predators in a zoo when they are given a rabbit for a play - that's another story, but you have to mention the fact that in a normal natural ecosystem they are not immune to attacks from another predator species. Even the biggest cats or bears are not apex predators in the areas where the two co-exist (Russian Far East with population of both the biggest tiger and one of the biggest brown bear subspecies). I can only imagine that in the natural state it is only the polar bear, the lion and big crocodilians are truly apex predators. In remoted areas like an island or an Ethiopian hillside other species can abtain such a status like polar fox or Ethiopian wolf. But it is a total absurd to claim that a cheetah, or chakma baboon or a bob-cat can be regarded as apex predator.

Verify the list! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.6.20 (talk) 16:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Humans as predators, etc.

I know this is painfully obvious to any who reads this, but near the line where it describes apex predators as those whose healthy adults are not preyed upon, shouldn't it mention that some of these animals are preyed upon by humans, even as healthy adults? Also,there are various other exceptions in which a healthy animal may be hunted and still considered to be an apex predator. I just think the article would make it a bit more accurate, because the way it reads right now sounds like these animals are never hunted under any condition (barring the noted environmental condition). —Potatman (talk) 21:03, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 74.15.204.92, 1 September 2011

Please add Lyvyatan Melvillei to the list of extinct apex predators. It absolutely deserves to be on this list, seeing as how it has the largest bite in tetrapod history so far and would have come in direct contact with C. Megalodon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livyatan_melvillei 74.15.204.92 (talk) 03:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: Wikipedia should not be used to cite itself. Topher385 (talk) 10:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not expert, some clarification needed

Snakes, as far as I know, are always shy and timid and scared. Is there a reason some are listed as Apex Predators? Is it because they aren't hunted on by a species in their specific environment? I mean, most snakes (or all?) act like they are potential prey and huntable. Doesn't that count? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.229.247 (talk) 06:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 28 December 2011

Randy Orton Cory975 (talk) 05:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I have hyperlinked it for you; you may go there at you leisure. Dru of Id (talk) 08:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Two complaints for the prehistoric apex predators section

1. Why is Dunkleosteus listed under dinosaurs that were apex predators. Dunkleosteus was a placoderm, a fish. It was not a dinosaur! It should be moved to the section listing other, non-dinosaurian apex predators. Come to think of it, why do dinosaurs get their own category instead of being lumped together with the other prehistoric predators, some of which were more closely related to dinosaurs than to other creatures on the same list. 2. As possibly the largest terrestrial mammalian carnivore in history, Andrewsarchus needs to be on this list. I know it is thought by some to be a scavenger, but so are some of the other creatures on this list, such as Tyrannosaurus. In fact, few prehistoric carnivores have been confirmed one way or the other to be scavengers or active hunters.