Same with bears. For instance, the grizzly (brown) bears in Denali National Park who are farther away from salmon breeding areas (coastal areas) tend to eat a lot more berries than their coastal counterparts.
Its probably true of most animals. I raised a couple of pigs and we intentionally never fed them any meat, even though they'd probably eat it, because we didnt want them to get a taste for it
Apparently it's still a thing in places like rural India for people to squat to poop out in the fields, and then risk being bowled over by a pig rushing over to eat it.
They truly will eat anything.
As far as meat goes, they are not just scavengers - I've seen videos of wild pigs chasing after rabbits, actively hunting them down.
I'd never head of those Chinese "pig toilets", but it reminds me of a Chinese friend who said that growing up (maybe still?) it was common practice in the villages to feed infant poop to the pet/village dogs.
> You don't want to be the farmer who falls over in his pig sty.
This is the real reason for the panic when Dorothy falls into the pig sty at the beginning of the Wizard of Oz. The pigs would crush her and eat her. (But in the movie, her dress doesn't even get dirty!)
Horses are clearly and very much into the whole cowboy thing, they LIKE chasing down cows and catching them, some do it all by themseves and catch cows by grabbing there tails and hauling them around that way.
Horses are panoptic motherfuckers and are startlingly good stalkers, which I learned living in close quarters with a horse needing to chase them away while doing stuff in the padock, but have them reapear, it took very precise sneeky peeking to catch them moving towards me, as they only move when I am not looking, which led me to the only viable deterance, which is to pretend that they are invisible/of zero importance
which un nerves them, but so much as one eyelash of a look at them is taken as an invitation to partisipate, fuckers.
Horses also work well with dogs, and for arabians in Arabia, dates and dried fish were used as feed for both.
note, live with an arab/percheron cross far enough out that there is a wide representation of wild critters, and most everything is on most everythings menue, depending.
And one of my more radicle, radicle friends would say, "we will eat the vegans first, they are slow and weak", refering to what to do durring an opocaliptic event, and until they could get out to my place in the country.
> Among primatologists, bearded capuchins are famous for using stone tools to obtain food. They’ve been observed placing palm nuts on a hard surface and smashing them with rocks to reveal the tasty kernels inside. Wild females have also been seen using sticks or blades of grass to pick their noses and eat any boogers they extract.
why would eating boogers be a selective advantage? They eat each other's boogers as well? the wild males are never observed participating?
I suspect it is not just when fruit is scarce many if not most primates are omnivores. Fruit is likely easier than meat most of the time but meat contains dense nutrients. Macaques e.g crab eating macaques routinely eat meat.
there was a recent story about squirrels in rural California opportunistically hunting and eating field mice and vols that's due to an explosion the latters' population and high availability. Not driven by scarcity of default food sources.
Ground squirrels, and the name is key. I haven't researched, but I know that often such animals eat small insects. And worms. Insects are meat, too.
So if there is a vole population explosion, and voles live underground, and are hungry, a ground squirrels den is going to get invaded, with the voles trying to steal food. And the ground squirrel will of course attack and kill intruders. Especially if they have young in that underground nest.
So it's not a far stretch for them to get used to the taste. I think they prefer nuts, because they can store nuts, but on that front they also eat berries and really anything they find, so storage isn't a diet limiter. And after killing a vole, why waste it?
My first, or original impression, which is why it stuck, was that they'd not been stranded for long, but without delay, begin considering who's on the menu. I am not sure why I remember it that way, so I will have to watch it again. Whether misinterpretation or not, it landed on me as a cathartic mockery of human metabolism, or, cannibalism.
Eating animal is easy, mostly proteins and fat that are also in plants. The main difference I can think of now is that animals have glycogen instead of starch. Glycogen is more branchy than starch, but IIRC it's not so difficult to digest and there is not to much of it anyway.
The animals adapted to eat plants probably have a gut that is too long, so it will be less efficient, and I guess they have to remember to eat their vegetables to avoid problems.
The reverse is harder. An animal adapted to eat mostly animals have a short gut and will not extract all the nutrients from the plants. Also, plants have cellulose that is super hard to digest, so some animals have special parts of the digestive tube to let the food wait and be partially digested by friendly bacteria. (Yes it's gross, unless you think it's almost like free beer.)
If you kill because you are hungry, it seems logical you would eat your prey. If your prey doesn't actually provide nutrients, but killing them eliminates competition to nutrients, the behavior would be evolutionarily beneficial, even if not maximally efficient.
I don't feel like the article is lacking for that. It's evolution at work. There could be monkeys eating animals that can properly digest them due to some mutation or unique gut biomes. Actually eating the animals is an important first step. Monkeys that usually eat fruits are hunting and eating animals when food is scarce, that's an article worthy observation.
https://www.startribune.com/minnesota-wolves-may-be-helping-...
reply