Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
The problem I have with your approach is that you have come up with a model of which is THE top predator in the ocean based on a set of parameters. The parameters you chose are the ones that you feel are relevant.
I have explicated a means of comparing some of the top sea-borne predators founded on factors such as weapons, defenses and means of escape, although I indicated it was not a black box as each match up has to be customized to ensure that all of the individual factors that come into play are examined in each case.


Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
All of the ones you chose do seem relevant to your objective, but the set certainly isn't complete. For instance, you chose diving depth, but ignored hypoxia, which is potentially even more relevant in the ocean.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that the amount of dissolved oxygen is too low for sharks to survive in a large percentage of the world's seas?


Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
You also chose teeth, but appear to have ignored jaw structure. The mako has a severely sub-terminal mouth, and appears to be gape limitted. That observation is supported by the prey species reported for makos, since all the species are those that a relatively small, underslung, jaw would be able to bite effectively. Does the mako even have the means to bite something as large as an orca with a mouth of that shape?
I am not convinced the jaw design is limited as you suggest eg http://www.drunkonblue.com/2009/11/t...he-open-ocean/


Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
You've caused me to spend more time researching shark and orca predation than I have ever had cause to.
Terribly sorry old boy.


Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
At this point, it seems pretty clear that your model is correct.
Thank you Shaggy.