Chapter 3: Southern Mammoth, Climate, and Nutrition

 

When has the Southern Mammoth (Mammuthus meridionalis) lived, and where has it lived? How far north? To what kind of a climate was this elephant adapted? On what kind of a plant-cover has it grazed? How large and how heavy has it been? How much did the Southern Mammoth have to eat per day, to maintain its body weight and to grow? With which other kinds of animals has it lived together? What have scientists found out now about this? How did the Southern Mammoth get to the places, where they have found its remains?

 

According to my chart: “Body-weight-aboveground plant-production”, the 6.4-ton elephant (or mammoth) needs at least an annual aboveground plant-production of 709 gDM/m² yr (dry weight). The 10-ton elephant needs at least 1065 gDM/m² (dry wt) per year. This food is only able to grow, where it is warm and moist enough. The African elephant is still able to live, where 250 gDM/m² (d.w.) has grown per year. That is, if it contains enough crude protein. It will starve to death with a full stomach, where only 200 gDM/m² (d.w.) has grown per year, and where its food contains only 2% crude protein or more. This, the great drought in 1970/71 in Tsavo East N. Park, in Kenya, East Africa, has clearly shown us. There about 5,900 elephants and several hundred Black Rhinos have starved to death with a full stomach. In Florida, USA, young African elephant calves have starved to death, when they gave them food for 6 months, which contained only 5.5% crude protein (d.w.). The dry grassland winter range of the bighorn sheep in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta, and the azonal dry loess-steppe of the winter range of the Dall sheep in the southwestern Yukon contains about 3.8% CP (d.w).

 

The Southern Mammoth (M. meridionalis) was adapted to a subtropical to warm-temperate climate. It has lived together with animals, adapted to a subtropical to warm-temperate climate. And it has grazed and browsed on plants, growing now in a subtropical to warm-temperate climate. The Southern Mammoth had a shoulder-height of up to 4.0 to 4.20 meters. And it weighed up to 10 to 12 tons or 10,000 to 12,000 kilograms.

 

So far, so good. Because this amount of food is able to grow in a subtropical to warm-temperate climate, at least at some places. But now we come to a problem. Why was the Southern Mammoth able to live also in northeastern Siberia, in Alaska, and the Yukon Territory? Why was this elephant able, to cross then the Bering Strait?

 

The expert will say now: During a warm climate, sea level was high, like today. The mammoth was able, to cross the Bering Strait during the height of the Last Glaciation, because the world’s sea level had fallen 100-200 meters. And the water of these 100-200 meters of missing seawater was stored then in the continental ice-sheets. The Arctic Ocean was then frozen over all year round, at some places, right down to the bottom. So it was then in the Far North not only very cold, much colder than now; but also very dry, much drier than now. Most of the workers do agree here in this: During the height of the Last Glaciation, when sea level was 100-200 m lower than now, also annual precipitation was very low: only about 150 mm, 100 mm or 90 mm per year. Would the Southern Mammoth have been able, to live during the height of the Last Glaciation in northern Siberia, Alaska, and the Yukon in such a dry and cold climate? Would it have been able, to live now in northern Siberia on a dry arctic plant-cover: on arctic tundra or arctic steppe? Would it find up there enough to eat and to drink?

 

New Plant-Production Chart: How much aboveground plant-matter (dry weight) would have been able to grow in northern Siberia, Alaska, and the Yukon during the height of the Last Glaciation on this very dry zonal arctic steppe? That is, when it was so cold and so dry up there, that trees and shrubs were not able to grow. Would the Southern Mammoth have found there enough to eat? Could this dry arctic steppe have fed large herds of Southern Mammoths? I have worked out now a completely new type of chart, to find the answer to these questions. This chart is based on the following basic values: The average annual aboveground production of plant matter (dry weight) in gDM/m²). The average annual precipitation (mm/yr). The average annual aboveground production of plant matter (dry weight) and average annual precipitation combined into gram dry matter per millimeter of precipitation per year (gDM/mm ppt yr). The average annual net radiation at the earth’s surface (kcal.cm².yr). The average annual net radiation at the earth’s surface can be easily changed into potential evapotranspiration, into transpiration power.

 

With this new chart, it will now be possible, to find out, how much aboveground plant-matter (dry weight) is able to grow at which amount of net radiation and at which amount of potential evapotranspiration. And also the other way around: With this new chart, it will now be possible, to find out, in what kind of a climate the food will be able to grow, where the elephant is able to live.

 

This chart is based on the annual aboveground production of plant matter (dry weight) of dry steppe, of dry grasslands. That is, where there is a dry season in summer, where the plant depends mainly on the water coming down from above, not on the water coming up from below. This chart does not tell us, how much aboveground plant matter (dry weight) will grow in wet meadows, which are flooded in spring, after breakup, or which are growing in wet areas near ponds and lakes. I have used the data about climate and aboveground plant-production in my new chart from the following places, starting from the South: From Tsavo East N. Park, in Kenya, East Africa, the different types of grasslands on the Great Plains of North America, the winter range of the bighorn sheep in Alberta, the subarctic azonal dry grasslands of the Slave River Lowland, N.W.T., where the bison is grazing, the azonal dry loess-steppe of the SW Yukon Territory, the grasslands of Central Asia, northeastern China (Inner Mongolia), and the dry steppe on the High Plateau of Tibet.

 

This new chart has on the left side the mean annual net radiation at the earth’s surface (kcal cm² yr (kly): from 40 kcal cm² yr down to 0.0 kcal cm² yr. This we may also express in millimeter potential evapotranspiration (P.E.) per year. 1 kly (kcal cm²) annual net radiation at the earth’s surface is about 16.95 mm P.E.

 

At the bottom of this chart are the grams aboveground dry matter per square meter per year per millimeter precipitation per year (gDM m²/mm ppt yr) from 0.0 to 1.3 gDM m²/mm ppt yr. That is, how much aboveground dry matter is growing there per year from 1 mm of precipitation per year. “Average in normal grassland” means here, the average on the line of my plant-production chart. That is, at the middle between very productive and very poor rangelands. “Average in poor grassland” means here less productive grasslands growing either on poor soil or where the summer is too hot or and too dry, like on the dry steppe and desert steppe of Central Asia and the short grassland on the Great Plains of North America. Low productive grassland we may also find, where the summer is too cool and too dry, like on the dry steppe of the Tibetan High Plateau and on the azonal grasslands (dry loess-steppe) of the Yukon Territory.

 

We are here mainly interested in the question: How much aboveground fodder is able to grow in the Far North in an arctic climate, on the zonal dry mammoth steppe? The following table gives the result of this research. It shows us, how much aboveground dry matter is growing on the average on a dry meadow or grassland (in contrast to the wet meadow or flooded grassland), and also on the poor, less productive grassland.

 

 

Annual net radiation at earth’s surface in kcal cm²

Annual potential evapotranspiration mm

Average on normal grassland, gDM m²/mm ppt year

On poor grassland, gDM m²/mm ppt year

40

678

0.42

0.205

30

508

0.31

0.165

20

339

0.21

0.15

15

254

0.15

0.095

10

170

0.105

0.06

7.5

127

0.075

0.045

5.0

85

0.05

0.03

 

 

 

Mammoth on Dry Arctic Steppe

 

The isoline of 15.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation at the earth’s surface is running now across northern Alaska and Canada and Siberia. In some parts, there is lower arctic tundra. In other parts, forest-tundra. On the average dry grassland, it produces about 0.15 gDM/m² per year. And in very dry conditions, only 0.95 gDM/m² per year. The African elephant is still able to live in a semi-desert, were 300 millimeters of rain per year produce about 250 gDM/m². That is, when it contains enough protein. Where only 200 gDM/m² has grown per year, the elephant will starve to death with a full stomach. The normal range of the elephant produces 300, 400, 500 gDM/m² per year and more.

 

Some of the world’s leading mammoth experts and ice-age experts have claimed: During the height of the Last Glaciation, northern Russia, northern Siberia, Alaska, and northern Canada have been then very dry. Because the Arctic Ocean has been frozen over then all year round, in some parts even right down to the bottom. Annual precipitation was then very low, perhaps only 200 mm, 150 mm, 100 mm or even only 90 mm per year. This might well have been so. I do have no quarrel with that at all. What I would like to find out here: Could the Southern Mammoth have lived then up there in such a dry arctic climate? Would it have found then enough to eat on a dry arctic steppe or on a very dry arctic steppe? Could a dry arctic steppe in such a cold arctic climate have fed herds of elephants, bison, and horses, and prides of lions?

 

At 15.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual precipitation, mm year

15.0 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.15 gDM/m² yr

15.0 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.095 gDM/m² yr

90

13.5

8.55

100

15.0

9.5

150

22.5

14.25

200

30.0

19.0

250

37.5

23.75

300

45.0

28.8

 

15.0 kcal cm² net radiation at earth’s surface corresponds to 254 mm potential evapotranspiration. It produces 0.15 gDM/m² per year in a normal dry grassland, and about 0.095 gDM/m² on a poor grassland. 300 mm of annual precipitation will produce only up to 45 gDM/m².

 

At 10.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual precipitation, mm year

10.0 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.105 gDM/m² yr

10.0 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.06 gDM/m² yr

90

9.45

5.4

100

10.5

6.0

150

15.75

9.0

200

21.0

12.0

250

26.25

15.0

300

31.5

18.0

 

The isoline of 10.0 kcal cm² net radiation at the earth’s surface is running now north of, at, and below the present arctic coast, and through some of the lower High Arctic Canadian Islands. In northern Siberia, the 10.0 kcal cm² net radiation line lies now mostly between 67°N and 70°N. 100 mm annual precipitation would produce there only 10.5 gDM/m² per year. And 250 mm annual precipitation would grow only 31.5 gDM/m². The African elephant will starve to death, where only 200 gDM/m² has grown per year.

 

At 7.5 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual precipitation, mm year

7.5 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.075 gDM/m² yr

7.5 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.045 gDM/m² yr

90

6.75

4.05

100

7.5

4.50

150

11.25

6.75

200

15.0

9.0

250

18.75

11.25

300

22.50

13.5

 

In Eastern Canada, the 7.5 kcal cm² annual net radiation at the earth’s surface is running now across the lower Canadian High Arctic Islands and Canadian mainland, north of Hudson Bay. In West Siberia it lies near 70°N. In central Siberia, on some parts Taimyr Peninsula. And in East Siberia, the 7.5 kcal cm² net radiation lines lies near the arctic coast. 90 mm of annual precipitation would produce there only 6.75 grams aboveground dry matter per square meter per year. And 300 mm annual precipitation would produce only up to 22.50 gDM/m² per year. Not quite enough to feed an elephant.

 

 

At 5.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual precipitation, mm year

5.0 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.05 gDM/m² yr

5.0 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.03 gDM/m² yr

90

4.5

2.7

100

5.0

3.0

150

7.5

4.5

200

10.0

6.0

250

12.5

7.5

300

15.0

9.0

 

The northern parts of Taimyr Peninsula have now a mean annual net radiation at the earth’s surface of 5.0 kcal cm². In such a climate, the Southern Mammoth would have had to live in northern Siberia, Alaska, and the Yukon during the height of the Last Glaciation. Or it would have been then even colder. That is, the net radiation may have been then below 5.0 kcal cm². At 90 mm precipitation per year, the arctic steppe would have produced there only about 4.5 grams aboveground dry matter per year. If it was poor, only about 2.7 gDM/m². 300 mm of annual precipitation would have produced then up there only up to 15.0 gDM/m². No elephant is able to live there.

 

 

Former and present distribution of animals with a trunk (Proboscidea). They spread out from Africa into Europe and central Asia. From there they wandered to Northeast Siberia, crossed the Bering Strait, which was then dry land, and from there into other parts of North America. Mammuthus (Archidiskodon) inhabited then only North America. The Mastodont (Cuvierionius) went still further south and was living then also in South America. Map from: Erich Thenius, Versteinerte Urkunden (1981) Fig. 86.

 

 

 

Annual precipitation needed to feed an elephant

 

The African elephant is still able to live in a semi-desert, were 300 millimeters of rain per year produce about 250 gDM/m². That is, when it contains enough protein. Where only 200 gDM/m² has grown per year, the elephant will starve to death with a full stomach. The normal range of the elephant produces 300, 400, 500 gDM/m² per year and more.

 

Some of the world’s leading mammoth experts and ice-age experts have claimed: During the height of the Last Glaciation, northern Russia, northern Siberia, Alaska, and northern Canada have been then very dry. Because the Arctic Ocean has been frozen over all year round, in some parts even right down to the bottom. Annual precipitation was then very low, perhaps only 200 mm, 150 mm, 100 mm or 90 mm per year. This might well have been so. I do have no quarrel with that at all. What I would like to find out here: Would the mammoth have lived then up there in such a dry arctic climate? Would it have found enough to eat then on a dry arctic steppe or on a very dry arctic steppe? Could such an arctic dry steppe in such a cold arctic climate have fed herds of elephants, bison, and horses? In other words: How much annual precipitation would we need in the Far North, so that this dry arctic steppe will be able, to feed an elephant, and whole herds of elephants? Could so much food grow in an arctic climate?

 

At 15.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual aboveground plant production (dry matter), needed, to feed the elephant, gram/m²

15.0 kcal cm² net radiation on normal grassland produces 0.15 gDM/m² yr. How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

15.0 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.095 gDM/m² yr.

How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

250

1667

2631

300

2000

3158

400

2667

4210

500

3333

5263

 

This means: At an annual net radiation at the earth’s surface of 15.0 kcal cm², we would need there 1667 mm of annual precipitation, to produce 250 grams aboveground dry matter per square meter per year. That is the lowest amount, on which the elephant is still able to live, if it contains enough protein. On a dry, less productive grassland, we would need there 2631 mm precipitation per year, to grow 250 gDM/m². In an arctic climate this is not possible.

 

 

At 10.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual aboveground plant production (dry matter), needed, to feed the elephant,

gram/m²

10.0 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.105 gDM/m² yr. How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

10.0 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.06 gDM/m² yr.

How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

250

2381

4167

300

2857

5000

400

3809

6667

500

4762

8333

 

At a mean annual net radiation at the earth’s surface of 10 kcal cm², we would need up there 2381 mm of precipitation per year. 250 gDM/m² is the lower limit, where the elephant is still able to live, if it contains enough protein. The less productive dry grassland will need then 4167 mm precipitation per year, to grow 250 gDM/m². In an arctic climate this is not possible. The elephant would starve to death.

 

 

At 7.5 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual aboveground plant production (dry matter), needed, to feed the elephant

gram/m²

7.5 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.075 gDM/m² yr. How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

7.5 kcal cm² net radiation on poor grassland produces 0.045 gDM/m² yr.

How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

250

3333

5555

300

4000

6667

400

5333

8889

500

6667

11,111

 

At 7.5 kcal cm² annual net radiation we would need up there 3333 mm precipitation per year, to produce 250 grams aboveground dry matter per square meter per year. On the less productive sites, we would need still more: 5555 mm precipitation per year. In an arctic climate this is not possible. It is too cold. The growing season of the plants is too short.

 

 

At 5.0 kcal cm² annual net radiation

 

Annual aboveground plant production (dry matter), needed, to feed the elephant, gram/m²

5.0 kcal cm² net radiation on average grassland produces 0.05 gDM/m² yr. How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

5.0 kcal cm² net radiation on poor dry grassland produces 0.03 gDM/m² yr.

How much annual precipitation needed (mm)

250

5000

8333

300

6000

10,000

400

8000

13,333

500

10,000

16,667

 

In such a climate, the Southern Mammoth would have had to live in the northernmost part of central northern Siberia, Alaska, and the Yukon during the height of the Last Glaciation. We would need then about 5000 mm of annual precipitation, just to produce 250 gDM/m² on the zonal dry arctic steppe. In an arctic climate this is not possible. The summer is too cold, and the growing season of the plants too short. Neither the Southern Mammoth, nor the Steppe Mammoth, nor the Woolly Mammoth, nor any other kind of elephant could have lived in an arctic climate. Nor would the woolly rhino, steppe bison, and lion have been able, to live on this arctic dry steppe. They would have starved and thirsted there to death. When the Southern Mammoth was grazing up there, the climate was much milder than now, without an arctic winter, without ice and snow.

 

Result

 

The Southern Mammoth has lived in Beringia, in Northeastern Siberia, Alaska, and the Yukon long before the global Flood of Noah’s days, which occurred about 4400 years ago. This giant has lived in the Far North in a warm-temperature, or even subtropical climate. The Southern Mammoth has crossed the Bering Strait in a mild, temperate climate, when sea-level was about 100-200 meters lower than today, when there were no ice-sheets up there, no arctic winter, and no permafrost. Also the mastodon, camel, horse, wild ass, tapir, and many other kinds of animals have crossed then the Bering Land Bridge on dry land, in a warm-temperate or even subtropical climate. You may find out more about this in my website: http://www.hanskrause.de/

 

 

References

 

Dubrovo, Irena, in Megafauna & Man, edited by Larry D. Agenbroad, Jim I. Mead, Lisa W. Nelson, at Hotsprings, South Dakota, and Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, 1990

Haynes, Gary, The Mountain That Fell Down: Life and Death of Heartland Mammoths, in: Megafauna & Man, Hot Springs, South Dakota 1990

Kahlke, Ralf-Dietrich, Die Entstehungs-, Entwicklungs- und Verbreitungsgeschichte des oberpleistozänen Mammuthus-Coelodonta-Faunenkomplexes in Eurasien (Großsäuger), (The Arising, Evolving and Expanding of the Upper-Pleistocene Mammuthus-Coleodonta faunal complex), Frankfurt am Main 1994

Krause, Hans, The Mammoth and the Flood, Volumes 1-3, Stuttgart 1996, 1997

Lister, Adrian M. and Paul Bahn, Mammoths, New York 1994

Mol, Dick, Larry D. Agenbroad, and Jim I. Mead Mammoths (1993), published by the Mammoth Site of Hot Springs, South Dakota, Inc., Hot Springs, South Dakota

Nelson, Lisa W., Mammoth Graveyard. A Treasure-Trove of Clues to the Past. Produced by The Mammoth Site of Hot Springs, South Dakota, Inc. 1994