the short-faced Bears that once roamed North America belonged to the genus arctotus two species were found on the continent during the pleistocene the Lesser short-faced bear arctotus pristiness which predominantly lived during the early pleisto scene and the giant short-faced bear arctodus simus which predominantly lived towards the end of the pleistocene both species likely overlapped with each other but arctotusimus evolved from arctotus pristimus the Bears were similar in appearance to today's bears but considerably larger the biggest was the giant short-faced bear which could grow up to 950 kilograms or 2 000 pounds in weight had a shoulder height of 1.6 meters or 5.2 feet and when standing on its hind legs could reach Heights of 4 meters or 13 feet although they are considered to have been omnivores like many of today's Bears they are thought to be the largest carnivorous land animals that ever lived here we ask the question could short-faced bears survive nowadays to answer this question we need to consider the bear's habitat climate and diet and compare these to what's available today firstly habitat the Lesser short-faced bear arctotus pristiness was largely found in today's Florida it preferred to live in open grassland habitats that were largely dominated by longleaf pine Flatwoods as Florida's wet forested habitat gave way to a dryer more open environment during the climatic shifts that occurred towards the middle of the pleistocene the Lesser short-faced Bears vanished it is thought that The Descendants the giant short-faced bear lived in a range of habitats from grasslands to Tropical Thorn shrub and Woodland in Mexico it lived in an open Forest dominated by low bushy Evergreen junipers in California the bear's habitat shifted from wetter mixed Woodland grassland and marshes to more arid mixed savannas as the pleistocene continued most of Canada was covered in glaciers but occasionally an ice-free Corridor would emerge allowing animals to migrate during these times arctotus fossils have been found in Northern Canada and boringia where some species such as lions brown bears and homotherium became locally extinct arctotus remained during the pleistocene it seems that the short-faced Bears were a highly adaptable species they survived and thrived in a wide and diverse range of habitats and even as the habitats and climate shifted as the pleistocene progressed the Bears continued to occupy the same niches today conditions may be different from those of the pleistocene but there is a chance the short-faced Bears could survive in the habitats available as the climate warmed the glaciers that covered much of North America began to retreat leaving behind a landscape that was shaped by glacial deposits and erosion in the warmer ice-free climate forests began to expand across much of North America replacing grasslands and other habitats changes in precipitation have led to changes in river systems with some Rivers shifting their courses and others drying up completely the short-faced Bears occupied habitats that are present today woodlands and open grasslands are still found throughout North America and would provide this sort of suitable habitat for these prehistoric bears so let's now consider the climate during the last glacial maximum about 20 000 years ago the global temperatures were about six degrees Celsius cooler than they are today the world was a drier place with a lot of the world's water locked up in glaciers the sea levels were lower and rainfall was half of what it is today this created a different climate an environment compared to today in which short-faced Bears thrived their thick Shaggy coats helped keep them warm in the cooler temperatures they would have had substantial fat reserves to survive the colder climates however there was less seasonality back then unlike today there were less obvious seasons in North America the adaptations that short-faced bears had to keep them warm may be too much for them if they live today like some of their modern day relatives short-faced Bears could overheat easily if they exert themselves or were exposed to hotter temperatures this may mean that short-faced bears would change their geographical location to live in more Northern regions where the temperatures are cooler fossils of arctotus pristinus have been found mostly in Florida but also in Kansas South Carolina Maryland Pennsylvania and Mexico it was most populous in the southeastern states thereby avoiding competition with the black bears which were largely found in the Northeast during the pleistocene what did the bears eat and would they be able to find the same food today it is largely accepted that the short-faced bear was omnivorous it would have eaten a range of berries and plants as well as meat the hunting strategy however is hotly debated some researchers have suggested that the long limbs of the short-faced bear were built for running speed this gave it the name Running Bear If This Were true then the animal could Chase herbivores across open Plains hunting them down over long distances but the immense size and heavy body of the Bears suggest that like today's brown bears they weren't Built For Speed they weren't agile so were unlikely to chase after agile prey the structure of the Bear's backbone as evidenced by fossil records shows that they had little flexibility in the spine and the way the vertebrae are positioned suggests that they were not quick at accelerating furthermore the Bears had a plantagrade gate meaning that their entire foot was placed on the ground when walking or running faster Predators tend to sprint on their toes with their heels lifted off the ground all this leads to the conclusion that the Bears didn't chase their prey a suggestion has been put forward that the prehistoric bears were scavengers their fossilized teeth have shown wear and tear reminiscent of bone cracking this could also explain their large body size which would have been used to defend carcasses that they came across however the dentition of fossilized short-faced Bears is not as worn as that of known scavengers such as hyenas the dentition such as the broad flat molars and the structure of the mandibular muscles suggest that the short-faced Bears were more herbivorous than omnivorous the plant material they consumed was typically coarse and unselectively grazed of course like many modern Bears it is still assumed that short-faced bears ate meat whether they actively hunted the prey is a topic for debate but tooth marks on prey such as ground sloths and probosidians confirmed that they were at least partly omnivorous the Flora and Fauna of North America have changed since the pleistocene indeed the climate changes which resulted in a huge shift in the plant species are thought to be largely responsible for the mass extinction of the megafauna including short-faced Bears the giant short-faced bear arctotus simus fed on C3 vegetation such as leaves stems bark and flowers from trees as well as shrubs and grasses they also consumed the prey species that browsed this vegetation such as deer camelots taper bison and ground sloths some scientists have suggested that the changing vegetation may have played a role in the extinction of some megafauna species for example some species may have been better adapted to the open grasslands of the Ice Age and may have struggled to compete in the new forested environments so could the Flora found there today support short-faced Bears it's difficult to say it depends on how adaptable species is there would certainly be enough vegetation to feed these immense beasts but whether their digestive systems would be able to cope with a new unfamiliar type of vegetation is another question like modern day black and brown bears the short-faced bear would be able to pray or scavenge upon the likes of moose or elk they may also be able to catch and feed on fish like some of today's bears would there be enough prey to feed these giant bears today depending on their population size there could be in certain areas they may compete with bears that already inhabit the ecosystem such as North America's brown and black bears and Canada's polar bears interestingly where short-faced Bears lived alongside brown bears particularly in beringia or Alaska the smaller less dominant brown bears were largely herbivorous the short-faced Bears out-competed their smaller counterparts for Prime prey consuming grazing animals and probably also fish the same is true for today's brown and black bears where brown bears are absent black bears consume more meat and fish in their diet but when brown bears inhabit the same area black bears are less able to fish for salmon and have much smaller territorial ranges fossil evidence of arctotus is quite sparse compared to other predators that lived at the same time as a result it is thought that these Bears lived in low population densities which would suit them if they survived today with an Ever shrinking habitat available to them and fewer food resources lower population densities could serve them well in today's climate it seems that arctotus was an adaptable animal from the evidence presented from fossil studies it lived in a wide range of habitats and consumed a rich and varied diet so why did it become extinct like the other megafauna arctotus survived in the pleistocene Hollow Scene boundary it was one of the last species of megafauna to become extinct during the quaternary Extinction event that removed between 30 and 40 Genera from North America climate change caused a shift in vegetation it led to less nutritional plant matter which is one of the main reasons some species struggled to survive for arctotus however the dental wear and tear from the fossilized remains don't seem to suggest the genus went hungry it is thought that short-faced bears had very low genetic diversity fossilized specimens found in Ohio were very closely related to specimens found in beringia which had been isolated for tens of thousands of years with a low genetic diversity the genus was more vulnerable to environmental changes although though food shortages don't appear to be to blame for the Bear's demise changes in the nutritional quality of the vegetation along with changes in the habitat could have attributed to their Extinction small population sizes and a lack of fresh genes coming into the population would have made them vulnerable to Extinction all in all it seems that there is a possibility that short-faced bears could survive nowadays they have a similar lifestyle to today's brown and black bears occupying similar niches and consuming a similar omnivorous diet however as they were unable to adapt to the changing environment that was reminiscent of the pleistocene Holocene boundary they would unlikely be able to survive in the rapidly changing world of today that's all for today if you enjoyed this video don't forget to like subscribe and share it with your friends you can also leave a comment with what you would like to see in the following videos thanks for watching see you next time