Analysis Of The Late Quaternary Extinction

The Late Quaternary Extinction happened approximately fifty to ten thousand years ago, and recently in the nineteenth century new light was shed upon why this extinction had happened and why it this extinction primarily targeted large animals. This extinction is vastly studied because it appeared to be more selective of large mammals than pervious extinction in North America. With recent advancements of carbon dating there has been hypothesis other than the over kill hypothesis which was primarily thought of humans decimating the populations of species. One primary reason that scientist believes large mammals had been primarily affected is because of their body size, which usually correlates with their reproductive periods. Scientist started looking at three
environmental hypothesis that could have contributed to the Late Quaternary Extinctions. The three hypothesis are Habitat Loss, Mosaic Nutrient, Co-evolution disequilibrium. Of these three hypothesis I can see how all three can be plausible, however I think that the mosaic-nutrient hypothesis almost shows that with changing climates and a decrease in growing seasons which would be primarily food for these animals could largely affect their habitat which would cause their survival rates to decrease. Sustainable climates along with resources would be extremely important. As diversity decreases and predator-prey interactions along with competitions can also be a factor of extinction for these mammals. However predator-prey and competition for survival happens every day, and I doubt this would lead to extinction of such vast amounts. Local extinction would be more conceivable but considering the extinctions of these large mammals happened in various locations around the world. Perhaps these large animals could not adapt to the changes in the landscape, or were left with habitats so reduced in area that their populations were no longer self-sustaining. On the other hand, human hunting may have significantly reduced the population of species that were important because they modified the ecosystem that maintained habitat’s for other animals. This loss would further trigger environmental change.
We know that today there some animals that maintain environmental conditions that are critical for the support of many other species. Human hunting strategies involved tracking their movements, then herding them and then killing multiple of them. Could mammoths and mastodons have been “keystone” species, or “ecological engineers” maintaining critical environmental conditions for other species? If so, their loss would have a cascade effect, resulting in further environmental change and loss of habitat for other species which were not the prime target of human hunters. As the prey populations plummeted their predators starved causing predator populations to decline. Also, as predator populations had increasing food shortages, along with increasing competition with humans and being preyed on by humans did not improve the likelihood of survival. In the end, it is terrible that these megafaunal species went extinct. Even after reading this article I could not point a finger at one primary reason causing the extinction. I would think that it would have to be a combination of environmental factors along with humans not realizing the consequences of over killing, and the large mammals unfortunately suffering the
most.