House Cats

[wolfhnd]

The house cat's parasitic relationship with man has made them a very successful species. Why do you think that other animals like raccoons, possums, skunks, appear more successful in the wild than small felines? Of course there is the omnivorous nature of those animals but what are the other factors?

Additional possible comparisons would be between coyotes and foxes.

Coyotes hunt both day and night. They are very opportunistic feeders with a varied diet which includes scavanging the large kills of other animals. Coyotes are basiclyy carnivores but will also eat insects, fruits, berries, and prickly pear cactus. The coyotes prefered diet includes deer, elk, rabbits mice squirrels, pocket gophers, beavers, ground nesting birds, amphibians, lizards, snails and fish.

http://people.westminstercollege.edu/fa ... s/Diet.htm

The red fox eats a wide variety of foods. It is an omnivore and its diet includes fruits, berries and grasses. It also eats birds and small mammals like squirrels, rabbits and mice. A large part of the red fox's diet is made up invertebrates like crickets, caterpillars, grasshoppers, beetles and crayfish. The red fox will continue to hunt even when it is full. It stores extra food under leaves, snow or dirt.

http://www.nhptv.org/natureworks/redfox.htm

While the relationship between red fox and coyotes is not clearly understood, the recent increase in coyote numbers and distribution in Maine may have adverse affects on the State's red fox population. Coyotes have high reproductive and dispersal capabilities, a social organization allowing the use of large prey, and opportunistic feeding habits and habitat requirements. These characteristics may have permitted coyotes to displace red foxes from some areas through interference competition (Major 1983). Coyote ranges, which are 5 to 7 times larger than fox territories, may significantly limit the number of fox families in an area (Voigt and Earle 1983). Studies in Ontario and western Maine suggest that foxes avoid areas regularly used by coyotes, even though suitable habitat may exist in those areas (Voigt and Earle 1983, Major 1983). The Ontario study also noted that foxes avoided raising pups in areas where coyotes traditionally traveled and raised pups. However, because coyotes and red fox have been reported to coexist in various habitats despite competition between the 2 species (Sherburne and Matula 1981, Voigt and Earle 1983, Major 1983), additional research is needed to determine the impacts of coyotes on red fox populations.

http://www.maine.gov/ifw/wildlife/speci ... ssment.pdf

[Eclogite]

Regardless of your distaste for cats (or perhaps as a Wolfhound you find them quite palatable) their relationship with humans is demonstrably mutualistically symbiotic, not parasitic.

[wolfhnd]

I like cats and dogs and there are benefits to having them around but I'm not sure about symbiotic.

[Eclogite]

I like cats and dogs and there are benefits to having them around but I'm not sure about symbiotic.

It is demonstrably sybiotic. wikipedia : Symbiosis is close and often long-term interaction between different biological species. Feeding and caring for a cat throughout its life surely constitutes a close and long-term interaction.

[Watson]

I thought symbiotic implied a mutually benificial relationship. The cat eats, sleeps, does other cat things, demands food........and the cycle continues. But I guess it could be thought of a symbiotic.

[Paralith]

The domestication of cats at least originated as symbiotic, according to the strict biological definition (which does require demonstrable mutual benefit.) Cats are fantastic at keeping down pest populations. Small mammals, reptiles, and birds are all on the cat's menu, and they will keep those populations in check wherever they are. Having a steady group of cats living in your barn and around your farm can be highly beneficial to your home and your crops. In fact, cats are so good at this, that when they are accidentally introduced to places where cats have never been, they devastate native small animal populations. The penguins on some of the Galapagos islands are rapidly approaching extinction because of cats.

Modern house cats are no longer used for this purpose, of course, but the same can be said for many dog breeds. Then again, it does seem that keeping pets can have a lot of mental health benefits, so perhaps the nature of their symbiosis has simply changed with the changing needs of humans.

[Eclogite]

I thought symbiotic implied a mutually benificial relationship. The cat eats, sleeps, does other cat things, demands food........and the cycle continues. But I guess it could be thought of a symbiotic.

Symbiosis can fall into one of three categories:
Mutualism, which is symbiosis as you have perceived it: both partners benefitting.
Parasitism, where one member of the relationship gains, but the other one suffers. e.g. tapeworms ¹.
Commensalism where one member benefits and the other neither gains nor loses.

1: I suspect I have read somewhere that some tapeworms actually confer a benefit on their hosts, but a brief google search failed to turn up a reference.

[wolfhnd]

Eclogite thanks for the correction! When you go on what you were taught 45 years earlier you sometimes make this mistakes ;-)

In fact, cats are so good at this, that when they are accidentally introduced to places where cats have never been, they devastate native small animal populations.

They fascinate me! But where larger predators are about the common house cat is rare while slightly large cats like the Ocelot or Bobcat seem to survive in small numbers. What I'm really curious about is how size seems to favor the larger predators in environments that can support them. Another example would be how coyote populations decline where their are wolves. It would seem to me that there would be more niches that would support a variety of body sizes. In the evolutionary arms race the dinosaurs seem to be the extreme example of bigger is better but there was always some very small predators but I'm not sure about relative numbers. Obviously in cold environments larger bodies conserver energy but I'm not sure that is a factor.

[Paralith]

I don't know any of this for a fact, but it may be that the larger predators in fact prey on the smaller ones. I know this phenomenon has been documented in some ecosystems, where one predator keeps the numbers of a second predator in check, which in fact allows for a proliferation of the animals which the second predator would normally eat lots of. This would explain why medium sized cats like ocelots and bobcats can still survive. They're too big to make an easy meal for the jaguars and the pumas. Again, I don't know this for a fact, but I would recommend researching whether or not this happens.

I just remembered the lions will in fact kill cheetah cubs when they find them. It is sometimes also in a predator's interests to stamp down a competitor.

Edit: looking again at your OP, wolfhnd, I think that house cats and big cats have more overlapping diets than do big cats and raccoons and possums. That might be a possible factor.

[Eclogite]

Eclogite thanks for the correction! When you go on what you were taught 45 years earlier you sometimes make this mistakes ;-)
.

Ah yes, but the great advantage of being slightly older still is that you cannot remember what you were taught forty five years ago, so you have to look it up. :)