{{Short description|Extinct genus of carnivores}} {{Automatic taxobox | fossil_range = Middle to Late Miocene (Serravallian to Messinian), {{Geological range|12|7}} {{period fossil range|Neogene|12|7}} | image = Barbourofelis_loveorum.jpg | image_upright = 1.15 | image_caption = ''B. loveorum'', Florida Museum of Natural History Fossil Hall at the University of Florida | taxon = Barbourofelis | authority = Schultz, Schultz & Martin, 1970 | type_species = †'''''Barbourofelis fricki''''' | type_species_authority = Schultz, Schultz & Martin, 1970 | subdivision_ranks = Other Species | subdivision = * †''Barbourofelis loveorum'' * †''Barbourofelis morrisi'' * †''Barbourofelis oregonensis'' * †''Barbourofelis piveteaui'' }}
'''''Barbourofelis''''' is an extinct genus of large feliform, from the subfamily Barbourofelinae, which is part of the family of false-sabertooth cats known as Nimravidae. ''Barbourofelis'', along with ''Albanosmilus'', were the last known nimravids. ''Barbourofelis'' lived in North America and Eurasia during the Miocene epoch from 12 to 7 Ma.<ref name="Barrettetal21">{{Cite journal |last1=Barrett |first1=P. Z. |last2=Hopkins |first2=W. S. B. |last3=Price |first3=S. A. |year=2021 |title=How many sabertooths? Reevaluating the number of carnivoran sabertooth lineages with total-evidence Bayesian techniques and a novel origin of the Miocene Nimravidae |journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology |volume=41 |issue=1 |article-number=e1923523 |doi=10.1080/02724634.2021.1923523 |bibcode=2021JVPal..41E3523B |s2cid=236221655}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{cite journal |last1=Tseng |first1=Z. Jack |last2=Takeuchi |first2=Gary T. |last3=Wang |first3=Xiaoming |date=January 2010 |title=Discovery of the Upper Dentitle of Brbourofelis whitfordi (Nimravidae, Carnivora) and an Evaluation of the Genus in California |journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology |volume=30 |issue=1 |pages=244–254 |doi=10.1080/02724630903416001 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Barrett2021">{{cite journal |last=Barret |first=Paul |date=October 26, 2021 |title=The largest hoplophonine and a complex new hypothesis of nimravid evolution |journal=Nature |volume=11 |issue=1 |bibcode=2021NatSR..1121078B |doi=10.1038/s41598-021-00521-1 |pmc=8548586 |pmid=34702935 |doi-access=free |article-number=21078}}</ref>
Five species are currently recognized within the genus: '''''B. fricki''''', '''''B. loveorum''''', '''''B. morrisi''''', '''''B. oregonensis''''', and '''''B. piveteaui'''''. ''B. morrisi'' likely evolved from ''Albanosmilus'' migrating into North America. With ''B. piveteaui'' evolving from reverse migration from North America into Eurasia. ''B. loveorum'' possibly evolved from ''B. morrisi'', and may have evolved into ''B. fricki''.
''B. morrisi'' and ''B. piveteaui'' were the smallest species being about as large as a leopard. ''B. loveorum'' was the larger than ''B. morrisi'' and may have weighed anywhere from {{convert|70-128|kg|lbs|abbr=on}}. ''B. fricki'' was the most recent and largest species of the genus, as well as the largest nimravid. Suggested to have been as large as lions, weighing around {{convert|328|kg|lbs|abbr=on}}, although a later study suggested it was significantly smaller weighing {{convert|256|kg|lbs|abbr=on}}. ''B. oregonensis'' was described to being similar in size and morphology to ''B. fricki''. It's believed that ''Barbourofelis'' was an ambulatory, ambush predator that hunted within closed forested environments. The extinction of ''Barbourofelis'' was thought to have been the result of the decline of its preferred prey.
==Taxonomy==
=== Classification === ''Barbourofelis'' was named by Bertrand Schultz, Marian Schultz, and Larry Martin in 1970 in honor of Erwin Hinckley Barbour, who died a few days before the holotype was discovered. Its type species is ''Barbourofelis fricki'' and is the type genus of the subfamily Barbourofelinae.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schultz |first1=C. Bertrand |last2=Schultz |first2=Marian R. |last3=Martin |first3=Larry D. |date=October 1970 |title=A New Tribe of Saber-toothed Cats (Barbourofelini) from the Pliocene of North America |url=https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/215159459.pdf |journal=Bulletin of the University of Nebraska State Museum |volume=9 |issue=1}}</ref> Originally, barbourofelids were considered members of the machairodont subfamily.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schultz |first1=C. B. |last2=Schultz |first2=M. |last3=Martin |first3=L. D. |year=1970 |title=A new Tribe of Saber-toothed cats (Barbourofelini) from the Pliocene of North America |url=https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museumbulletin/54/ |journal=Bulletin of the Nebraska State Museum |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=1–31}}</ref> However, this was called into question, and by the 1980s and 90s barbourofelids were considered to be nimravids instead of felids.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bryant |first1=H. N. |date=1991 |title=Phylogenetic relationships and systematics of the Nimravidae (Carnivora) |journal=Journal of Mammalogy |volume=72 |issue=1 |pages=56–78 |doi=10.2307/1381980 |jstor=1381980}}</ref><ref name=":6" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Baskin |first=Jon |date=1981 |title=Barbourofelis (Nimravidae) and Nimravides (Felidae), with a Description of Two New Species from the Late Miocene of Florida |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271790956 |journal=Journal of Mammalogy |volume=62 |issue=1 |pages=122–139 |doi=10.2307/1380483 |jstor=1380483 }}</ref> In the 2000s, Morlo et al. (2004) argued that barbourofelids ranked as their own family, known as Barbourofelidae.<ref name="Morlo2004">{{cite journal |author=Michale Morlo |author2=Stéphane Peigné |author3=Doris Nagel |name-list-style=amp |date=January 2004 |title=A new species of ''Prosansanosmilus'': implications for the systematic relationships of the family Barbourofelidae new rank (Carnivora, Mammalia) |journal=Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society |volume=140 |issue=1 |page=43 |doi=10.1111/j.1096-3642.2004.00087.x |doi-access=free}}</ref> This was also the prevailing view for barbourofelids during the 2010s,<ref name="Werdelin2010">{{cite book |last1=Werdelin |first1=L. |title=Biology and Conservation of Wild Felids |last2=Yamaguchi |first2=N. |last3=Johnson |first3=W. E. |last4=O'Brien |first4=S. J. |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2010 |isbn=978-0-19-923445-5 |editor1-last=Macdonald |editor1-first=D. W. |location=Oxford, UK |pages=59–82 |chapter=Phylogeny and evolution of cats (Felidae) |editor2-last=Loveridge |editor2-first=A. J. |chapter-url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266755142 |name-list-style=amp}}</ref><ref name="Robles2013">{{Cite journal |last1=Robles |first1=Josep M. |last2=Alba |first2=David M. |last3=Fortuny |first3=Josep |last4=Esteban-Trivigno |first4=Soledad De |last5=Rotgers |first5=Cheyenn |last6=Balaguer |first6=Jordi |last7=Carmona |first7=Raül |last8=Galindo |first8=Jordi |last9=Almécija |first9=Sergio |last10=Bertó |first10=Juan V. |last11=Moyà-Solà |first11=Salvador |year=2013 |title=New craniodental remains of the barbourofelid ''Albanosmilus'' jourdani(Filhol, 1883) from the Miocene of the Vallès-Penedès Basin (NE Iberian Peninsula) and the phylogeny of the Barbourofelini |journal=Journal of Systematic Palaeontology |volume=11 |issue=8 |pages=993–1022 |doi=10.1080/14772019.2012.724090 |bibcode=2013JSPal..11..993R |s2cid=85157737}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Morales |first1=Jorg |last2=Pickford |first2=Martin |date=2018 |title=A new barbourofelid mandible (Carnivora, Mammalia) from the Early Miocene ofGrillental-6, Sperrgebiet, Namibia |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369230226 |journal=Communications of the Geological Survey of Namibia |volume=18 |pages=113–123}}</ref> although some experts still considered them to be nimravids.<ref name=":4" />
However, in the 2020s, most experts have reclassified them as nimravids.<ref name=":10" /><ref name="Barrettetal212" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Barret |first1=Paul Z. |last2=Hopkins |first2=Samatha S. B. |date=2024 |title=Mosaic evolution underlies feliform morphological disparity |journal=Proc. R. Soc. B |volume=291 |issue=2028 |doi=10.1098/rspb.2024.0756 |pmc=11321862 |pmid=39137889 |article-number=20240756}}</ref><ref name="Barrett2021" /><ref name=":11" /><ref name=":13" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mahmood |first1=Khalid |year=2023 |title=Barbourofelines from the Middle-Late Miocene of the Siwaliks, Pakistan |url= |journal=Pakistan Journal of Zoology |volume= |issue= |pages= |doi=10.17582/journal.pjz/20221013201049 |s2cid=257513528 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Most experts classify them as the subfamily Barbourofelinae,<ref name=":10">{{cite journal |last1=Wang |first1=Xiaoming |last2=White |first2=Stuart C. |last3=Guan |first3=Jian |date=2 May 2020 |title=A new genus and species of sabretooth, Oriensmilus liupanensis (Barbourofelinae, Nimravidae, Carnivora), from the middle Miocene of China suggests barbourofelines are nimravids, not felids |url=https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0g62362j |journal=Journal of Systematic Palaeontology |volume=18 |issue=9 |pages=783–803 |doi=10.1080/14772019.2019.1691066 |bibcode=2020JSPal..18..783W |s2cid=211545222 |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name="Barrettetal212">{{Cite journal |last1=Barrett |first1=P. Z. |last2=Hopkins |first2=W. S. B. |last3=Price |first3=S. A. |year=2021 |title=How many sabertooths? Reevaluating the number of carnivoran sabertooth lineages with total-evidence Bayesian techniques and a novel origin of the Miocene Nimravidae |journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology |volume=41 |issue=1 |article-number=e1923523 |doi=10.1080/02724634.2021.1923523 |bibcode=2021JVPal..41E3523B |s2cid=236221655}}</ref><ref name=":11">{{Cite journal |last1=Jasinski |first1=Steven E. |last2=Abbas |first2=Ghyour |last3=Mahmood |first3=Khalid |display-authors=et al. |date=November 2022 |title=New Carnivoran (Mammalia: Carnivora) specimens from the Siwaliks of Pakistan and India and their faunal and evolutionary implications |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365095742 |journal=Historical Biology |volume=35 |issue=11 |pages=2217–2252 |doi=10.1080/08912963.2022.2138376}}</ref><ref name=":13">{{Cite journal |last=Werdelin |first=Lars |date=November 2021 |title=African Barbourofelinae (Mammalia, Nimravidae): a critical review |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356101795 |journal=Historical Biology |volume=34 |issue=2 |pages=1347–1355 |doi=10.1080/08912963.2021.1998034}}</ref> although one study proposed them as a tribe, Barbourofelini, within the Nimravinae subfamily.<ref name="Barrett2021" />
=== Evolution === [[File:Albanosmilus jourdani - crani.jpg|thumb|Cranium of ''Albanosmilus jourdani'', the possible ancestor of ''Barbourofelis'']] ''Albanosmilus jourdani'' is believed to be the ancestor to the genus, which migrated into North America sometime during the Late Miocene.<ref name="Morlo2006">{{cite journal |author=Michael Morlo |title=New remains of Barbourofelidae from the Miocene of Southern Germany: implications for the history of barbourid migrations |journal=Beiträge zur Paläontologie, Wien |volume=30 |pages=339–346 |year=2006 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233791187}}</ref> ''B. morrisi'' was the earliest species within the genus, probably the result of ''Albanosmilus'' migrating to North America and was likely ancestral to ''B. loveorum'', which later evolved into ''B. fricki''.<ref name=":4" /> The discovery of ''B. piveteau'' suggests ''Barbourofelis'' reverse migrated back into Eurasia.<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal |last1=Geraads |first1=Denis |last2=Güleç |first2=Erksin |date=June 1997 |title=Relationships of Barbourofelis piveteaui (OZANSOY, 1965), an upper Miocene Nimravid (Carnivora, Mammalia) from central Turkey |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348564951 |journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology |volume=17 |issue=2 |pages=370–375 |doi=10.1080/02724634.1997.10010981 }}</ref>
==Description== [[File:M. Antón. (2013). Walking with sabertooths (fig. 1).png|thumb|left|Restoration of the head of ''B. fricki'' by Mauricio Antón]] The type species, ''B. fricki'', is considered to have been the largest barbourofeline, as well as the largest nimravid.<ref name="Barrett2021" /><ref name="Sabertooth" /> ''B. fricki'' was thought to have been a lion-sized predator, having a weight comparable to an African lion, with limb bones indicating a muscular, robust body. Individuals within the species have been reconstructed with shoulder heights of around {{convert|90|cm|ftin|abbr=on}}.<ref name="Sabertooth"/> In 2021, Barret estimated based on m1 length regression, ''B. fricki'' may have weighed up to {{convert|328|kg|lbs|abbr=on}},<ref name="Barrett2021" /> however a 2024 study found a much lower body mass of {{convert|256|kg|lbs|abbr=on}}.<ref name=":82">{{Cite journal |last=Juhn |first=Mark S. |last2=Balisi |first2=Mairin A. |last3=Doughty |first3=Evan M. |last4=Friscia |first4=Anthony R. |last5=Howenstine |first5=Aidan O. |last6=Jacquemetton |first6=Christiane |last7=Marcot |first7=Jonathan |last8=Nugen |first8=Sarah |last9=Valkenburgh |first9=Blaire Van |date=2024 |title=Cenozoic climate change and the evolution of North American mammalian predator ecomorphology |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/paleobiology/article/cenozoic-climate-change-and-the-evolution-of-north-american-mammalian-predator-ecomorphology/CDF3786B3FA8A1DB57FF6CED340F33F3 |journal=Paleobiology |language=en |volume=50 |issue=3 |pages=452–461 |doi=10.1017/pab.2024.27 |issn=0094-8373|doi-access=free }}</ref> ''<sup>Including supplementary materials</sup>'' ''B. oregonensis'' was another large species, described to being similar in size and morphology to ''B. fricki'', although it has some distinctions such as the absence of P4 and M1, as well as a more pronounced transverse.<ref name=":12">Desler, Rachel (2003). ''[https://intranet.ess.uw.edu/content/people/student_publications_files/desler--rachel-haywood/Desler_2003.pdf Description of a new Barbourofelis species (Carnivora, Mammalia) from Dalles Formation of Northern Oregon]'' (Master of Science)</ref>
The smaller species, ''B. morrisi'', was believed to have been closer to the size of a large leopard and has a shoulder height around {{convert|65|cm|ftin|abbr=on}}, being intermediate in size between ''Sansanosmilus'' and ''B. fricki''.<ref name="Turner">{{cite book |last=Turner |first=Alan |url=https://archive.org/details/TheBigCats/mode/1up |title=The Big Cats and their Fossil Relatives: an illustrated guide |publisher=Columbia University Press |year=1997 |isbn=978-0-231-10228-5 |location=New York |page=29 |url-access=limited}}</ref><ref name="Sabertooth" /> ''B. piveteaui'' is described to being similar in size to ''B. morrisi''.<ref name=":5" /> ''B. loveorum'' was suggested to have been larger than ''B. morrisi''.<ref name=":4" /> In a 2012 paper, Meachen estimated that ''B. loveorum'' may have weighed {{convert|70|kg|lbs|abbr=on}} on average.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal |last=Meachen |first=J. A. |year=2012 |title=Morphological convergence of the prey-killing arsenal of sabertooth predators |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261974255 |journal=Paleobiology |volume=38 |issue=1 |pages=1–14 |doi=10.1666/10036.1 |jstor=41432156 }}</ref> However, Orcutt and Calde estimated that based on articular width of the humerus, the species may have been larger, weighing between {{convert|87-128|kg|lbs|abbr=on}}, with an average weight of {{convert|110|kg|lbs|abbr=on}}.<ref name="link.springer.com">{{Cite journal |last1=Orcutt |first1=John D. |last2=Calede |first2=Jonathan J.M. |year=2021 |title=Quantitative Analyses of Feliform Humeri Reveal the Existence of a Very Large Cat in North America During the Miocene |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10914-021-09540-1 |journal=Journal of Mammalian Evolution |volume=28 |issue=3 |pages=729–751 |doi=10.1007/s10914-021-09540-1 |s2cid=235541255|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
The genus had the longest canines of all barbourofelines, which were also flattened, indicating a high degree of specialization to its diet. These canines had a longitudinal groove on the lateral surface that has been described as a means of allowing blood from a wound they have inflicted to flow away. This groove more likely was an adaptation to make the canines lighter while maintaining their strength. Other notable traits include the presence of a postorbital bar, the presence of a ventrally extended mental process (bony extensions on either side of the lower jaw), and the shortening of the skull behind the orbits, in addition to having a very robust constitution. The barbourofelin was probably very stocky in build, resembling a bear-like lion or lion-like bear. Based on its foot structure, species of ''Barbourofelis'' might have had a semi-plantigrade walking stance.<ref name="Sabertooth">{{cite book|last=Antón|first=Mauricio|title=Sabertooth|date=2013|publisher=University of Indiana Press|location=Bloomington, Indiana|isbn=978-0-253-01042-1|page=104}}</ref>
The most extensive selections of bones found for this genus come from ''B. loveorum'' and have allowed further inference to the proportions of other members of the genus.<ref name="Sabertooth"/>
==Paleobiology== thumb|upright|''B. fricki'' skull === Growth and development === A 1988 study found that based on the analysis of the skulls and maxillary materials, ''Barbourofelis'' had delayed eruptions of deciduous upper canines, which suggests that ''Barbourofelis'' practiced a long period of parental care.<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=Bryant |first=Harold N. |date=1988 |title=Delayed eruption of the deciduous upper canine in the sabertoothed carnivore Barbourofelis lovei (Carnivora, Nimravidae) |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02724634.1988.10011712 |journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology |volume=8 |issue=3 |pages=295–306 |doi=10.1080/02724634.1988.10011712 |bibcode=1988JVPal...8..295B |url-access=subscription }}</ref> Additionally, skeletons of juvenile ''Barbourofelis'' have been found, and examination of their skeletons indicates that the cubs would reach near-adult size before their milk sabers would begin to erupt. This indicates that they were dependent on their mother or potential family group until well into their second year, similar to that of modern lions. Such a long period of dependence would have likely led to situations in which near-adult cubs would have likely helped to restrain prey while their mother made the kill.<ref name="Sabertooth" /><ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last=Bryant |first=Harold N. |date=1990 |title=Implications of the dental eruption sequence in Barbourofelis (Carnivora, Nimravidae) for the function of upper canines and the duration of parental care in sabretoothed carnivores |url=https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1990.tb06015.x |journal=Journal of Zoology |volume=222 |issue=4 |pages=585–590 |doi=10.1111/j.1469-7998.1990.tb06015.x|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
=== Social behavior === ''Barbourofelis'' was found to have large carnassial teeth, meant it was for efficiently processing a carcass and ate at a fast and competitive manner. This indicated it either lived in a highly competitive ecosystem or that it was social, or even a combination of both scenarios.<ref name=":7">{{cite book |last=Antón |first=Mauricio |title=Sabertooth |date=2013 |publisher=University of Indiana Press |isbn=978-0-253-01042-1 |location=Bloomington, Indiana |page=185}}</ref> In addition, experts argued due to the delayed eruption of their upper canines may have been further evidence of gregariousness in ''Barbourofelis.<ref name=":6" />''<ref name=":7" /><ref name=":8" /> Although, some authors have suggested that ''Barbourofelis'' was a solitary ambush predator.<ref name=":2">{{cite journal |last1=Naples |first1=V. L. |last2=Martin |first2=L. D. |title= Restoration of the superficial facial musculature in nimravids |date=June 2008 |journal= Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society |volume=130 |issue=1 |pages=55–81 |doi= 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2000.tb02195.x}}</ref>
=== Predatory behavior === Forelimb analysis from a 2021 found that ''B. loveorum'' may have less constrained forelimb movement compared to the contemporary machairodont ''Nimravides galiani'' and extant felids. The increased mobility in the forelimbs suggests it relied on grappling prey and subduing prey, as an ambulatory ambush predator, that walked and trotted around the forest floor similar to ursids, wolverines, and badgers. It would've been opportunistic and attacked prey upon reach, and could've engaged in scavenging similar to wolverines due to their large carnassial teeth. In addition to possibly being able to climb, although it wouldn't have been arboreal.<ref name=":1" /> A 2005 study found that the leopard-sized ''B. morrisi'' had a similar crural index to the lion-sized ''Smilodon fatalis'', but had a lower brachial index than the machairodont and ambush predators, having an index score closer to that of ambulators. This suggests ''B. morrisi'' had the same leverage as ''Smilodon''. In addition, ''B. loveroum'' and ''B. fricki'' were found to have even lower brachial and crural indexes than ''Smilodon'', suggesting that barbourofelins possibly had a greater power output of the limbs than ''Smilodon''.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Therrien |first=François |date=November 2005 |title=Feeding behaviour and bite force of sabretoothed predators |url=https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article-abstract/145/3/393/2631050 |journal=Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society |volume=145 |issue=3 |pages=393–426 |doi=10.1111/j.1096-3642.2005.00194.x}}</ref> The robustness of the humerus suggests it could've taken on prey larger than itself.<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal |last=Baskin |first=Jon |date=December 2005 |title=Carnivora from the Late Miocene Love Bone Bed of Florida |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254281452 |journal=Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History |volume=45 |issue=4 |pages=413–434 |doi=10.58782/flmnh.oveu6772 }}</ref>
[[File:Teloceras and Barbourofelis.jpg|thumb|''B. loveorum'' mounted as it attacks ''Teleoceras'']] Previously, it has been suggested by Naples and Martin that ''B. fricki'' had a jaw gape of 115° or greater.<ref name=":2" /> However, Lautenschlager et al. (2020) suggests a lower jaw gape for ''Barbourofelis''. Their analysis suggests jaw gapes of 89.13°, 85.29°, and 65.68° for ''B. fricki'', ''B. loveorum'', and ''B. morrisi'' respectively''.<ref name="InoBite">{{cite journal |last1=Lautenschlager |first1=Stephan |last2=Figueirido |first2=Borja |last3=Cashmore |first3=Daniel D. |last4=Bendel |first4=Eva-Maria |last5=Stubbs |first5=Thomas L. |year=2020 |title=Morphological convergence obscures functional diversity in sabre-toothed carnivores |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society B |volume=287 |issue=1935 |pages=1–10 |doi=10.1098/rspb.2020.1818 |issn=1471-2954 |pmc=7542828 |pmid=32993469 |doi-access=free}}</ref> <sup>Including supplementary materials</sup>''
Figueirido et al. (2024) study on the cranial biomechanics of ''B. fricki'' found based on m. masseter pars profunda, this species would've had a maximum jaw gape of 73° and found little evidence to support jaw gapes of over 90°''.'' They also found that ''Barbourofelis'' skull was less stressed when it came to bilateral canine biting compared to ''Smilodon fatalis''. When it came to stabbing, the skull of ''Barbourofelis'' were not as evenly distributed as ''Smilodon'', with regional stresses mainly present in occipital and parietal bones, as well as the upper canines. With pulling-back, stress in ''Smilodon'' skull was more evenly distributed than ''Barbourofelis'', with the stress of ''Barbourofelis'' being concentrated in the premaxilla, parietal-occipital region, postorbital bar, and canines. Despite having a stress resistant skull, the canines were found to be very weak when extrinsic forces are applied due to its sharp and flattened canines, so it would've been able to penetrate more easily than ''Smilodon''. The authors argued, since ''Barbourofelis'' skull experiences less stress than ''Smilodon'', it may have been more generalist in prey killing than ''Smilodon''.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Figueirido |first1=Borja |last2=Tucker |first2=Shane |last3=Lautenschlager |first3=Stephan |date=13 April 2024 |title=Comparing cranial biomechanics between Barbourofelis fricki and Smilodon fatalis: Is there a universal killing-bite among saber-toothed predators? |url=https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ar.25451 |journal=The Anatomical Record |article-number=ar.25451 |doi=10.1002/ar.25451 |hdl=10630/31032 |hdl-access=free |pmc=12506856 }}</ref>
=== Brain anatomy ===
thumb|upright|Reconstructions by Antón Despite its derived craniodental adaptations, ''Barbourofelis'' brain was similar to that of Oligocene nimravids.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Lyras |first1=George A. |title=Paleoneurology of Amniotes, New Directions in the Study of Fossil Endocasts |last2=Geer der van |first2=Alexandra Anna |last3=Werdelin |first3=Lars |date=November 2022 |pages=681–710 |chapter=Paleoneurology of Carnivora |doi=10.1007/978-3-031-13983-3_17 |isbn=978-3-031-13982-6 |chapter-url=https://www.academia.edu/122614559}}</ref> Compared to living felids, its brain its anterior lobes were more narrow and the highest point of the cerebrum was situated more caudally.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lyras |first1=George A. |last2=Giannakopoulou |first2=Aggeliki |last3=Werdelin |first3=Lars |date=25 April 2019 |title=The brain anatomy of an early Miocene felid from Ginn Quarry (Nebraska, USA) |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12542-018-00444-9 |journal=PalZ |volume=93 |issue=2 |pages=345–355 |doi=10.1007/s12542-018-00444-9 |bibcode=2019PalZ...93..345L |url-access=subscription }}</ref>
==Paleoecology== ''B. loveorum's'' environment in the Love Bone Beds deposits (of Clarendonian Age) was a mixture of grassland, riverine forest, and marshes, in which it would have shared territory with herbivorous animals include rhinoceroses such as ''Teleoceras'' and ''Aphelops'', the protoceratid ''Synthetoceras'', the camel ''Aepycamelus'', horses such as ''Neohipparion'' and ''Nannippus'', the extinct tapir ''Tapirus webbi'', the proboscidean ''Gomphotherium'', and carnivores such as the machairodont ''Nimravides galiani'', the borophaginae canid ''Epicyon'', and mustelids such as ''Leptarctus'' and ''Sthenictis''.<ref name=":3">{{cite book |last=Antón |first=Mauricio |title=Sabertooth |date=2013 |publisher=University of Indiana Press |isbn=978-0-253-01042-1 |location=Bloomington, Indiana |page=56}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Webb |first=S. D. |last2=MacFadden |first2=B. J. |last3=Baskin |first3=Jon |date=1981 |title=Geology and paleontology of the Love Bone Bed from the late Miocene of Florida |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274819211_Geology_and_paleontology_of_the_Love_Bone_Bed_from_the_late_Miocene_of_Florida |journal=American Journal of Science |volume=281 |issue=5 |pages=513-544 |doi=10.2475/ajs.281.5.513 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":9" /><ref>{{cite journal |last=Hulbert Jr. |first=Richard C. |year=2005 |title=Late Miocene ''Tapirus'' (Mammalia, Perissodactyla) from Florida, with Description of a New Species, ''Tapirus webbi'' |journal=Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History |volume=45 |issue=4 |pages=465-494 |doi=10.58782/flmnh.pdqo4742 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Forelimb morphology suggests ''B. loveorum'' and ''N. galiani'' weren't directly competing with one another, but instead niche partitioned by preferring different habitats. The robust forelimbs of ''Barbourofelis'' suggests it preferred forested environments, while ''Nimravides'' preferred more open habitats. This is further supported by forest dwelling fauna such as tapirs, ''Prosthennops'', ''Aepycamelus'', and ''B. loveorum'' itself being unusually abundant in Love Bone Beds compared to Late Miocene sites. In addition, the shorter metacarpals of ''Barbourofelis'' suggested it hunted smaller prey than ''Nimravides.''<ref name=":1">{{cite thesis |last=Ormsby |first=Christianne |title=Morphology and Paleoecology of Nimravides galiani (Felidae) and Barbourofelis loveorum (Barbourofelidae) from the Late Miocene of Florida |date=May 2021 |degree=MS (Master of Science) |url=https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3902}}</ref>
''B. fricki'' roamed western North America being found in states such as Kansas, Nebraska, Texas, and Nevada from 9 to 7 Ma.<ref name="Barrett2021" /> ''<sup>Including supplementary materials</sup>'' Within Ambelodon fricki Quarry of Nebraska, ''B. fricki'' coexisted with canids such as borophagines canids like ''Epicyon hayendi'' and ''Borophagus'', and an extinct fox ''Vulpes stenognathus'', the agriotherinii bear ''Indarctos oregonensis'', the machairodont ''Nimravides'', and mustelid ''Sthenictis''. Large herbivores present included rhinoceros such as ''Aphelops'' and ''Teleoceras'', horses such as ''Protohippus gidleyi'', ''Calippus'', ''Cormohipparion'', ''Dinohippus leidyanus'', and ''Neohipparion trampasense'', and the proboscidean ''Amebelodon fricki''.<ref>[https://paleobiodb.org/classic/basicCollectionSearch?collection_no=18086&is_real_user=1 PaleoBiology Database: Cambridge]</ref>
=== Extinction === ''B. fricki'', the last species of ''Barbourofelis'', went extinct around 7 Ma.<ref name="Barrett2021" /> ''<sup>Including supplementary materials</sup>'' Some scientists thought its extinction may have been the result of competition with machairodonts such as ''Nimravides'', as they were widely successful despite the expansion of grasslands.<ref name=":14">{{cite book |last=Antón|first=Mauricio|author-link=Mauricio Antón|title=Sabertooth|date=2013|publisher=University of Indiana Press|isbn=978-0-253-01042-1|location=Bloomington, Indiana|page=220}}</ref> However, other experts have argued against competition playing a role in the extinction of ''Barbourofelis'' as the temporal overlap between barbourofelines and machairodonts were limited.<ref name="Barrett2021" /> Instead, they believe its extinction was the result of a faunal overturn at the end of Hh2, which saw a decline in horses, camelids, antilocaprids, and dromomerycids.<ref name="Barrett2021" /><ref name="Jiangzuo20222">{{Cite journal |last1=Jiangzuo |first1=Qigao |last2=Li |first2=Shijie |last3=Deng |first3=Tao |date=2022 |title=Parallelism and lineage replacement of the late Miocene scimitar-toothed cats from the old and New World |url=https://www.cell.com/iscience/pdf/S2589-0042(22)01909-5.pdf |journal=iScience |volume=25 |issue=12 |article-number=105637 |bibcode=2022iSci...25j5637J |doi=10.1016/j.isci.2022.105637 |pmc=9730133 |pmid=36505925}}</ref>
==References== {{Reflist}} {{Barbourofelidae}} {{Taxonbar|from1=Q133084|from2=Q11908163|from3=Q118645088|from4=Q111039026|from5=Q111039508}}
Category:Miocene feliforms Category:Barbourofelidae Category:Miocene mammals of North America Category:Pliocene mammals of North America Category:Fossil taxa described in 1970 Category:Prehistoric carnivoran genera