Dr. Krantz mentions in his book the possibility that Sasquatch could have a hind gut fermentor in its digestive system.

A hind gut fermentor is in my understanding of the subject, a secondary type of stomache above the small intestine used to absorb more nutrients from the food it eats. Squeezing the material and using bacterial action to digest the food.

What are the attributes of a scat that goes through this process?

Does anyone have examples?

Ken Ken Yielding

A cow has a double gut…..just walk out in a pasture and there you go.

Hindgut fermentation refers to the ability of some animals to process nutrients in their large intestine (colon and/or cecum) with the aid if symbiotic micro-organisms. More specifically it's mostly the process of breaking down the cellulose (and related components) of plant cells in order to get at the nutrients. Common examples include horses, rabbits and gorillas (which is likely why Krantz and co. believe this). There are also fish and 'lower' animals that use hindgut fermentation. This adaptation is actually less efficient then foregut fermentation, which ruminants and others use, in part because hindgut fermenters aren't able to absorb/digest most of the protein that is generated/liberated- mostly in the form of the dead organisms that are breaking down the cellulose. At the same time they benefit from being able to consume some toxic compounds which can bypass digestion in the intestines with this design.

The hind gut is actually "below" the small intestines (aka foregut w/ stomach) in terms of the route of passage.

I'm not sure there any defineable attributes to scat from hindgut fermenters becasue they are a diverse lot. Rabbits make pellets (and cecal/night pellets that they eat), horses make manure, and gorillas make lobulated, tubular scat. Most scats are relatively fibrous most of the time, but even that depends on what they happen to be eating at the time.

What is noteworthy is that efficient hindgut fermentation is really an adaption of herbivores. Most omnivores (you, me, dogs, bears, pigs, etc) have some degree of hindgut fermentation, but not like horses, rabbits and gorillas- mostly because efficient fermentation is related to 'vat' size and specialized fermenters have enlarged hindguts for this purpose, unlike most omnivores. This is important because sasquatches have anecdotally been reported to eat meat, which makes them at least omnivores, and therefore not likely very efficient hindgut fermenters. I don't remember the exact quote, but if Krantz stated that 'they could have hindgut fermenting abilities' it wouldn't be any more profound than saying they likely have bones. It's really just a question of degree unless they are strict carnivores, which seems unlikely (if they exist).

Hope that helps and that I got it all right? There are some decent websites that explain further details, mostly related to horses.

AM

can you send a photo of gorillia scat,

thanks,

Ken Ken Yielding

Pile and close-up of different scats.

I agree with Apeman.

It's an anatomical feature of devoted herbivores. All of the reports of the different North American great ape describe both plant and meat eating.

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM I love chocolate ice-cream!!

Please don't say that! :yuck:

Looks more like a nicely roasted marshmallow, right before you squish it into a S'More! Open wide!

Apeman has it right .......Sorry but... Krantz spent a lot of time explaining the opposing view to the point where you forgot what his view was.......for instance....., grammavore.....some 200 pages worth....until he reluctantly admitted that sasquatches were omnimvores......oops...his term...."oportunistic omnivores"........

Maybe they are like humans. We have a 25' intestine which leans toward vegatarianism, but we eat what we want and those that eat too much red meat get colon cancer later on. We also have a vestigial appendix which might or might not have something to do with hindgut fermentation in the past.

BTW, my dog is different too. She likes vegetables and fruit, she loves bananas and strawberries. She pouts if you eat a banana without giving her any, so all guests have to give her a piece.

Interesting/useless fact: Cats can't taste sweet. They don't have the taste-buds for sweet in their tounges.

-Ray
(this is officially the thread with the most disgusting title ever.)

Serious question about scat in the woods for those of you who have some knowledge about the subject. Why does some scat found (deer for instance) sometimes have a purple color, even sometimes staining the ground below with the same color? I have always thought maybe berries in the diet, but that was only my guess. Anyone know?

Actually they do have the taste buds, they just don't have functioning receptors on them to detect sugars. Subtle difference I realize.

Is that what our appendix used to do?

Is this during blackberry season? Just a thought..

Boss

Ah - thanks for the info - I had actually typed 'receptors', but then since I wasn't certain of that, decided to generalize with 'tastebuds'.

I guess cats don't need no stinkin bananas.

-Ray

Deer love wild purple grapes and musadines. This could leave a purple poop aplenty.

If by this you mean 'did the appendix function as part of a hindgut fermentation set-up in our evolutionary ancestry' then the answer most would give is "probably, yes." The true function of the appendix remains unclear and even some animals with a large cecum often have a small, seemingly useless appendix that doesn't play an obvious role in hindgut fermentation. That's mostly done by the cecum and to a lesser extent the colon.

:yeahthat:

(as soon as I look some of those words up in a dictionary, I'll be right back with a comment)

I can't see sheet in that pic. Oh wait it is sheet.

Isn't there DNA imbedded in the waste as it passes through the digestive system? And would this DNA be viable after being exposed to the air and other elements for an extended period of time? I read somewhere where the DNA in the intestines would be more conclusive in terms of identifying who the owner is as opposed to a hair or skin sample.

The point is It seems abnormally large sized scat is always being discovered with peculiar ingredients. If someone produced a sample of this scat would there be viable DNA for testing?

Yes. Mostly in cells sloughed nromally from the intestinal tract.

Depends how long and under what conditions but usually, yes, within a few days, sometimes up to weeks.


Most would disagree with that. DNA is DNA but with intestinal/fecal DNA you worry about contamination from anything the animal has eaten. With hair and skin you worry more about surface contamination, usually DNA from people handling it. Fecal DNA could arguably be considered better in that there are no (other) nonhuman primates to eat in the woods so you only have to worry about human DNA contamination, which is probably more likely on hair and skin. Sample handling is critical.


Usually by people that don't realize how diverse bear, moose, elk, and deer scat can be...


If it was collected, handled and stored appropriately, yes. There are at least a couple threads on this subject.

Cheers,

Apeman

Thanks APEMAN,
That might be what the article meant by intestinal DNA being a better sample due to a lower risk of contamination (it's been a long time since I read it).

This is the scat in Question.

Any scatophiles out there willing to comment on spring bear scat? I've read that black bears at least will gorge themselves on masses of fibrous material right before entering winter dormancy. One of the things they do when they emerge a few months later is enjoy one heck of a BM before(?) they start scrounging in earnest for that first meal of the spring. From what I understand, these piles are larger and stranger looking than your run-of-the-mill summer bear scat. I've never seen one. For those who have, do they resemble the purported Sas-scat we read about now and then?

I have scanned the slides of the scat with a nikon super scan 9000. I will include a more detailed and better representation of the scat. I scanned it at the highest res and quality. The TIF is about 125 MB. I am going to convert it to a smaller size and post it here.

Ken Ken Yielding

"Scat & Hind Gut Fermentor".... damn, I gotta figure out a way to work that phrase into my act !!!

"Thank you, Ladies & Gentlemen & all you fine Scat & Hind Gut Fermentors !!!"

:bsflag: sorry....

I am having problems with up loading the new photo to this thread for some reason.

Please PM if you want me to send it to you via email.

Or if a admin could help me with uploading the file to the thread please PM me.

I have the file down to about 7 MB and in a JPEG format.

Ken Ken Yielding