Professor Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones

part of the ecosystem, actually, to be fertilising the ground in that way. And so more plants grow up and then they eat more plants and so on.

part of the ecosystem, actually, to be fertilising the ground in that way. And so more plants grow up and then they eat more plants and so on.

Well, first of all, we make a kind of analogy with living elephants, you know, where 60 or 70 is really the top duration. Secondly, we do have a kind of a record in the tusks. because the tusks have annual growth rings. You know, the tusks grew each year. They kind of pushed out of the skull and they grew longer each year. They also wore down at the tip, you know, through use.

Well, first of all, we make a kind of analogy with living elephants, you know, where 60 or 70 is really the top duration. Secondly, we do have a kind of a record in the tusks. because the tusks have annual growth rings. You know, the tusks grew each year. They kind of pushed out of the skull and they grew longer each year. They also wore down at the tip, you know, through use.

Well, first of all, we make a kind of analogy with living elephants, you know, where 60 or 70 is really the top duration. Secondly, we do have a kind of a record in the tusks. because the tusks have annual growth rings. You know, the tusks grew each year. They kind of pushed out of the skull and they grew longer each year. They also wore down at the tip, you know, through use.

But we can count the rings. We can count the growth rings. Now, in a very old animal, the sort of earliest part of the tusk, which is at the tip, would have worn away. So we never get the complete lifespan. But the longest that we've counted is, I think, 47 years. So in other words, there was one mammoth tusk where 47 annual rings were counted.

But we can count the rings. We can count the growth rings. Now, in a very old animal, the sort of earliest part of the tusk, which is at the tip, would have worn away. So we never get the complete lifespan. But the longest that we've counted is, I think, 47 years. So in other words, there was one mammoth tusk where 47 annual rings were counted.

But we can count the rings. We can count the growth rings. Now, in a very old animal, the sort of earliest part of the tusk, which is at the tip, would have worn away. So we never get the complete lifespan. But the longest that we've counted is, I think, 47 years. So in other words, there was one mammoth tusk where 47 annual rings were counted.

And the fact that we haven't got any up to 60 or 70, which is the kind of expectation, is because the old ones have worn away at the tip. So you never get the total lifespan. But it kind of fits. You know, we've got 47 preserved. So my guess is it's probably similar to a living elephant at about 60 or 70 if they were doing well. So this is the mammoth equivalent of tree rings, is it?

And the fact that we haven't got any up to 60 or 70, which is the kind of expectation, is because the old ones have worn away at the tip. So you never get the total lifespan. But it kind of fits. You know, we've got 47 preserved. So my guess is it's probably similar to a living elephant at about 60 or 70 if they were doing well. So this is the mammoth equivalent of tree rings, is it?

And the fact that we haven't got any up to 60 or 70, which is the kind of expectation, is because the old ones have worn away at the tip. So you never get the total lifespan. But it kind of fits. You know, we've got 47 preserved. So my guess is it's probably similar to a living elephant at about 60 or 70 if they were doing well. So this is the mammoth equivalent of tree rings, is it?

Well, the woolly mammoth had an enormous range. I mean, it was bigger than either of the living species. You could start in the West in Ireland, if you like.

Well, the woolly mammoth had an enormous range. I mean, it was bigger than either of the living species. You could start in the West in Ireland, if you like.

Well, the woolly mammoth had an enormous range. I mean, it was bigger than either of the living species. You could start in the West in Ireland, if you like.

through Britain, across Britain, through almost all of Europe, down to a kind of latitude of northern Spain, let's say the northern Mediterranean, right the way across Asia, right up to the Arctic Ocean, all the way across to northern China, northern Japan. And then we tend to, in paleontology, we think of the Americas as actually to the east,

through Britain, across Britain, through almost all of Europe, down to a kind of latitude of northern Spain, let's say the northern Mediterranean, right the way across Asia, right up to the Arctic Ocean, all the way across to northern China, northern Japan. And then we tend to, in paleontology, we think of the Americas as actually to the east,

through Britain, across Britain, through almost all of Europe, down to a kind of latitude of northern Spain, let's say the northern Mediterranean, right the way across Asia, right up to the Arctic Ocean, all the way across to northern China, northern Japan. And then we tend to, in paleontology, we think of the Americas as actually to the east,

of Asia, because although in this country, at least, we're used to seeing a map of the world with America on the left and the Atlantic Ocean in the middle. But the way that animals actually spread was eastward across the Bering Strait, which is the sea that now separates Siberia from Alaska, was dry land.

of Asia, because although in this country, at least, we're used to seeing a map of the world with America on the left and the Atlantic Ocean in the middle. But the way that animals actually spread was eastward across the Bering Strait, which is the sea that now separates Siberia from Alaska, was dry land.

of Asia, because although in this country, at least, we're used to seeing a map of the world with America on the left and the Atlantic Ocean in the middle. But the way that animals actually spread was eastward across the Bering Strait, which is the sea that now separates Siberia from Alaska, was dry land.