Table 2. Assessment of how well supported each behavioural hypothesis is by the results of the present study.
As hypotheses have not been previously described in an explicitly quantitative manner, they are codified here in a qualitative fashion only.
| Hypothesis | Whole-limb posture | Digit posture | Force required at claw tip | Supported? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slash-kicking prey (Fig. 1B) | Extended | Extended | High | No |
| Prey riding (Fig. 1C) | Extended to semi-flexed | Moderately extended | High | No |
| Prey-mounted flank attack (Fig. 1D) | Extended to semi-flexed | Moderately extended | High | No |
| Targeting prey’s vital areas (Fig. 1E) | Semi-flexed to flexed | Variable | Variable (depending on substrate) | Partly |
| Prey restraint (Fig. 1F) | Flexed | Flexed | Low | Yes |
| Kicking defence (Fig. 1G) | Extended | Extended | High | No |
| Digging out prey (Fig. 1H) | Extended to semi-flexed | Flexed | Variable (depending on substrate) | Partly |