Predatory behavior in manner suggested by Fowler et al.'' (2011) In 2009, Manning and colleagues interpreted dromaeosaur claw tips as functioning as a puncture and gripping element, whereas the expanded rear portion of the claw transferred load stress through the structure. They argue that the anatomy, form, and function of the foot's recurved digit II and hand claws of dromaeosaurs support a prey capture/grappling/climbing function. The team also suggest that a ratchet-like
locking ligament might have provided an energy-efficient way for dromaeosaurs to hook their recurved digit II claw into prey. Shifting body weight locked the claws passively, allowing their jaws to dispatch prey. They conclude that the enhanced climbing abilities of dromaeosaur dinosaurs supported a scansorial (climbing) phase in the evolution of flight. In 2020, Powers and colleagues analyzed the snout morphology of dromaeosaurids from North America and Asia, their findings suggest that the maxilla of
Deinonychus was short and deep, resembling that of short-snouted canids, suggesting that
Deinonychus specialized on larger prey. Within the same year, isotopic analysis done by Frederickson and colleagues, found that adult
Deinonychus were likely feeding on
Tenontosaurus to some degree. A 2010 study by Paul Gignac and colleagues attempted to estimate the bite force based directly on newly discovered
Deinonychus tooth puncture marks in the bones of a
Tenontosaurus. These puncture marks came from a large individual, and provided the first evidence that large
Deinonychus could bite through bone. Using the tooth marks, Gignac's team were able to determine that the bite force of
Deinonychus was significantly higher than earlier studies had estimated by biomechanical studies alone. They found the bite force of
Deinonychus to be between 4,100 and 8,200
newtons, greater than living carnivorous mammals including the
hyena, and equivalent to a similarly-sized alligator. Gignac and colleagues also noted, however, that bone puncture marks from
Deinonychus are relatively rare, and unlike larger theropods with many known puncture marks like
Tyrannosaurus,
Deinonychus probably did not frequently bite through or eat bone. Instead, they probably used their strong bite force for defense or to capture prey, rather than for feeding. A 2024 study by Tse, Miller, and Pittman et al., focusing on the skull morphology and bite forces of various dromaeosaurids discovered that
Deinonychus, the largest taxon examined, had a skull that was well adapted to hunting of large vertebrates and delivering powerful bites to prey alongside
Dromaeosaurus, to which it was compared. In this study,
Deinonychus represented the most extreme specializations compared to other dromaeosaurids when it came to its adaptations. The same study also revealed that
Deinonychus' skull was less resistant to bite forces than that of
Velociraptor, which apparently was engaging in more scavenging behavior, suggesting high bite force resistance was more common in dromaeosaurid taxa that were obtaining food through scavenging more than engaging in active predation. It is also suggested in these findings that Deinonychus may have fed by using neck-driven pullback movements to dismember carcasses when feeding, akin to modern varanid lizards.
Limb function Despite being the most distinctive feature of
Deinonychus, the shape and curvature of the
sickle claw varies between specimens. The type specimen described by Ostrom in 1969 has a strongly curved sickle claw, while a newer specimen described in 1976 had a claw with much weaker curvature, more similar in profile with the 'normal' claws on the remaining toes. evidence that this talon was held up off the ground while the dinosaur walked on the third and fourth toes. Ostrom suggested that
Deinonychus could kick with the sickle claw to cut and slash at its prey. Other studies have suggested that the sickle claws were not used to slash but rather to deliver small stabs to the victim. In 2005, Manning and colleagues ran tests on a robotic replica that precisely matched the anatomy of
Deinonychus and
Velociraptor, and used hydraulic rams to make the robot strike a pig carcass. In these tests, the talons made only shallow punctures and could not cut or slash. The authors suggested that the talons would have been more effective in climbing than in dealing killing blows. In 2009, Manning and colleagues undertook additional analysis dromaeosaur claw function, using a numerical modelling approach to generate a 3D finite element stress/ strain map of a Velociraptor hand claw. Ostrom cited Gilliard (1958) in saying that they can sever an arm or disembowel a man. Kofron (1999 and 2003) studied 241 documented cassowary attacks and found that one human and two dogs had been killed, but no evidence that cassowaries can disembowel or dismember other animals. Cassowaries use their claws to defend themselves, to attack threatening animals, and in agonistic displays such as the Bowed Threat Display. In 2011, a study suggested that the sickle claw would likely have been used to pin down prey while biting it, rather than as a slashing weapon. Biomechanical studies by
Ken Carpenter in 2002 confirmed that the most likely function of the forelimbs in predation was grasping, as their great lengths would have permitted longer reach than for most other theropods. The rather large and elongated
coracoid, indicating powerful muscles in the forelimbs, further strengthened this interpretation. Carpenter's biomechanical studies using bone casts also showed that
Deinonychus could not fold its arms against its body like a bird ("avian folding"), contrary to what was inferred from the earlier 1985 descriptions by
Jacques Gauthier and
Gregory S. Paul in 1988. Alan Gishlick, in a 2001 study of
Deinonychus forelimb mechanics, found that even if large wing feathers were present, the grasping ability of the hand would not have been significantly hindered; rather, grasping would have been accomplished perpendicular to the wing, and objects likely would have been held by both hands simultaneously in a "bear hug" fashion, findings which have been supported by the later forelimb studies by Carpenter and Senter. In a 2001 study conducted by Bruce Rothschild and other paleontologists, 43 hand bones and 52 foot bones referred to
Deinonychus were examined for signs of
stress fracture; none were found. The second phalanx of the second toe in the specimen YPM 5205 has a healed fracture. Parsons and Parsons have shown that juvenile and sub-adult specimens of
Deinonychus display some morphological differences from the adults. For instance, the arms of the younger specimens were proportionally longer than those of the adults, a possible indication of difference in behavior between young and adults. Another example of this could be the function of the pedal claws. Parsons and Parsons have suggested that the claw curvature (which Ostrom [1976] had already shown was different between specimens This was based on the hypothesis that some small dromaeosaurids used their pedal claws for climbing. In a 2015 paper, it was reported after further analysis of immature fossils that the open and mobile nature of the shoulder joint might have meant that young
Deinonychus were capable of some form of flight. In 2016, Scott Persons IV and Currie examined the limb proportion of numerous theropods and found Dromaeosaurids weren't
cursorial animals due to their low CLP scores, with
Deinonychus scoring -2.2, suggesting they couldn't maintain high speeds for extended periods of time.
Eggs The identification, in 2000, of a probable
Deinonychus egg associated with one of the original specimens allowed comparison with other theropod dinosaurs in terms of egg structure, nesting, and reproduction. In their 2006 examination of the specimen, Grellet-Tinner and Makovicky examined the possibility that the dromaeosaurid had been feeding on the egg, or that the egg fragments had been associated with the
Deinonychus skeleton by coincidence. They dismissed the idea that the egg had been a meal for the theropod, noting that the fragments were sandwiched between the belly ribs and forelimb bones, making it impossible that they represented contents of the animal's stomach. In addition, the manner in which the egg had been crushed and fragmented indicated that it had been intact at the time of burial, and was broken by the fossilization process. The idea that the egg was randomly associated with the dinosaur was also found to be unlikely; the bones surrounding the egg had not been scattered or disarticulated, but remained fairly intact relative to their positions in life, indicating that the area around and including the egg was not disturbed during preservation. The fact that these bones were belly ribs (
gastralia), which are very rarely found articulated, supported this interpretation. All the evidence, according to Grellet-Tinner and Makovicky, indicates that the egg was intact beneath the body of the
Deinonychus when it was buried. It is possible that this represents brooding or nesting behavior in
Deinonychus similar to that seen in the related
troodontids and
oviraptorids, or that the egg was in fact inside the
oviduct when the animal died.
Social behavior Scientists have debated whether or not
Deinonychus was gregarious.
Deinonychus teeth found in association with fossils of the
ornithopod dinosaur
Tenontosaurus are quite common in the Cloverly Formation. Two quarries have been discovered that preserve fairly complete
Deinonychus fossils near
Tenontosaurus fossils. The first, the Yale quarry in the Cloverly of Montana, includes numerous teeth, four adult
Deinonychus and one juvenile
Deinonychus. The association of this number of
Deinonychus skeletons in a single quarry suggests that
Deinonychus may have fed on that animal, and perhaps hunted it. Ostrom and Maxwell have even used this information to speculate that
Deinonychus might have lived and hunted in packs. The second such quarry is from the Antlers Formation of Oklahoma. The site contains six partial skeletons of
Tenontosaurus of various sizes, along with one partial skeleton and many teeth of
Deinonychus. One tenontosaur humerus even bears what might be
Deinonychus tooth marks. Brinkman
et al. (1998) point out that
Deinonychus had an adult mass of , whereas adult tenontosaurs were 1–4 metric tons. A solitary
Deinonychus could not kill an adult tenontosaur, suggesting that pack hunting is possible. Contrary to the claim that crocodilians do not hunt cooperatively, they have actually been observed to hunt cooperatively, even going as far as individuals serving different roles during the hunt. On top of that, despite cases of cannibalism and infighting, several species of crocodilians such as
Nile crocodiles,
American alligators, and to a certain extent
Saltwater crocodiles (who have been known for their highly aggressive behavior), have been considered to be relatively gregarious. This further suggests that the notion of infighting and cannibalism ruling out cooperative feeding and gregariousness is flawed. Currie and Eberth criticized this hypothesis in their 2010 paper, as many gregarious carnivores are very intolerant towards each other, despite this, these carnivores still develop complex, social behavior. Li
et al. describes track sites in their 2007 paper, noting the similar foot spacing and parallel trackways, implying gregarious pack behavior instead of uncoordinated feeding behavior. A carbon isotopic analysis on
Deinonychus teeth suggests precociality in the genus. The isotopes found for different aged specimens indicate that adults and juveniles had different diets across the various age groups, suggesting a more typical
archosaurian set of life stages, with any parental feeding of young ending before the young were large enough to sustain the typical adult diet. The examinations also suggests a lack of mammal-like pack hunting in
Deinonychus. Despite this, due to the lack of spatial separation of juvenile and adults,
Deinonychus was likely gregarious, having social tolerance at least that of crocodilians, instead of a complete agonistic relationship as seen in Komodo dragons. They argued due to some adults having overlapping values with smaller individuals,
Deinonychus probably wasn't
monogamous and instead practiced
ratite-like parental care. ==Paleoenvironment==