Through out my observing, reading newsletter and other members information here. I am thinking that Male felidae like Tiger, Lion etc become more dominant , aggressive and gain muscle and weight when they become father first time. This is because they can protect their cubs, female and Territory.

According to JV - His male tiger Sariska who struggle to establish territory, dominated by other males and was smaller in size. But what interesting happened is when he was able to mate with a female and the female produces litters he became more aggressive. Male tigers that previously had dominated him, were now attacked when they came near his territory. Sariska bulked up and put on weight, giving him the edge when fighting other male tigers.

I have also observed to some extent in thread of Rofls, About father Male Tiger.

However, I am just putting my views here no any backup of data except the above JV's newsletter.
But this certainly open a debate on this behavior of animals and kind of interesting.
 

~~http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/24/gps-study-tracks-grizzlies-as-follow-hunters/    GPS study tracks grizzlies as they follow huntersThis GPS system is a real bear.Eight Montana grizzly bears have been outfitted with GPS trackers in an ongoing study that could bring some unnerving news to hunters.  
The study is aimed at bolstering the theory that grizzlies, which can be as stealthy as they are ferocious, stalk hunters from as close as the length of a football field in order to steal their prey. Already, data has shown at least one grizzly following oblivious elk hunters almost from the moment they left the parking lot, according to the Billings Gazette. Scientists believe the bear may have been following the humans in hopes of getting to a fallen elk before they did."Bears opportunistically scavenge carcasses throughout the active season and commonly usurp kills of other predators, such as cougars and, since their reintroduction in 1995, gray wolves,” stated a report last year by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team. “Remains left by hunters also provide grizzly bears with meat, and bears are attracted to areas outside of national parks when these remains become available during the fall.” The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, part of the U.S. Geological Survey, started the project over the summer, by tagging the grizzlies in the Grand Teton National Park. Next, the study team asked elk hunters to voluntarily carry some 100 GPS units that track their routes.In the most clearly detailed example, a group of hunters turned on their GPS devices moments after leaving a parking area at around 6 a.m. When scientists analyzed their movements later and contrasted them with those of a nearby grizzly, it became clear the bear was tailing them.The bruin stayed downwind of the hunters, at one point coming within 100 yards of them as they moved around a lake. At around noon, the bear bedded down for a nap, but easily picked up the hunters’ trail again when it awoke, according to the report. Grizzly bears’ have a sense of smell seven times greater than that of a bloodhound, and 100 times that of a human by some estimates. Grizzlies also possess a Jacobson’s organ in the roof of their mouth that can detect heavier moisture-borne odors.Scientists tracked the bear as it appeared to smell an elk carcass from 4 miles away, follow the scent and even wound up swimming across the lake to get to it, according to the report. They also observed that the bear made some evasive maneuvers, possibly to avoid an untagged grizzly competing for the same meat. “The temporary movements away from the carcass could be indicative of this particular bear being ‘pushed off’ the carcass by a more dominant bear,” said Frank van Manen, of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team based in Bozeman.Grizzlies have been known to steal the prey of hunters and fishermen alike. Animals such as elk may travel for miles after being wounded, leaving hunters the task of tracking them even as bears may be doing the same.
So attuned to the movements of hunters are the bears that scientists believe they may even listen for the sound of gunshots, knowing that they signal a meal to be scavenged. Grizzlies are known scavengers, and officials noted there have been cases of the mighty bruins attacking hunters as they dressed elk in the field. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks now requires successful bison hunters outside of Yellowstone National Park to move carcasses and gut piles 200 yards away from homes, roads and trails to lessen the chances of human-bear interactions, according to the Gazette.

 

http://photos.wildfact.com/gallery

So far I've only seen Pockets, myself and Sanjay on there from this blog.
 

@peter

A couple of things I found to be inconclusive about your post

"At about similar body length, Amur tigers are more athletic than Assam tigers. Male Assam tigers are built like tanks, but male Amur tigers seldom exceed 210 kg. Assuming male Amur tigers fight dangerous opponents more often than male Assam tigers (other male tigers as well as bears and wild pigs) and apparently have just about what it needed to survive, the conclusion is a fighter in the world of big cats isn't built like a tank."

I definitely do not agree with this, since there is absolutely no way to determine which is more athletic. I have seen a Assam Tigress leap out of 6ft high, dense grass, to the top of a full grown elephant just to attack a FG.
I have seen a massive male tiger chase down cattle through 2+ feet of water and grass like it was nothing while making sharp cuts.
So obviously the massive cats of Kaziranga (assam) are every bit as athletic as Amurs.

The next is this
"WATER

I read nice stories about swamps, big cats and immense muscles in order to move and hunt in a way enabling a decent income.

While it is true Okavango lions and Assam tigers seem extra large, Sunderban tigers are the smallest today. The Vietnamese swamp tigers in Cochin-China a century ago also were smaller than tigers in other parts of Indochina. Sumatra also has very swampy regions, but the tigers making a living over there were not as large as those in other parts of Sumatra.

The conclusion is water apparently isn't a drive for size in lions and tigers. Maybe swimmers are a bit more robust at times, but they are not larger. There are other factors and these seem more important."

You must remember, trying to compare Kaziranga to SUmatra or China is incorrect, since both live in the most densly human populated and deforested areas in the world. They have no true prey to hunt with any real mass and are having less and less room to raom. Especially in Sumatra since I don't know enough about Vietnamese swamp tigers, but I do know that in old hunting images, I saw some massive vietnamese tigers and heard a few stories about their massive size.
But sumatra has been completely destroyed, check out the "hands on thread" where I posted the people of green peace motorcycling all through Sumatra showing you just how bad it is.

So I do think Water is a huge factor, but so is lots of territory, prey densisty and unmolested forrests. But of course water is going to play a huge role, it is the bringer of life. All animals seek it out, and start famililes around it.




 

I recently asked Gaute about the if he noticed the tigers he saw as being drugged. A girl I used to see that lived in Thailand for a few years said when she visited the Tiger Temple that the tigers seemed drugged. I also think that to get a tiger to sit still and take photographs with people would probably require some sort of sedative.
Here is a sad but interesting article on the Tigers in Thailand Temples

"While there have been rumors about Temple monks drugging the animals so that they act calmer near tourists, there is no evidence that this practice occurs. Still, tigers living at the facility are frequently noted as being oddly lethargic and calm. While drugs and medications may not be used, tigers may become submissive to workers after years of man-handling and physical abuse. One look at this video may have you thinking the same thing."
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsand...mal-abuse/



 

Brotherhood among wild animal is most visible and strong relation. Specially for Lions. Male lion make a relation that last for life time. They are partner in all situation. They share female, their food and territory almost everything.

This relation is also strong among Cheetah male. They live together , hunt together and fight together.

This thread is meant to discuss brotherhood relationship of any wild animal.



















Male cheetah coalition








 

http://news.discovery.com/animals/sharks...141023.htm 

 With fangs and the first sawlike teeth on Earth, the biggest predator in the swamps of the early Permian Period ate anything it wanted.

But when Dimetrodon waddled on land 290 million years ago, there weren't enough tasty herbivores to go around, according to an idea proposed in the 1970s by famed paleontologist E. C. Olson. "There were too many meat eaters," said Robert Bakker, the curator of paleontology at the Houston Museum of Natural Science. "There was a meat deficit all over the world."

After 11 years of sifting through fossils in Baylor County, Texas, Bakker said he thinks he has proved Olson right, based on research presented Monday (Oct. 20) here at the Geological Society of America's annual meeting.

 During the early Permian, carnivores greatly outnumbered herbivores on land, so Dimetrodon filled its belly by hunting in shallow water. In the bone beds, Bakker and his collaborators uncovered 30 Dimetrodons and only two herbivores. But the fossil hunters also found masses of freshwater shark fossils intermingled with Dimetrodon teeth. Dimetrodon shed teeth throughout its life, and the lost crowns are like bullets at a crime scene, Bakker said. "This is CSI," Bakker told Live Science. "Sharks were eaten by Dimetrodon in great numbers."

Dimetrodon resembled a sail-backed Komodo dragon on steroids, and probably hunted with ease in the water. But the shark, a Xenacanth, while nowhere near as large as aDimetrodon, fought to the death. Hundreds of shark coprolites (fossil poop) in the bone beds hold Dimetrodon bone fragments. Distinctive crescent-shaped shark bites were also discovered on intact Dimetrodon bones, although the marks suggest Xenacanthus sharks were too delicate to wrench off their foes' limbs.
In total, more than 60 Xenacanth shark fossils were intermingled with Dimetrodon teeth. (Cartilage is rarely fossilized, but the sharks left behind their protective head spines.) Three Dimetrodon teeth were imbedded in large pieces of shark cartilage. "Shark was the other red meat," Bakker said. Reptile and aquatic amphibian bones round out the chewed shark cartilage and mangled Dimetrodon bones. "We find Dimetrodon tooth marks on everything. They even ate each other," Bakker said.
 

A cold-blooded killer, Dimetrodon carried a huge fin on its back, perhaps for solar heating or scaring other animals. Though it resembled a primitive lizard, the fearsome predator was actually a synapsid, an ancestor to mammals that went extinct long before dinosaurs first appeared. Some mammalian features first appeared in the synapsids, including skull holes behind the eyes that serve as attachment points for jaw muscles, and the innovative two-teeth system for shearing meat and immobilizing prey.

"There was life before the dinosaurs, and it was different and interesting," Bakker said. "You could even argue that without sharks we could not have evolved."

Originally published on Live Science.

 

http://markgelbart.wordpress.com/2011/03...h-america/ 
 
I am not going to copy and paste this, but if anyone else here finds it interesting, please feel free to do so. I am interested in bear evolution and, as my "online moniker" implies, I am mostly interested in brown bear evolution. I find it difficult to find information of modern animals during prehistoric times, as every book I read focuses on the extinct species. Also, any good books on this topic is appreciated, but please remember that my education level is a G.E.D. that I earned when I was a 30 year old kid.
 I'm not sure if this site might be useful or not: http://zmmu.msu.ru/rjt/articles/article....ages=71-75

 

Guinness World Records 2015 - Oldest big cat fossil - In 2010, fossils from a previously unknown species similar to a snow leopard were unearthed in the Himalayas. The fossils of this species - named Panthera blytheae - have been dated to between 4.1 and 5.95 million years old, which supports the theory that big cats evolved in central Asia - not Africa - and spread outward.