There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
02-23-2020, 10:16 AM( This post was last modified: 02-25-2020, 10:55 AM by peter )
PUMAS IN PATAGONIA AND CANADA
Over the years, I saw a number of documentaries on pumas in Canada, Chili, the USA (Florida, Texas and Oregon) and Patagonia. The largest pumas I saw were from Patagonia. In one documentary, researchers measured a female and three nearly full-grown cubs in an elevated region. The adult female was the longest I saw by a margin.
A few weeks ago, I saw 'Wild Patagonia' (BBC). It has 3 parts. In the last episode, a biologist (or ranger) was briefly interviewed. When the BBC-crew asked him about problems, he said they had recently seen a 'huge' male puma. The advice was to stay away from him. Based on what I saw, I'd say he, regarding his size, hadn't exaggerated. The male was different from pumas in other regions. Apart from the colour (quite pale), he was much more robust than all other male pumas I had seen. The skull also seemed different (relatively larger).
In 'The puma - Mysterious American cat' (S.P. Young and E.A. Goldman, 1946), one can find reliable information about the size of pumas in different regions. Three females shot near Santa Cruz (Argentina) well over a century ago were 6.10 (208,28 cm.), 7.6 (228,60 cm.) and 7.8 (233,698 cm.) in total length, whereas a male shot near lake Argentina was 8.1 (246,38 cm.). My guess is they were measured 'over curves', but Goldman (pp. 191-192) offers no specifics on the method used.
Skull measurements are more reliable. The tables in the book mentioned above (pp. 269-276), although based on a limited number of specimens (referring to skulls from the southern part of Argentina in particular), suggest there's little to choose between Patagonian pumas (Felis concolor pearsoni) and Colorado pumas (Felis concolor hippolestes). In length and width, skulls of pumas shot in British Columbia, Oregon and Colorado roughly compared to those of pumas shot near Rio Coy (Argentina), but the dentition in the skulls of pearsoni was heavier. The longest skull (237 mm. in greatest total length) was from a male shot near Meeker, Colorado. He was 227 pounds (102,96 kg.). Two other males also shot in the vicinity of Meeker were 164 (74,39 kg.) and 160 (72,57 kg.) pounds.
Skulls of adult females only very seldom reach 200 mm. in greatest total length. The only 2 slightly exceeding that mark were from Meeker, Colorado and Coy Inlet, Argentina (pp. 273-276). The dentition in the skulls of pearsoni, again, is heavier.
Skulls of pumas shot in the northern part of the USA and Canada are more rounded and a few mm. wider than skulls of pumas shot in the southern part of Argentina, whereas the rostrum often is a bit longer and wider in Patagonian skulls. In Patagonian skulls, the zygomata gradually converge towards the rostrum. In skulls from pumas shot in the northern part of the USA, in contrast, the angle between the rostrum and the zygomata is more acute. For this reason, skulls from pumas shot in the southern part of Argentina seem closer to skulls of lions and tigers, whereas skulls from pumas shot in the northern part of the USA seem closer to those of small cats (more rounded).