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.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****

(01-19-2016, 08:02 AM)tigerluver Wrote: Correct, the lions contemporary with modern civilization (<10 kya) is P. leo. P. spelaea went extinct around 10 kya, but it also occupied essentially all of Europe while it existed. So prehistoric humans would have had contact with the cave lion, but the Greeks and after the modern lion.

Three waves of lion are theorized to have come from an African stem group. The first wave, closer to a million years ago, was P. fossilis. The second wave was P. spelaea, whose exact date of emergence in Europe I don't remember, but was long enough after P. fossilis that according to a researcher P. spelaea and P. fossilis could not interbreed (Sabol 2011), and the two species seemed to have restricted each other's movement. I am not certain about P. fossilis extinction and P. spelaea emergence dates as it is debated as to whether the two are sister species or a single lineage. What is certain is that P. spelaea outlived P. fossilis by a long ways. P. leo likely migrated into Europe and Asia after P. spelaea died out, leaving the niche open around 10 kya. As a whole, the modern lion had to wait for the removal of P. spelaea as well as the emergence of a land bridge over to Eurasia.

I can't confirm the difference in size between European P. leo and African P. leo. Although, it'd seem more likely modern specimens are smaller, as that is the general trend across the majority of species. There was an April fools joke played a while back that proposed "dwarf" lions, but it was a bluff. 

Sounds good, though I'll be very busy until after the 23rd.

That dwarf lion skeleton actually looked to have a bear's skull, so yeah it definitely was a fake.
2 users Like Polar's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****

Also, Barbary lions were smaller in size than African/Asian ones, or similar?
1 user Likes Polar's post
Reply

United States GrizzlyClaws Offline
Canine Expert
*****
Moderators

(01-19-2016, 09:02 AM)Polar Wrote: Also, Barbary lions were smaller in size than African/Asian ones, or similar?

Prior to the human interference, they were about the same size.
3 users Like GrizzlyClaws's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****
( This post was last modified: 01-22-2016, 06:20 AM by Polar )

tigerluver, my ISP provider suddenly called me to plan my router for a service change today (apparently to change/refresh its service from Comcast Premium to X-Finity till Saturday, then I'm all good), and I am typing this on my smartphone. The document is only stored on my computer, and I can't get it out in any way since I didn't use any Google Cloud services or a USB/CD device to store it. And you said you were busy after the 23rd, but I will provide the PDF document ASAP on Saturday since I've already finalized it. Sorry for the delay.

I've already uploaded the study on how older bears continually get stronger with age than younger bears on the "Bear Size" forum. (This document was on my Google Drive for years now, so I could upload it without my computer.)
2 users Like Polar's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****

(01-17-2016, 05:05 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:
(01-16-2016, 09:56 AM)tigerluver Wrote:
*This image is copyright of its original author


I remember the 470 mm P. spelaea bone was passed off as P. fossilis due to size and someone quoted Mladec as middle Pleistocene. Rereading the document, the specimen is likely much younger, as it is from the same collection of bison bones dated to around 20 kya. The Mokhnevskaya skull is likely from the latest interglacial, somewhere around 100 kya. This specimen may be even younger. It seems the great size of P. spelaea was retained up until its extinction.

The Asian Cave lions could also likely have the same size as their European counterparts.

Didn't they have bigger and more numerous prey in Siberia at that time as well? I've always thought Siberian cave lions were larger than the cave lions in Europe due to that exact reason.
1 user Likes Polar's post
Reply

United States GrizzlyClaws Offline
Canine Expert
*****
Moderators

@Polar, based on the scientifically recorded fossils, the Siberian Cave lions are smaller, but based on the private collection from China, they are bigger.

So it is quite baffling.
1 user Likes GrizzlyClaws's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****
( This post was last modified: 01-24-2016, 08:49 AM by Polar )

Both tigerluver and GrizzlyClaws, here they are: tales about lion-tamers and lions in the Himalayan valley. (I had to re-read the book quite a bit in order to find the page with the actual anecdotes, phew!)

I'll continue to take sections and quotes out of this book if I see any more valuable info, but for now, here's the file:

Attached Files
.pdf   FromtheHillsofNepalandKushLionSection.pdf (Size: 106.28 KB / Downloads: 9)
4 users Like Polar's post
Reply

United States tigerluver Offline
Prehistoric Feline Expert
*****
Moderators

Reading that excerpt, it seems the villagers were simply referring to captive lions, maybe who had escaped? Gir lion don't have black manes from memory.
2 users Like tigerluver's post
Reply

United States GrizzlyClaws Offline
Canine Expert
*****
Moderators

(01-25-2016, 04:27 AM)tigerluver Wrote: Reading that excerpt, it seems the villagers were simply referring to captive lions, maybe who had escaped? Gir lion don't have black manes from memory.

The Asiatic lions could grow with thick dark mane when living in the colder climate, since they are closely related to the Barbary lions.

Even the African lions can convergently develop this morphology.
3 users Like GrizzlyClaws's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****
( This post was last modified: 01-25-2016, 05:05 AM by Polar )

There actually are wild and unmixed Asiatic lions with black manes, but their names are too small to notice for their size.

Yeah, I guess these lions are escaped captive specimens, they can't just suddenly adapt to the icy mountain climate that are the Himalayas, without the natives regularly noticing them.

In some pictures, I've seen modern Asiatic lions grow thick manes without exposure to cold weather, but I don't know if they are mixed with African lions. Asiatic/Barbary lions of the past had bigger belly hair and manes than all other lions.
3 users Like Polar's post
Reply

United States tigerluver Offline
Prehistoric Feline Expert
*****
Moderators
( This post was last modified: 01-25-2016, 05:09 AM by tigerluver )

I'm sure lions could survive in the lower Himalayas. They colonized three continents (two if we talk Eurasia). Only issues would be the forest, which seems to inhibit lion expansion, having enough breeding females, and dealing with a same sized, same niche tiger already established in the area.
4 users Like tigerluver's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****

(01-25-2016, 05:09 AM)tigerluver Wrote: I'm sure lions could survive in the lower Himalayas. They colonized three continents (two if we talk Eurasia). Only issues would be the forest, which seems to inhibit lion expansion, having enough breeding females, and dealing with a same sized, same niche tiger already established in the area.

True. They won't be able to establish territoriality in the land where the more powerful tiger, sloth bear, and black bear reside.
2 users Like Polar's post
Reply

United States tigerluver Offline
Prehistoric Feline Expert
*****
Moderators

An earlier conversation with @Polar reminded me of cortical bone thickness, so here's the data from Meachen-Samuels and Van Valkenburgh (2010) reorganized into species. The sample sizes of modern felids were abysmal (with lions and tigers only having 2 representative for each bone), so the trends here may not be representative of what is true for each respective species. Cortical bone thickness also decreases with age, adding some error to the measurement as well. Kavg is the measure of cortical bone thickness, averaging both the lateromedial and anteroposterior cortical measurements into one to represent a whole bone. The smaller the Kavg, the more cortical bone the species has, thus theoretically more density at at least the shaft.


*This image is copyright of its original author


It seems that cortical bone thickness is not correlated with mass density. The jaguar, with the most weight per length of bone, as a high Kavg, indicating lesser cortical bone thickness. It seems that cortical bone thickness increases without regard to body size to mass density for other biophysical reasons. Plus, seeing the cheetah with a cortical bone thickness greater than the jaguar leaves a big question mark on the reliability of cortical bone thickness in determining built.
3 users Like tigerluver's post
Reply

United States Polar Offline
Polar Bear Enthusiast
****
( This post was last modified: 02-04-2016, 06:31 AM by tigerluver Edit Reason: Removed location for security )

Fast-twitch muscles increase cortical bone or overall bone thickness (depending on bone growth limitations), and slow-twitch Ib (brute strength) muscles increase cross-sectional bone filament density.

This is probably the reason why the cheetah has a greater cortical bone thickness than the jaguar does as far as the ratio between cortical bone thickness/ whole bone diameter goes.


I'll have to supply the study for this on Sunday as I have quite a trip to make for my IT Tech Certification ceremony, and I have extreme amounts of schoolwork to accomplish.
3 users Like Polar's post
Reply

United States tigerluver Offline
Prehistoric Feline Expert
*****
Moderators


*This image is copyright of its original author


From Merriam and Stock (1932) and Marciszak et al. (2014). 

P. fossilis has a narrow occipital protuberance compared to the other two, similarly to the island tigers as compared to their mainland relatives. P. fossilis also looks to have more continuous triangular cranium. These two traits do not really vary intraspecifically and thus are notable interspecific discrepancies. In terms of shape, I find P. atrox and P. spelaea close to each other with P. fossilis a very unique form. Observations like this make it very difficult to figure out which species is closer to which.
2 users Like tigerluver's post
Reply






Users browsing this thread:
4 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB