+- WildFact (https://wildfact.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Information Section (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-information-section)
+--- Forum: Wildlife Pictures and Videos Gallery (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-wildlife-pictures-and-videos-gallery)
+--- Thread: Freak Specimens (/topic-freak-specimens)
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-22-2014
(06-20-2014, 09:52 PM)'tigerluver' Wrote:(06-20-2014, 12:53 PM)'Apollo' Wrote: My doubt is eventhough these cats are similar in dimensions, the Ngandong tiger seems to outweigh all of them by a big margin.
Panthera leo fossilis and Panthera atrox seems to get higher headbody length of 240cm and shoulder height 125cm when compared to Ngandong tiger (Head body length 230cm and Shoulder height 115cm) but still they weigh less than the Ngandong tiger. What is the reason ? Is there is any difference in the body construction ?
From the data I've been working with, tigers are proportionately heavier in terms of bone length than lions. The difference is least in femur length, but still significant. And as body size is cubic, the proportionality difference gets even greater at the prehistoric high end estimates. Tigers might have denser bones, as peter noted some of his tiger skulls were very dense. Tiger canines also seem to be the most dense. No studies have been done on their long bones yet, give me a few more college years [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img]. Tigers are also proportionately longer, and thus there is more core body, thus maybe more weight. I feel the length discrepancy is offset by the lion's greater height, thus I favor the dense bones theory, as even though tiger bones are relatively thin compared to lions, they whole animal still weighs more with equal dimensions.
So as per dense bones theory, tigers seems to have denser bones than lions.
What could be a possible reason for tigers to have denser bones and relatively thinner bones compared to lions ?
When it comes to P.atrox and Ngandong, they seems to have similar body dimensions and P.atrox seems capable of reaching bigger dimensions than Ngandon tiger (headbody length and shoulder height). But when comparing weights the P.atrox averages 250Kg and Ngandong tiger weighs (370-415Kg). So the differences is more than 100 Kgs, which confuses me.
How come one cat species can weigh more than another cat species by 100kgs when its body dimensions are slightly smaller or similar.
Im not getting it.
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-22-2014
(06-20-2014, 09:58 PM)'tigerluver' Wrote:(06-20-2014, 07:27 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:(06-20-2014, 01:01 PM)'Apollo' Wrote: @GrizzlyClaws
"Some Panthera spelaea fossilis specimens are huge with the skull of over 19 inches long, but proportionally narrower and less robust."
"Although the longest skull of the Panthera spelaea fossilis is 485mm, but it was proportionally narrower and less robust."
"That 19 inches skull is virtually impossible for any cat in the history, and even the largest Cromerian lion has reached this length, but still nowhere close to the overall dimension."
So these cats had narrow elongated skulls unlike the modern tigers and lions ?
Do you have any model pics of how these cats would have looked (I mean the skull and head) ?
I have read the paper in last year, but i didn't manage to save it.
Maybe Guate still has the paper right now.
Yes, these Cromerian lions don't have robust skull, pretty much elongated, and the canines are also proportionally smaller.
Here you go:
https://www.mediafire.com/?2v51rox1e2ki0jr
The largest late middle Cave lion skull is 9.7 mm shorter than the largest early cave lion skull, and it might be possible that these two specimens were equal in size, due to the fact that the early variety and thinner and longer skulls. The earlier catss also seemed to have longer skulls for their body (derived from observation of nasal apertures).
TFS the pdf file.
RE: Freak Specimens - tigerluver - 06-22-2014
(06-22-2014, 10:01 AM)Apollo Wrote:(06-20-2014, 07:23 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:(06-20-2014, 12:53 PM)'Apollo' Wrote: @Guate
Thanks alot for the info and data.
Thanks again for clearing out my doubts.
But I still have some doubts and I hope you can help me here
Asper your data posted by Pckts
Ngandong tiger
Body size:
* Head-body length: 210 – 230 cm.
* Total length: 316 – 345 cm.
* Shoulder height: 115 cm.
* Weight: "By the way, the body mass of the Ngandong tiger (P. t. soloensis) must be updated. The new investigations made by Tigerluver and me put the body mass of this great cat between 370 kg (using the Christiansen & Harris (2005) equations) and 415 kg (Tigerluver new equations). This surpasses the weight of the largest Panthera atrox and Panthera (leo) fossilis and match with the largest Smilodon populator."
Panthera leo fossilis
About the size of Panthera atrox, probably up to 320 kg and estimated at 240 cm in head-body length.
Panthera leo spelaea
Large animal, 8-10% larger than modern lions. Largest skull of 420 cm. WaveRiders mentioned one of c.440 cm, but no evidence was presented. It probably weighed up to 300 kg, although this is debatable. Body length estimated at 220 cm.
Panthera Atrox
* Head and Body Length: 1.6 - 2.5 m (5.3 - 8.2 ft) (Shaw 2005)
* Tail Length: .5 - .8 m (1.7 - 2.7 ft) (Shaw 2005)
Source: http://library.sandiegozoo.org/factsheet...erican.htm
The maximum shoulder height estimated by Turner & Anton (1996) was of 125 cm.
Average weight : 250Kg (upto 320Kg)
My doubt is eventhough these cats are similar in dimensions, the Ngandong tiger seems to outweigh all of them by a big margin.
Panthera leo fossilis and Panthera atrox seems to get higher headbody length of 240cm and shoulder height 125cm when compared to Ngandong tiger (Head body length 230cm and Shoulder height 115cm) but still they weigh less than the Ngandong tiger. What is the reason ? Is there is any difference in the body construction ?
The largest Ngandong tiger is like Baikal, standing about 4 feet tall at shoulder and being 8 feet in the head+body length.
When the body dimension is similar, the tiger-like cat often weighs more than the lion-like cat.
Yeah a tiger like cat will often weigh more than a lion like cat at similar body dimensions.
But here the weight difference is much higher (P.atrox avg 250Kg (upto320Kg) and Ngandong tiger (370-415 Kg)).
The weight difference seems to be much higher even for tiger like cat when compared to a lion like cat at similar dimensions.
Provided that the P.atrox is capable of reaching bigger body dimensions than Ngandong tiger.
Actually the largest specimen for P. atrox is 351 kg based on a skull. P. atrox may have had proportionately larger skulls as well. No fossil specimens from this species on record has the dimensions that a tiger with a femur of 480 mm would have. A couple of P. s. fossilis specimens on record (a 465 mm ulna and 484.7 mm skull) probably had similar dimensions to the largest Ngandong tiger. I think my equations estimated it around 386 kg.
RE: Freak Specimens - tigerluver - 06-22-2014
Dug up an old post I wrote from yuku, I haven't worked with cave lion data in a while.
"tigerluver wrote:
The Skull
This post will shortly discuss the theoretical mass tied with the large skull (GSL = 484.7 mm, theoretical CBL = 433 mm).
The Mazak et al. (2011) gave an estimate of 445 kg, and also seems to overestimate mass. The reasoning behind this is explained in Christiansen and Harris (2005), as follows:
"A data sample with many small species would introduce a size-related bias, producing unreliably high body mass estimates for large species."
Mazak et al. used the average body mass and condylobasal lengths of each specie as the database to derive the equation. Thus, from the sample size of 6 data points (n=6), 4 were representative of relatively smaller species (P. pardus, N. nebulosa, P. onca, and P. uncia) while 2 were representative of the large species (P. leo and P. tigris). Graphically, there was an uneven distribution of data points, with the smaller species being represent on one extreme and the large on another. Therefore, the data sample had too many small species relative to the amount of large species represented, and thus there was, "a size-related bias, producing unreliably high body mass estimates for large species" (Christiansen and Harris, 2005).
Mazak et al. (2011) used a species averaged database to prevent confusion between intra- and inter-specific allometry. Though, in reducing the sample size, the distribution of data became uneven, causing the size-related bias mention above.
I constructed a logarithmically scaled graph using the same database of specimens from Mazak et al. (2011), but had each individual specimen to represent a data point rather than a specie average representing a data point. This produced a plot with an even distribution of data points. The resulting equation:
log(body mass in kg) = 2.6725*log(condylobasal length in mm) - 4.4587
An implication of this equation is that skull size grows more rapidly than body mass. Furthermore, the data sample used can be more safely applied to P. spelaea as P. spelaea is a distinct species, rather than a subspecie of anomalous species in terms of relative proportions and body mass (e.g. P. t. soloensis to P. tigris), and thus one can assume P. spelaea follows the growth trend of Panthera in general. I realize the wording in this paragraph may be a bit confusing, so just ask if any further clarification is needed on the point I am making.
Finally, the equation discussed yields a theoretical body mass for the 484.7 mm skull of approximately 387 kg.
The Femur
The femur estimate you got is similar to the one I have found with regression. I assumed that P. spelaea had a build midway between tigers and lions and thus based the regression off a database of only tigers and lions. The database for the formula is based off of 6 specimens, the equation:
log(mass) = 3.6775*log(femur length) - 7.2568
The 470 mm femur would have a mass of 371 kg accordingly.
The Ulna
Finally, I will go over the ulna in this short post.
As I stated before, an ulna of 465 mm is certainly from a record breaking specimen. To predict the body mass without encounter false negative allometry, I again used a database of tigers and lions, with six specimens in total. The equation:
log(mass) = 2.8965*log(ulna length) - 5.1318
The R-squared value was .9, weaker than my other equations. This is because the tiger and lions are significantly different in ulna to body mass proportions, with the former being relatively heavier. Again, I assumed P. spelaea fossilis had a built between the tiger and the lion. The resulting estimate, 393 kg. Putting the ulna into perspective with the Ngandong tiger femur, this specimen probably had a femur of 480 mm as well, give or take. Its mass would be slightly less than the Ngandong specimen (as this specimen is classed as a member of the tiger species, c. 409 kg) again assuming it was not built like a tiger, rather midway between lions and tigers.
I am looking into evidence to help figure the built of P. spelaea. Two things support it being very lion-like in built, if not synonymous, genetic data and robusticity of the bones, which fall into the range of modern lions. Furthermore, it is likely P. spelaea was morphologically lion-like as both species lived in similar, open landscapes, calling for greater cursoriality, explaining the relatively great width of the long bones.
end post"
RE: Freak Specimens - sanjay - 06-22-2014
Thats really wonderful information.
RE: Freak Specimens - sanjay - 06-22-2014
I think, these information about prehistoric cats should be discussed in Extinct Animals sections. This thread is for modern freak specimens. I want that some of you can start this discussion on the Extinct Animals section.
RE: Freak Specimens - GrizzlyClaws - 06-22-2014
(06-22-2014, 11:02 AM)'sanjay' Wrote: I think, these information about prehistoric cats should be discussed in Extinct Animals sections. This thread is for modern freak specimens. I want that some of you can start this discussion on the Extinct Animals section.
Agree, but our discussion now has involved with the overlap of the modern freak specimen such as Baikal.
This guy is almost physically identical to the largest fossil tiger specimen discovered so far.
RE: Freak Specimens - sanjay - 06-22-2014
GrizzlyClaws, I agree about Baikal compared to prehistoric cats.
You can continue to discuss and comparing here. I wanted only that any information related to prehistoric cats should be in that section.
Anyway. I thank tigerluver for starting new thread. Hope to see some good data and information about prehistoric cats.
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-23-2014
(06-22-2014, 10:20 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote:(06-22-2014, 10:01 AM)'Apollo' Wrote:(06-20-2014, 07:23 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:(06-20-2014, 12:53 PM)'Apollo' Wrote: @Guate
Thanks alot for the info and data.
Thanks again for clearing out my doubts.
But I still have some doubts and I hope you can help me here
Asper your data posted by Pckts
Ngandong tiger
Body size:
* Head-body length: 210 – 230 cm.
* Total length: 316 – 345 cm.
* Shoulder height: 115 cm.
* Weight: "By the way, the body mass of the Ngandong tiger (P. t. soloensis) must be updated. The new investigations made by Tigerluver and me put the body mass of this great cat between 370 kg (using the Christiansen & Harris (2005) equations) and 415 kg (Tigerluver new equations). This surpasses the weight of the largest Panthera atrox and Panthera (leo) fossilis and match with the largest Smilodon populator."
Panthera leo fossilis
About the size of Panthera atrox, probably up to 320 kg and estimated at 240 cm in head-body length.
Panthera leo spelaea
Large animal, 8-10% larger than modern lions. Largest skull of 420 cm. WaveRiders mentioned one of c.440 cm, but no evidence was presented. It probably weighed up to 300 kg, although this is debatable. Body length estimated at 220 cm.
Panthera Atrox
* Head and Body Length: 1.6 - 2.5 m (5.3 - 8.2 ft) (Shaw 2005)
* Tail Length: .5 - .8 m (1.7 - 2.7 ft) (Shaw 2005)
Source: http://library.sandiegozoo.org/factsheet...erican.htm
The maximum shoulder height estimated by Turner & Anton (1996) was of 125 cm.
Average weight : 250Kg (upto 320Kg)
My doubt is eventhough these cats are similar in dimensions, the Ngandong tiger seems to outweigh all of them by a big margin.
Panthera leo fossilis and Panthera atrox seems to get higher headbody length of 240cm and shoulder height 125cm when compared to Ngandong tiger (Head body length 230cm and Shoulder height 115cm) but still they weigh less than the Ngandong tiger. What is the reason ? Is there is any difference in the body construction ?
The largest Ngandong tiger is like Baikal, standing about 4 feet tall at shoulder and being 8 feet in the head+body length.
When the body dimension is similar, the tiger-like cat often weighs more than the lion-like cat.
Yeah a tiger like cat will often weigh more than a lion like cat at similar body dimensions.
But here the weight difference is much higher (P.atrox avg 250Kg (upto320Kg) and Ngandong tiger (370-415 Kg)).
The weight difference seems to be much higher even for tiger like cat when compared to a lion like cat at similar dimensions.
Provided that the P.atrox is capable of reaching bigger body dimensions than Ngandong tiger.
Actually the largest specimen for P. atrox is 351 kg based on a skull. P. atrox may have had proportionately larger skulls as well. No fossil specimens from this species on record has the dimensions that a tiger with a femur of 480 mm would have. A couple of P. s. fossilis specimens on record (a 465 mm ulna and 484.7 mm skull) probably had similar dimensions to the largest Ngandong tiger. I think my equations estimated it around 386 kg.
Thanks for the info.
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-23-2014
Huge male tiger from Harbin
Here is the video
Here are some screen shots taken by P.tigris
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
RE: Freak Specimens - Pckts - 06-24-2014
More Harbin Monsters in their summer coats
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-24-2014
Damn those males have massive forequarter.
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-24-2014
*This image is copyright of its original author
RE: Freak Specimens - Wanderfalke - 06-24-2014
(06-24-2014, 12:49 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: More Harbin Monsters in their summer coats
*This image is copyright of its original author
First thing, that popped into my eyes: maaaaaassive skull from the tiger in the middle! Here you can clearly notice the difference between a lion and tiger skull. And yes, the forequarters are striking as well. TFS!
RE: Freak Specimens - Apollo - 06-24-2014
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author