(02-16-2015, 04:59 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Yeah, they are not exactly the descendants of the Kruger lions, but they surely belong to the South African clade.

On the other hand, the Crater lions not only belong to the East African clade, they were also directly descended from the colonial Serengeti lions.

 

(02-17-2015, 03:14 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(02-15-2015, 08:19 PM)'chaos' Wrote:

(02-13-2015, 10:48 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(02-13-2015, 06:54 PM)'chaos' Wrote: @Pockets - it's a well known fact both lion and tiger subspecies that dwell in prey rich regions are generally larger than their counterparts in prey challenged regions. Common sense. 




 

You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?

@Waverider
In regards to Kaziranga tigers, you are right they have not been measured. But Assam Tigers have a few individuals who have been, and according to them, they have the largest skulls on average, and their body weight was in the 220kg range I believe. I don't know about what region in assam they were from, but Kaziranga is in assam. Lets also look at Eye Witness accounts saying that they are the largest tigers they have ever seen. Then lastly, prey density,
Kaziranga is the Only place in India with Rhino, Elephant, Water Buffalo and all the other species of prey in India for a tiger. It also has the highest Tiger Density as well, so using those proven facts, the only way a Tiger density that high is sustained, is plenty of prey, the habitat is lush, deep grass and tough treking. A animal must swim miles, hunt through elephant grass and deep wet marsh lands to make kills. All would contribute to growth in muscles and overall weight.
Lets compare these factors to the Crater,
No higher prey density than else where, terrain is similar to any where else, lion density is very low there, (growing recently) but still not higher than other areas, Coalitions are much more individuals meaning more mouth's to feed, lions as recently as 30 years ago came from the Serengeti. So its not like Kaziranga where they have had 100s of years of uninterrupted evolutionary time, they have only recently begun to live there again in substantial #s and its not like they could have adapted specific morphological traits in that time frame. So, by no means is 212kg an unheard of # for wild lions, but it certainly is not backed by evidence that those weights are the average for male lions in the crater. I have also seen no eye witness accounts saying they are any larger than any other Lions from elsewhere maybe somebody here would like to ask a few lion experts on FB?


"The 212 kg figure is an educated estimate, but just an estimate. Because it refers to an average weight of a sample it has more validity then if it would refer to any particular individual. Assuming it were correct, in the sample of N=6 individuals averaging 212 kg I would definitely expect a weight range of 200-225 kg as a minimum, more likely 195-230 kg as I conservatively predicted (actual prediction 195-243 kg likely optimistic for 6 individuals only).

I just remind that the sample of N=7 adult male tigers from Chitawan NP average 235 kg kg with a range of 200-261 kg"

Also the real average of Chitwan would be 200kg-272kg+ but thats a different discussion.

 



 

~~You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
 Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
 But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
 The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
 And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?


Spin it anyway you like. The fact is crater lions have ample food year round. Combined with  other factors, that apparently makes for a larger lion.
Take that up with our creator. Like larger tigers sub species, I presume similar dynamics apply.




 

"Spin it"
haha
I just posted proof from packers observations over 30 plus years with the history of the "Crater" lion. They have ample food year round, but guess what, the Serengeti has wayyyy more food year round. They are no larger than anywhere else, at least nothing noted by actual biologists who study them.

"Take out all the unneccesary scientific over-complication, its quite easy to understand."
I really like that statement ^^

So we should dismiss all scientific studies now? Well if thats the case, Crater lions are Serengeti lions. No larger or smaller, lets keep it simple then.

 

 

(02-17-2015, 04:08 AM)'chaos' Wrote:

(02-17-2015, 03:14 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(02-15-2015, 08:19 PM)'chaos' Wrote:

(02-13-2015, 10:48 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(02-13-2015, 06:54 PM)'chaos' Wrote: @Pockets - it's a well known fact both lion and tiger subspecies that dwell in prey rich regions are generally larger than their counterparts in prey challenged regions. Common sense. 





 

You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?

@Waverider
In regards to Kaziranga tigers, you are right they have not been measured. But Assam Tigers have a few individuals who have been, and according to them, they have the largest skulls on average, and their body weight was in the 220kg range I believe. I don't know about what region in assam they were from, but Kaziranga is in assam. Lets also look at Eye Witness accounts saying that they are the largest tigers they have ever seen. Then lastly, prey density,
Kaziranga is the Only place in India with Rhino, Elephant, Water Buffalo and all the other species of prey in India for a tiger. It also has the highest Tiger Density as well, so using those proven facts, the only way a Tiger density that high is sustained, is plenty of prey, the habitat is lush, deep grass and tough treking. A animal must swim miles, hunt through elephant grass and deep wet marsh lands to make kills. All would contribute to growth in muscles and overall weight.
Lets compare these factors to the Crater,
No higher prey density than else where, terrain is similar to any where else, lion density is very low there, (growing recently) but still not higher than other areas, Coalitions are much more individuals meaning more mouth's to feed, lions as recently as 30 years ago came from the Serengeti. So its not like Kaziranga where they have had 100s of years of uninterrupted evolutionary time, they have only recently begun to live there again in substantial #s and its not like they could have adapted specific morphological traits in that time frame. So, by no means is 212kg an unheard of # for wild lions, but it certainly is not backed by evidence that those weights are the average for male lions in the crater. I have also seen no eye witness accounts saying they are any larger than any other Lions from elsewhere maybe somebody here would like to ask a few lion experts on FB?


"The 212 kg figure is an educated estimate, but just an estimate. Because it refers to an average weight of a sample it has more validity then if it would refer to any particular individual. Assuming it were correct, in the sample of N=6 individuals averaging 212 kg I would definitely expect a weight range of 200-225 kg as a minimum, more likely 195-230 kg as I conservatively predicted (actual prediction 195-243 kg likely optimistic for 6 individuals only).

I just remind that the sample of N=7 adult male tigers from Chitawan NP average 235 kg kg with a range of 200-261 kg"

Also the real average of Chitwan would be 200kg-272kg+ but thats a different discussion.

 




 

~~You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
 Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
 But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
 The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
 And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?


Spin it anyway you like. The fact is crater lions have ample food year round. Combined with  other factors, that apparently makes for a larger lion.
Take that up with our creator. Like larger tigers sub species, I presume similar dynamics apply.





 

"Spin it"
haha
I just posted proof from packers observations over 30 plus years with the history of the "Crater" lion. They have ample food year round, but guess what, the Serengeti has wayyyy more food year round. They are no larger than anywhere else, at least nothing noted by actual biologists who study them.

"Take out all the unneccesary scientific over-complication, its quite easy to understand."
I really like that statement ^^

So we should dismiss all scientific studies now? Well if thats the case, Crater lions are Serengeti lions. No larger or smaller, lets keep it simple then.

 


 

You posted diddly squat in regards to crater lions. The Serengeti is subject to annual migrations. The crater is not. That equals a more consistent
food base which equals a heavier lion. Most agree craters are simply a larger lion. You have a tendency to read way too much into statements and
overcomplicate, like youv'e been doing. Its a very simple equation. Thats where the "take out the UNNECESSARY scientific complication" you like to
use in any argument you feel slipping through your oily hands, stems from.  

 

(02-17-2015, 05:05 AM)'chaos' Wrote: And?...............My posts are based solely on logic as to why craters could be larger. I am not the only person who
consider these lions to be one of, if not, the largest lion subspecies. Nobody knows why they're larger. Perhaps its
due to the craters environment. I'm not a scientist and I've never been there. According to waveriders previous posts
in this thread, the 212 kg estimate has been accepted as an educated "estimate" by peer reviewed scientific paper. That
carries way more weight than your desperate attempts to discredit anything and everything I believe in or post. 

~~For the benefit of everybody the above on the 212 kg estimate is NOT a fact but a comment on an educated estimate suggested by a peer-reviewed scientific paper.
 
That makes for a larger cat don't ya think? Now whether these are genetically identical to Serengeti's? I could give two shiites. The simple fact it
obviously irks you, is your issue. I, along with many others believe craters are a larger lion subspecies. Kinda like you believe Kaz tigers are the
largest tiger sub-species without any actual proof. Now, if you agree, we'll continue to disagree. I'm on board.  

 

(02-17-2015, 05:38 AM)'Pantherinae' Wrote: Remember @Pckts alot of The prey migrates in The serengeti, unlike The animals in the crater aswell. 
I think The crater Lions are bulked up serengeti lions, You can easy see they are heavier and more stocky animals than those from serengeti just by watching videos and pictures to compare! 

 

(02-17-2015, 05:43 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(02-17-2015, 05:05 AM)'chaos' Wrote: And?...............My posts are based solely on logic as to why craters could be larger. I am not the only person who
consider these lions to be one of, if not, the largest lion subspecies. Nobody knows why they're larger. Perhaps its
due to the craters environment. I'm not a scientist and I've never been there. According to waveriders previous posts
in this thread, the 212 kg estimate has been accepted as an educated "estimate" by peer reviewed scientific paper. That
carries way more weight than your desperate attempts to discredit anything and everything I believe in or post. 

~~For the benefit of everybody the above on the 212 kg estimate is NOT a fact but a comment on an educated estimate suggested by a peer-reviewed scientific paper.
 
That makes for a larger cat don't ya think? Now whether these are genetically identical to Serengeti's? I could give two shiites. The simple fact it
obviously irks you, is your issue. I, along with many others believe craters are a larger lion subspecies. Kinda like you believe Kaz tigers are the
largest tiger sub-species without any actual proof. Now, if you agree, we'll continue to disagree. I'm on board.  


 

The only thing that "irks me" is your refusal of anybody who disagrees with your claim.
Like you stated yourself, the 212 kg is NOT a fact.

Peter writes
"Regarding Ngorogoro lions. In spite of many decades of research in many regions in Africa and in spite of countless tables with weights, only one Ngorogoro male was actually weighed. It was a young adult, who scaled 146 kg. Very different from the computed average for young adults in the page above (206 kg.). A disappointing result, but there you have it. 

Anything to add? Yes. The regression equation was debated on AVA. Apollyon contacted Packer. The conclusion they got to was the equation was inadequate. More? Yes. I saw a few documentaries in which lions were measured. I noticed that chest girths were not taken in the proper way. They only measured half of the girth, as this meant they didn't have to move the lion. I understand (a male lion is a heavy animal), but I wouldn't get to satisfactory. There's one more thing. Everything I have on wild lions suggests adult males outaverage adult females by about 60-70 kg. Let's assume the average for Ngorogoro females (127 kg.) was right and let's also assume that Ngorogoro lions are big animals. I propose to take 70 kg. as the average difference. That would result in 197 kg. at best. Different from 212 kg. Maybe the relation between chest girth and weight is different in lions, tigers and bears.  "

Amnon
" ...too simple. Lions are social and rely on numbers. More food should result in more lions (ofc in bigger size as well...but only to some extent). Thats why size differences between various lion populations are limited.

...and as far as I know its rather the size of prey (and not the amout of prey...that much) what increases the size of lions. "

Gaute says:
"The formula is NOT from Packer, and was not provided TO Packer also. He directly say that, this is the point, period."


Grizzly
"Yeah, they are not exactly the descendants of the Kruger lions, but they surely belong to the South African clade.

On the other hand, the Crater lions not only belong to the East African clade, they were also directly descended from the colonial Serengeti lions. "

etc.

Everybody says the same more or less, this topic is pointless to discuss any further with you. Ill stick to discussing it with people who interpret and present data.