(04-02-2018, 01:33 PM)Spalea Wrote: @GrizzlyClaws :

About #852: since the modern lions, Asiatic and African, are well-maned lions, whereas the Cave lions and Panthera Atrox (or the North American Lion) were very poorly-maned, we can indeed suppose that the true origins of the mane belongs to the Natodomeri lineage. And perhaps before the split African lion/Asiatic lion. But of course we cannot determine how much the Natodomeri lion's mane was developed. And thus the origin picture of the youtube video (#851) is only a pure speculation.

Inside the "Sciency Thoughts" article, it is said that the Natodomeri lion' size and the Panthera Atrox' size were as big one than the other. The poorly-maned North American lion and the perhaps well-maned Natodomeri lion would be the opposite tendancies as concerns the mane among the Pleistocene lions.


As concerns the size, we can believe, according to the skulls fragments known, that the Natodomeri lion's size and the North American lion's size were equal. After the split African lion/Asiatic lion the lions' size were smaller. But as concerns the Spelaea lineage, the differents lions invading the nothern countries were more and more bigger till they regained, with the North American lion, the Natodomeri lion's size with which he was in part coeval.

I hope not to be confused in my interpretation but...

Now I just make a brief aside in the children novels of the 60th... I have kept from my childhood two prehistoric novels from the french writer, Rosny Ainé (1856-1940) : "The quest for fire" continued by "Le félin géant" (i.e. "The giant felid", doesn't exist in the Wikipedia english langage). According to the described fauna, the two novels happened in the North of the Asian continent.

Just look at how was represented one of the protagonist of the story, a giant lion, the same giant lion in both  books (same author but two different illustrators):

Inside "The quest for fire": A kind of cave lion... 

*This image is copyright of its original author

And inside "The giant felid": a very developed-maned lion "as tall as a human", hairy everywhere. Perhaps a vision we could have about the Natodomeri lion.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Rather funny isn'it ?

(04-02-2018, 06:46 PM)Pckts Wrote: A skull size of 15” isn’t unusual for modern day lions so I’m curious if the skull is at least 15”s and probably much larger if it was in good condition or is that the total length?

(04-02-2018, 04:13 AM)brotherbear Wrote: Is there enough information collected to create a comparison picture of Natodomeri lion with a modern African lion? A picture is worth a thousand words.

(04-02-2018, 06:46 PM)Pckts Wrote: A skull size of 15” isn’t unusual for modern day lions so I’m curious if the skull is at least 15”s and probably much larger if it was in good condition or is that the total length?

(04-03-2018, 10:44 PM)Utigerluver Wrote:

(04-02-2018, 04:13 AM)brotherbear Wrote: Is there enough information collected to create a comparison picture of Natodomeri lion with a modern African lion? A picture is worth a thousand words.

Give me some time and perhaps some nice side views of lions and their skulls and I'll make something happen.

(12-04-2017, 08:57 AM)peter Wrote:

(12-03-2017, 11:56 PM)tigerluver Wrote: Panthera atrox in South America?

A new paper was just published stating that a fossil pantherine of South America, known as P. onca mesembrina, has been misidentified at least a few times. The true identity of this cat they assert is Panthera atrox. Their assertion is based on morphological similarities of the specimen to P. atrox rather than the jaguar. The skull they reference is the best example of their point. The paper.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Take a look at the above photos. Which species does the skull in the top photo looks most similar too? Based on visibility of the incisive foramina and the nasal shape, the authors conclude that the skull is actually of P. atrox.

At first take, the logic looks good. However, Dr. Ross Barnett disagrees, mentioning on twitter that cats of these areas have been DNA tested and shown to be jaguar. He cited this paper. 

The authors in a way already had a response built into the paper to such a rebuttal, stating that the ancient jaguar and American lion would have shared the domain. So what does everyone think? Is this skull of a jaguar or an American lion?

JAGUAR OR LION

Based on the shape and relative length of the nasals (a), the shape and relative width of the rostrum (b) and the transisiton from the maxillary bone to the arches ©, I would get to Panthera leo.


JAGUAR SKULLS

Based on the skulls I saw, I'd say that jaguars are closer to lions and leopards than to tigers. Of these three (Panthera leo, Panthera onca and Panthera pardus), however, jaguar skulls show more features typical for tiger skulls.


EVOLUTION

I remember a discussion on another forum quite some years ago. The discussion was about the Americas, lions, jaguars and evolution and it started with a very old skull attributed to Panthera atrox. I participated, but to a degree only.

My feeling was not everything was known about the two big cats in the Americas (referring to Panthera leo and Panthera onca). 

I know there was a split in Panthera a long time ago. Based on the skulls I saw, my guess is tigers split first. They're different from the other three species (not counting P. uncia for now), whereas the other three (P. leo, P. onca and P. pardus) seem to be related. 

Of these three species, lions could be crucial. Their way of life offered many opportunities. When they spread out, they met no opposition. Not in the open landscapes they preferred. 

Leopards adapted to woodland and elevated regions, but jaguars seem to be typical forest cats. I always wondered about the robustness of jaguars, as they mostly hunt smallish animals. In South-America, there are no large herbivores in the forests. Not any more, I mean. Jaguars didn't quite adapt. In a way, they seem to be overpowered. Why is that?

My guess was (referring to the discussion mentioned above), that they're relatively new. Did they migrate from Europe? Lions could and did cross Berengia and settled in the northern part of the Americas, but solitary big cats struggled to cross Berengia. This means that lions should have been the only representative of Panthera in the Americas. But they're not. So where did jaguars come from?

The only logical explanation I could find back then was they have to be related to Panthera atrox. When the climate changed in the Americas and big herbivores started to disappear, lions had to adapt. Maybe prides were replaced by small groups first and maybe some individuals started living on their own later. Maybe the conditions in the northern part of the Americas were too difficult to survive and maybe the conditions in the south offered more opportunities. Over time, individuals in the south adapted to forest life and water.


SIZE AND ROBUSTNESS

The scenario discussed above can explain why jaguars of large size only occur in regions where the forest is less dense (Venezuela, the Pantanal and a few other regions): open woodland offers more opportunities for large herbivores and those who hunt them would be able to maintain a large size. 

This scenario however still doesn't explain the robustness typical for jaguars. So what is the reason?

My feeling is that jaguars are big cats that had to scale down over time in order to survive. The question is where the scaling down started. Did Panthera onca develop in Europe and split a long time ago, or did they develop from a population of Panthera atrox in the southern part of North-America? 

Skulls can help to a degree. Jaguar skulls are closer to Panthera tigris and Panthera leo than to Panthera pardus. My take is they're closer to Panthera leo. Maybe the features in jaguar skulls also seen in tiger skulls are a result of adaptation to forest life.

(06-29-2018, 04:46 PM)Wjohnny rex Wrote: Can someone give some estimations for the skull size of the Ngandong tiger with 480 mm femur?