+- WildFact (https://wildfact.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Information Section (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-information-section)
+--- Forum: Terrestrial Wild Animals (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-terrestrial-wild-animals)
+---- Forum: Wild Cats (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-wild-cats)
+----- Forum: Tiger (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-tiger)
+----- Thread: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers (/topic-modern-weights-and-measurements-on-wild-tigers)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-06-2022
A Comparison
Wagdoh
208cm HBL
96cm Tail Length
304cm TL
101cm Shoulder Height
Chest Girth 136cm
*This image is copyright of its original author
Waghdoh fits really well in the 230kg range when compared to these males. He was really bulky in his prime which could add some mass but obviously the claims of him being the largest Tiger in India were far fetched. Regardless he was a big male, no doubt.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - GuateGojira - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 09:55 PM)Pckts Wrote: Again the verbiage of "approx" is concerning.
I don't think so, the scales are not always exact, there are a few grams more or less, so the word "approx" just suggest to use round numbers. That is what I think, and that is why also some body masses in popular books are just rounded, that is what Dr Karanth explained to me, at least.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Ashutosh - 10-06-2022
To be fair to Waghdoh, that chest circumference is totally underestimated. What is absolutely mind blowing is the condition of his body at the time of his death aged 19! All his canines were intact and he was still quite bulky. By age 13-15, you see a significant drop in body mass of even the biggest males out there.
Also, there is a tendency amongst humans to lose height and width as you age, so is that the case amongst tigers as well? Considering he lived well past most of his species, that could skew some of these measurements.
@Pckts, Waghdoh’s chest girth still ranks him 5th on that chart you posted. Considering his age, that is remarkable.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - GuateGojira - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:12 PM)Pckts Wrote: Waghdoh fits really well in the 230kg range when compared to these males. He was really bulky in his prime which could add some mass but obviously the claims of him being the largest Tiger in India were far fetched. Regardless he was a big male, no doubt.
That is the difference between real measurements and people estimations. That is why I don't believe is claims of "giant cats", unless the animal is actually measured.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Roflcopters - 10-06-2022
no doubt Wagdoh was one of the biggest male from MH side, in his prime days. his bulk was hard to beat. i’ll have to admit, i’m surprised by his TL 304cm. i hardly ever imagine C Indian tigers to be that long. Dalla from Khata corridor and another huge male from Khata corridor were 307cm and 309cm in TL so in theory, Wagdoh was much bigger dimensionally than i previously thought. Thanks for the info @"Khan85"
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - GuateGojira - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:22 PM)Ashutosh Wrote: To be fair to Waghdoh, that chest circumference is totally underestimated. What is absolutely mind blowing is the condition of his body at the time of his death aged 19! All his canines were intact and he was still quite bulky. By age 13-15, you see a significant drop in body mass of even the biggest males out there.
Also, there is a tendency amongst humans to lose height and width as you age, so is that the case amongst tigers as well? Considering he lived well past most of his species, that could skew some of these measurements.
@Pckts, Waghdoh’s chest girth still ranks him 5th on that chart you posted. Considering his age, that is remarkable.
I am agree with this. This tiger was already old, and like all mammals they loose condition with age, that is a fact. Is not the same a young strong animal than a very old one (13-15 for a wild tiger is quite remarkable).
These measurements suggest that Waghdoh was bigger when young, but as we can quote only the available data, we must put in the remarks that this specimen was old and post-prime when measured and weighed.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:22 PM)Ashutosh Wrote: To be fair to Waghdoh, that chest circumference is totally underestimated. What is absolutely mind blowing is the condition of his body at the time of his death aged 19! All his canines were intact and he was still quite bulky. By age 13-15, you see a significant drop in body mass of even the biggest males out there.
Also, there is a tendency amongst humans to lose height and width as you age, so is that the case amongst tigers as well? Considering he lived well past most of his species, that could skew some of these measurements.
@Pckts, Waghdoh’s chest girth still ranks him 5th on that chart you posted. Considering his age, that is remarkable.
Chest girth isn't going to be as affected as you might think, obviously some but not much. And the ones who have larger chest girths than him were still sub 230kg.
But you can see the measurements that aren't effected by age like body length and shoulder height and you can see that Waghdoh fits in very well with the 230kg Tigers I posted.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:30 PM)Roflcopters Wrote: no doubt Wagdoh was one of the biggest male from MH side, in his prime days. his bulk was hard to beat. i’ll have to admit, i’m surprised by his TL 304cm. i hardly ever imagine C Indian tigers to be that long. Dalla from Khata corridor and another huge male from Khata corridor were 307cm and 309cm in TL so in theory, Wagdoh was much bigger dimensionally than i previously thought. Thanks for the info @"Khan85"
That's not very long, he's actually stunted by his shorter tail. Anything over 200cm HBL is a good sized Tiger, but nothing extraordinary.
So far the longest and largest Tigers reliably measured have come from C. India so by all accounts it's no surprise they should produce large specimens.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:21 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:(10-06-2022, 09:55 PM)Pckts Wrote: Again the verbiage of "approx" is concerning.
I don't think so, the scales are not always exact, there are a few grams more or less, so the word "approx" just suggest to use round numbers. That is what I think, and that is why also some body masses in popular books are just rounded, that is what Dr Karanth explained to me, at least.
Possibly but the measurements don't coincide with a 270kg male, especially one so old and apparently the body wasn't in good scientific condition for weighing when captured so that also gives me pause.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - GuateGojira - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:44 PM)Pckts Wrote: Possibly but the measurements don't coincide with a 270kg male, especially one so old and apparently the body wasn't in good scientific condition for weighing when captured so that also gives me pause.
But, is 270 or 240? Honestly, the letter is hard to understand. Maybe Khan85 could clarify.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:46 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:(10-06-2022, 10:44 PM)Pckts Wrote: Possibly but the measurements don't coincide with a 270kg male, especially one so old and apparently the body wasn't in good scientific condition for weighing when captured so that also gives me pause.
But, is 270 or 240? Honestly, the letter is hard to understand. Maybe Khan85 could clarify.
Yeah, good point. 240kg with some stomach content would be more reasonable for sure. I'm still skeptical but will wait for clarification.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Ashutosh - 10-06-2022
@Pckts, Waghdoh lived till 19. In human terms, that is close to 100 years! A person that old has lost considerable amount of height and width. In fact, after age 70 in humans, that rate of loss accelerates by upto a factor of 3.
I don’t know how specifically big cats age and at what rate do their height and width shrink (of course varies upon individuals), but surely there is some loss there too. And, in case of Waghdoh that loss would be more pronounced considering how long he lived.
And, compare the chest girth of Prime Waghdoh to the one near the end, the difference is quite stark. He was renowned for his thickness. That’s where the baseless claims about him being the biggest tiger came from. Just for reference sake, look at his son Shiva, who himself at 12 years old is really thick. Shiva looks a bit longer and taller than his father, but, Waghdoh in his prime was definitely heftier of the two.
@GuateGojira, he was 19 years old when he died not 13-15. He was one of the oldest surviving tigers that we knew about and unlike Machli, he wasn’t propped up artificially with live bait.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Charger01 - 10-06-2022
(10-06-2022, 10:46 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:(10-06-2022, 10:44 PM)Pckts Wrote: Possibly but the measurements don't coincide with a 270kg male, especially one so old and apparently the body wasn't in good scientific condition for weighing when captured so that also gives me pause.
But, is 270 or 240? Honestly, the letter is hard to understand. Maybe Khan85 could clarify.
270
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-07-2022
(10-06-2022, 11:20 PM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Pckts, Waghdoh lived till 19. In human terms, that is close to 100 years! A person that old has lost considerable amount of height and width. In fact, after age 70 in humans, that rate of loss accelerates by upto a factor of 3.
I don’t know how specifically big cats age and at what rate do their height and width shrink (of course varies upon individuals), but surely there is some loss there too. And, in case of Waghdoh that loss would be more pronounced considering how long he lived.
And, compare the chest girth of Prime Waghdoh to the one near the end, the difference is quite stark. He was renowned for his thickness. That’s where the baseless claims about him being the biggest tiger came from. Just for reference sake, look at his son Shiva, who himself at 12 years old is really thick. Shiva looks a bit longer and taller than his father, but, Waghdoh in his prime was definitely heftier of the two.
@GuateGojira, he was 19 years old when he died not 13-15. He was one of the oldest surviving tigers that we knew about and unlike Machli, he wasn’t propped up artificially with live bait.
It’s not apples to apples. A cat and a human are very different and on top of that Wagdoh is a wild animal, he was still in good enough condition to hunt as well as having recently fed. Humans are kept alive by
By modern medicine which is why our lifespan directly coincides with modern medical improvements. Without these advances a humans lifespan would go back to what it was which is why their lifespans are shorter in poorer countries even today.
When a human “shrinks” their spine curves due to their muscles no longer able to accommodate their bipedal nature. Tigers do not deteriorate in the same way nor does any 4 legged creature.
Lastly no single human ages the same, like with big cats it’s genetics. Some 60 year old men still look healthy and robust while others look frail and weak. Age obviously plays a role, but how much of a roll is unknown especially on an individual level.
Next is understanding how measurements are taken. Chest girth is taken behind the forearm so it has more to do with the rib cage and the skeletal muscle/fat that attach to it which is far less pronounced than what you see in the limbs. There’s no doubt his limbs and neck would certainly suffer more significant girth loss in comparison. Length and height will not suffer the same, infact generally speaking a big cat is at its longest and tallest around the age of 8-10 which is much closer to death than say a 4/5 year old cat which is also considered to be an adult.
So when comparing to the cats I’ve posted which have no ages represented, it’s fairly reasonable to put him in their same category. Even if you were to add a few cms of girth or length, he’d still fit in with them and certainly not be in Branders Tigers range. But Wagdoh was a heavy Tiger, more bulky/fatter than most so it’s very possible he holds more weight than another Tiger of similar proportions but in terms of frame he’s just another good sized Tiger. Not to mention if he was measured over the curves than it’d really throw a wrench in the weight.
And finally, throwing all speculation aside and going off the actual measurements and body condition listed, there really is no way that’s a 270kg cat.
RE: Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers - Pckts - 10-07-2022
(10-07-2022, 12:44 AM)abhisingh7 Wrote:(10-06-2022, 09:55 PM)Pckts Wrote:(10-06-2022, 09:33 PM)Khan85 Wrote: Waghdoh's PM report
It was confirmed that he was indeed weighed using a scale and there was only some undigested food in him, not gorged.
Who confirmed that if you don't mind?
Again the verbiage of "approx" is concerning.
Also can you find out the protocol used?
His measurements are fairly normal for a large male except for a shorter shoulder height. He's got good length but short shoulder and a decent chest, so overall he's definitely a good sized male which we all knew but protocol will make a big difference.
If we were to compare him to Branders and assuming Wagdoh was measured in a straight line, Waghdoh would be shorter in length and shoulder and smaller at the chest. So with all things equal, it's safe to assume Wagdoh was probably a 225-250kg Male when empty.
in his prime wagdoh should be 250kg or even 270 i would belive , but at old age he looked a lot shurnked , he lost huge amout of bulk, he was visibly a lot smaller in last 2-3 years of his life , could be 210kg too at the time of death or 240kg with content.
I’d agree with that, I’d say closer to the 250kg range though.
Also what needs to be taken into account is the fact that these dead cats are bloated in the early stages which is noted on the report. That also could exaggerate their girth which deserves to be mentioned as well.