The Cave Lion (Panthera spelaea and Panthera fossilis)

[Stripedlion2]

(07-30-2020, 02:21 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:

(07-30-2020, 01:21 AM)Stripedlion2 Wrote: So cave lions are a distinct species but are closest related to the lion today.

Maybe the difference is similar to today's mainland clouded leopard/sunda clouded leopard, chimpanzee/bonobo, eastern/western gorilla.

(08-25-2020, 08:33 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:

(08-25-2020, 07:42 AM)Stripedlion2 Wrote: Yea I’ll read about them too I didn’t think cougars in Central America could reach large sizes I thought only Canadian and American cougars could reach huge sizes .

Central America pumas are small, probably the smaller ones of the species. In fact, when the jaguar is present, the puma is smaller, so in Central America where are the smaller jaguars, certainly here are also the smaller pumas, however as far I know, there are no weights from pumas in this region.

Yea jaguars are the ultimate apex predators in central and South America . Also here’s another good question wouldn’t the african lioness genes limit the growth of the cave lion African lions size ? They limit African lions size and tiligers and tigons are smaller than ligers. So how would they play out i don’t know one the scientists said they would try to make the hybrid be as much like cave lions as possible maybe that counts for size too. Reply

[BorneanTiger]

The Löwenmensch figurine found in Germany has been dated to the Upper Paleolithic during the Pleistocene, about 35,000 – 40,000 years ago, credit: Thilo Parg (15th of November, 2013)
   

Upper Pleistocene Eurasian cave lions and bison depicted in the Chauvet Cave, France, anywhere from 37,000 – 28,000 years ago, credit: Claude Valette (4th of March, 2016)
    Reply

[Stripedlion2]

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply

[Stripedlion2]

That picture is a depiction of blue babe and his killers that I found on Facebook. It’s very interesting. Reply

[epaiva]

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply

[tigerluver]

A full report on two frozen cave lion cubs is out:

The Preliminary Analysis of Cave Lion Cubs Panthera spelaea (Goldfuss, 1810) from the Permafrost of Siberia

Most interesting part I found was the assertion of the pelage change with age.:
"The general tone of the colour of the fur coat of Sparta is greyish to light brown, whereas, in Boris, the fur is generally lighter, greyish yellowish. It is, therefore, possible that light colouration prevailed with age in cave lions and was adaptive for northern snow-covered landscapes."

*This image is copyright of its original author

The color in figure B is what they assert may be the adult pelage. Interestingly, no spots on the cubs as in modern lines. Sparta (figure e) also has what is almost a stripe down its back.

Perhaps BBC had the color right after.:

Reply

[BorneanTiger]

(08-08-2021, 10:15 AM)tigerluver Wrote: A full report on two frozen cave lion cubs is out:

The Preliminary Analysis of Cave Lion Cubs Panthera spelaea (Goldfuss, 1810) from the Permafrost of Siberia

Most interesting part I found was the assertion of the pelage change with age.:
"The general tone of the colour of the fur coat of Sparta is greyish to light brown, whereas, in Boris, the fur is generally lighter, greyish yellowish. It is, therefore, possible that light colouration prevailed with age in cave lions and was adaptive for northern snow-covered landscapes."

*This image is copyright of its original author

The color in figure B is what they assert may be the adult pelage. Interestingly, no spots on the cubs as in modern lines. Sparta (figure e) also has what is almost a stripe down its back.

Perhaps BBC had the color right after.:

There is more information, as mentioned in newspapers:

Perfectly preserved, frozen cave lions found in Siberia with whiskers still intact: https://english.alarabiya.net/variety/20...ill-intact, https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-...0bHD_uy3fw

Tala Michel Issa, Al Arabiya English, published: 10 August, 2021: 06:26 PM GST, updated: 10 August, 2021: 06:33 PM GST

Tim Fitzsimons, reporter for NBC News; August 6, 2021, 9:53 PM +04 / Updated August 7, 2021, 12:06 AM +04

Frozen cave lion cub, nicknamed Sparta, found in the Siberian arctic. Image from Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CpgSthlm/status/1422869720341045250
   

A team of international scientists say they have identified a pair of extinct Ice Age lions that are among the best preserved specimens ever found. Of these, a perfectly preserved and frozen 28,000-year-old cave lion cub was found deep in the Siberian arctic, making it one of the world’s best-preserved ice age animals, an expert has said. The scientists believe that the cave lion cubs, dubbed Boris and Sparta, each briefly roamed the steppe of what is now eastern Russia thousands of years ago.

The female lion cub’s fur, teeth and skin are all intact, the CNN reported on Thursday.

Cave lions, or Panthera spelæa, once lived across much of Eurasia before going extinct around 10,000 years ago. These Ice Age big cats, though closely related, were larger than their African lion relatives that still exist today.

Sparta, an Ice Age cave lion believed to be 28,000 years old. Courtesy / Love Dal?n
   

The lion, nicknamed Sparta, was one of two baby cave lions found in the area. Both cave lions, extinct felines that used to roam mainly across the Northern Hemisphere, were found in 2017 and 2018 by mammoth tusk hunters in Russia’s Far East on the banks of the Semyuelyakh River.

The two cave lion cubs are believed to have been about a month or two old when they died — already the size of a full-grown house cat — but carbon dating showed that they were mummified, likely in mud, at roughly the same location thousands of years apart. The cubs were found around 15 meters apart so they were thought to be siblings, but a new study has found that the age difference between the two amounted to some 15,000 years. The second cub, nicknamed Boris, is known to be older and according to carbon dating, he was found to be around 43,448 years old.

Love Dalén measuring Sparta. Courtesy / Jacqueline Gill
   

In an email to NBC News, professor of evolutionary genetics at the Center for Palaeogenetics in Stockholm, Sweden and author of a new study on the cubs, Love Dalén said that as far as he knows "there have been four such cubs found ever."

“Sparta is probably the best-preserved Ice Age animal ever found, and is more or less undamaged apart from the fur being a bit ruffled. She even had the whiskers preserved. Boris is a bit more damaged, but still pretty good,” Dalén told the CNN, and to people on Twitter.

They were around one to two months old before they perished, the study, published in Quaternary, found: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-550X/4/3/24/htm

Scans conducted on the animal showed skull and skeleton damage as well as dislocation of the ribs. However, how the cubs died remains to be unknown. “Given their preservation, they must have been buried very quickly. So maybe they died in a mudslide, or fell into a crack in the permafrost. Permafrost forms large cracks due to seasonal thawing and freezing,” Dalén said.

According to the research, the general tone of the cubs’ fur coat was similar to that of the African lion cub, however both lions exhibited some differences in their coat color. Boris had “greyish yellowish” fur while Sparta’s fur was “greyish to light brown.” “It is, therefore, possible that light coloration prevailed with age in cave lions and was adaptive for northern snow-covered landscapes,” the study revealed.

Cave lions and early humans coexisted.

The Chauvet cave in France, whose discovery in 1994 upended the timeline of human artistic achievement, features one wall covered with images of cave lions, with different color patterns than African lions today. The researchers note that the French cave contains "half of all cave lions Palaeolithic paintings known to date."

Cave lions are believed to have had less pronounced manes, and the difference in colour patterns between the juveniles and adults gave the researchers insight into how the animal's fur pattern might have changed from youth to adulthood.

A replica of the Chauvet Cave Lion Panel, in Vallon Pont d'Arc, France, on April 16, 2015. BONY / Sipa via AP file
   

Selected paintings of adult cave lions from Chauvet cave, showing interesting colouration on their head fur. Pictures: P. Fosse, numbers labelled as in Clottes and Azéma. Credit: Clottes, J.; Azéma, M. Les félins de la grotte Chauvet; Seuil Publications: Paris, France, 2005; pp. 1–125: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27923872?fb...VZRmYpbfRg
   

"Prehistoric people either only depicted female cave lions, or the cave lion males lacked mane," Dalén said in the email. "This is something we still don’t know. I guess we need to find a frozen adult male cave lion to figure that out." "It is still unknown exactly how cave lions adapted to life in the harsh conditions of the high latitudes with their rapid season periodicity, strong winds, and cold and long winters with associated continuous nights," researchers wrote.

The paper says there are some clues, finding that the cubs' fur was similar but not identical to that of the African lion currently in existence. "Cave lion fur also has a long thick fur undercoat consisting of strombuliform æriferous fur hair. It covers the body of a cave lion cub evenly and most likely helped cave lion cubs adapt to the cold climate."

Researchers couldn't say how they died for sure, since many cubs die young from a variety of threats, but found that "death by predation of the cave lion cubs seems unlikely."

The scientists conclude that the large number of well-preserved cave lion cubs found in this region of Russia "suggests that this area during the Karginian interstadial (when the climate was becoming relatively warm and tree vegetation was spreading) was a favourable breeding site for cave lions. It also seems probable that this site, during this time period, had some characteristics that made it more likely to rapidly freeze and preserve animals. The site was attractive to cave lions for making dens, but it was probably also susceptible to them collapsing."

The locations of the cave lion cubs' finds: on the Uyandina River (indicated by a red triangle) and on the Semyuelyakh River (indicated by a red asterisk): https://www.mdpi.com/2571-550X/4/3/24/ht...BPg6mpZhes
   

Frozen mummy of the cave lion cub named "Uyan", Uyandina River, Yakutia: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-550X/4/3/24/ht...BPg6mpZhes
    Reply

[jrocks]

(11-06-2018, 04:22 AM)tigerluver Wrote:

(11-04-2018, 12:00 PM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:

(11-04-2018, 11:21 AM)tigerluver Wrote:

(11-04-2018, 10:44 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:

(11-04-2018, 12:25 AM)tigerluver Wrote: @Wolverine , I have not read of the released measurements for those fossils since their photos showed up years ago. However, I am certain larger P. fossilis are already on record. Let's use an ideal 200 kg lion as the isometric comparison.

The formula is:

Mass (fossil) = (Measurement of fossil)/(Measurement of extant specimen)^3 * Mass of the extant specimen.

Firstly, the 484.7 mm Chateau skull (Marciszak et al. 2014). A 200 kg modern lion could have a skull about 380 mm long. Applying these numbers to the aforementioned formula results in a mass of 415 kg.

Next, the 465 mm ulna (Reichenau 1908). A 200 kg lion could have an ulna about 385 mm long. Calculate... this P. fossilis weighed 352 kg.

Finally, the giant 192 mm MTIII (Marciszak et al. 2014). A 200 kg lion could have an MTIII of 145 mm. Calculate... a whopping 464 kg. Perhaps this is somewhat of an overestimate if P. fossilis was even longer limb-wise than the modern lion, but we have no skeletons to support this assumption other than the fact that its descendant, P. atrox, was indeed proportionally longer limb-wise. Moreover, MTIIIs vary a lot between individuals in relation to body size/mass. Nonetheless, the specimen was likely no less than 400 kg.

Both the MTIII and ulna can be confounded by an increased cursoriality in P. fossilis but the former much more so. The elongated skull of P. fossilis can also confound the isometric comparison to a degree.

From the scant fossil record, it is quite apparent P. fossilis consistently produced what would be giants by modern standards. For instance, many of the fragmented mandibles were likely from skulls that exceeded 400 mm. By probability and comparison of samples, P. fossilis was likely larger than P. atrox as well. The excessively large long bones of P. fossilis also hint that 130-140 cm at the shoulder would be comfortably attained by some of the largest specimens.

@epaiva I will post some photos soon, sorry about the wait.

Was the 192 mm MTIII specimen larger than the Chateau skull?

If we use the respective body parts of a 200 kg lion as the samples, it does appear so.

Maybe the 192 mm MTIII specimen could acquire a skull close to 500 mm which is the absolute maximum for any Panthera specimen?

The MTIII is a difficult one. One issue is that when calculating the range of weights produced by isometry, the range I found was as low as 400 kg to as high a over 500 kg. In other words, the bone is not that well correlated to body size, but is nonetheless from a top 10 Panthera specimen. The second issue is that if P. fossilis is more cursorial, the MTIII would be proportionately elongated and isometrically comparing the bone to that of an extant lion will heavily overestimate the weight. Thus extrapolating other body parts is filled with uncertainty. A skull length range of 450-500 mm would not be illogical in my opinion.

The issue can be applied to the skull. P. spelaea had a big skull for its bones, bigger than the extant lion. For instance, the specimen is Sabol (2018) has a femur to skull ratio of 0.99, which is distinctly less than extant lion generally as the number in P. leo is over 1.00. That means while applying the 484.7 mm skull to P. leo ratios, we'd think the femur would be 500 mm. Likely in reality the femur of the specimen was 470-480 mm, which is not that much bigger than the largest P. spelaea (470 mm femur from Germany mentioned by Deidrich). Of course still absurdly gigantic, but not what P. leo comparisons would lead one to believe. Another confounding issue is that long snouts usually means proportionately longer skulls for a body mass/size. We know that P. fossilis did have a longer snout that P. spelaea, likely making the long bone to skull ratio somewhat lesser in P. fossilis as compared to P. spelaea, further decreasing long bone length extrapolations by a bit. It is for this reason I feel the 465 mm has been underestimated via isometry or the 484.7 mm skull at least overestimated. Unless P. fossilis is exceptionally cursorial, a 465 mm ulna should give a femur of around 480 mm, matching the 484.7 mm skull. Now one can see why mass estimations vary so much, there are too many confounding variables. These two specimens were likely body size-wise just about the same as the 480 mm Ngandong femur for these reasons. Mass is a whole different rabbit hole in its own as the tiger and lion lineages hold mass differently. I have lately avoided addressing the complex topic and just give pure isometry estimates but hopefully this makes sense.

As a whole, the closer the species temporally to an extant species, the more accurate the single bone estimates and vice versa.

As for the rank of the cursoriality for the Pleistocene pantherine cats, it could be something like that?

Panthera fossilis > Panthera atrox > Panthera spelaea intermedia > Panthera spelaea spelaea > Panthera tigris (Pleistocene)

I still need to read up on the proposed P. s. intermedia but looking through old notes I tried comparing P. fossilis and P. spelaea cursoriality by comparing the MTIII to femur ratio. The data used is from Marciszak et al. (2014) for P. fossilis and P. spelaea I took from a few other places too.

As a disclosure, both the small sample size and fact that we do not have a multi-bone specimen of P. fossilis may (and probably do) affect the accuracy of the conclusions. 

I first averaged the lengths of the femurs (n=4) and MTIII (n=11) of P. fossilis. The same was done for P. spelaea (femur: n=12, MTIII: n=44). Now it is not possible to do a t-test for ratios as again, the data is not paired by individual but rather just a population average. The next best thing I could think of would be to bootstrap in a way (certainly not real bootstrapping as the data does not allow) and recombine the femur to MTIII ratio to produce multiple numbers. To do so, I used the confidence intervals of the averages and considered them their own unique data point. So for P. fossilis, we had the following data:

Avg. femur length: 382 mm
     - Low 95% CI: 339 mm
     - High 95% CI: 424 mm

Avg. MTIII length: 156 mm
     - Low 95% CI: 145 mm
     - High 95% CI: 166 mm

For P. spelaea:
Avg. femur length: 407 mm
     - Low 95% CI: 391 mm
     - High 95% CI: 422 mm

Avg. MTIII length: 141 mm
     - Low 95% CI: 139 mm
     - High 95% CI: 143 mm


Then the ratios were populated as follows: 
Low 95% CI MTIII/Low 95% CI Femur
High 95% CI MTIII/High 95% CI Femur
Avg. MTIII/Avg. Femur
Low 95% CI MTIII/High 95% CI Femur
High 95% CI MTIII/Low 95% CI Femur
Avg. 95% CI MTIII/Low 95% CI Femur
Avg. 95% CI MTIII/High 95% CI Femur
Etc.

So essentially a whole lot of permutations (9).

The range for P. fossilis was 0.37-0.47 (Avg. 0.41) . It was 0.33-0.37 for P. spelaea (Avg. 0.35). A t-test shows significant difference but there has already been too many theoretical calculations for me to put too much value in the t-test.

This analysis means P. fossilis had a longer MTIII, meaning it was more cursorial. This could very tentatively be supported by the fact that the distal long bones of P. fossilis are generally larger than those of P. spelaea, but the proximal long bones are not as consistently larger.


Far from conclusive as I'd rather have actual paired data but it's better than nothing.

On that note, I'll again stress the risk of extrapolating one bone length from another with the lack of data on the extinct species. By the ratios described above, the 192 mm MTIII would have a femur measuring c. 470 mm. This would not produce a 500 mm skull in all likelihood but rather a skull equal to or slightly smaller than the Chateau giant. The previous mass estimations I provided were under the assumption that P. fossilis was a P. leo clone but as people seem to be interested I've detailed all the caveats.

Again I will stress the aforementioned is all very theoretical, we have 4 P. fossilis femurs only. Nonetheless, food for thought.

hi @tigerluver, are the 156, 145, and 166 numbers for fossilis and the 141, 139, and 143 numbers for spelaea the least circumference values, I was just wondering what those numbers meant Reply

[Sully]

Lions and brown bears colonized North America in multiple synchronous waves of dispersal across the Bering Land Bridge

Abstract

The Bering Land Bridge connecting North America and Eurasia was periodically exposed and inundated by oscillating sea levels during the Pleistocene glacial cycles. This land connection allowed the intermittent dispersal of animals, including humans, between Western Beringia (far northeast Asia) and Eastern Beringia (northwest North America), changing the faunal community composition of both continents. The Pleistocene glacial cycles also had profound impacts on temperature, precipitation and vegetation, impacting faunal community structure and demography. While these palaeoenvironmental impacts have been studied in many large herbivores from Beringia (e.g., bison, mammoths, horses), the Pleistocene population dynamics of the diverse guild of carnivorans present in the region are less well understood, due to their lower abundances. In this study, we analyse mitochondrial genome data from ancient brown bears (Ursus arctos; n = 103) and lions (Panthera spp.; n = 39), two megafaunal carnivorans that dispersed into North America during the Pleistocene. Our results reveal striking synchronicity in the population dynamics of Beringian lions and brown bears, with multiple waves of dispersal across the Bering Land Bridge coinciding with glacial periods of low sea levels, as well as synchronous local extinctions in Eastern Beringia during Marine Isotope Stage 3. The evolutionary histories of these two taxa underline the crucial biogeographical role of the Bering Land Bridge in the distribution, turnover and maintenance of megafaunal populations in North America. Reply

[Sully]

The Pleistocene lion Panthera spelaea (Goldfuss, 1810) from Poland – A review

Abstract

Panthera spelaea was recorded in Poland from 18 open-air and 42 cave sites dated in the range 750–28 ka. Most of these records are located in southern Poland (Silesia) and neighbouring areas. Among them, the find of Panthera spelaea in Kozi Grzbiet mentioned here for the first time is one of the oldest European records of the species. Most of the obtained AMS dates are concentrated on the second half of MIS 3 and showed that the Pleistocene lion disappeared more or less synchronously across Poland. The findings of its remains from open-air sites are mostly accidental discoveries during field works, while those in caves are mostly connected with archaeological research and the exploitation of cave sediments for producing fertilizers.
Aside of a few juvenile bones and milk teeth, the remains of adult individuals, mostly males, predominate in the studied sample. Their behavior to hunting cave bear during the times, when the other, more typical food sources were scarce, tendention to hunt very big preys and went into the conflicts with other carnivores than females do, resulted in higher injuries and mortalities. Within the species, three chronosubspecies were recognized, with P. s. fossilis recorded from 7 sites, dated between 750 and 240 ka and P. s. intermedia only partially recognized in Wierzchowska Górna Cave. The most numerous are the remains of P. s. spelaea which were found in 48 localities dated between 150 and 28 ka. With the exception of four caves, the Polish finds of P. spelaea are generally less abundant at sites where they occur. Older P. s. fossilis, dated on MIS 19–12, was a large form with robust stature and broad cheek teeth. Younger P. s. fossilis dated on MIS 11–9 was represented by a large and massive specimens, but with more advanced morphological dental features. Polish individuals of P. s. spelaea were slightly smaller and less massive than P. s. fossilis, with narrower cheek teeth. Since MIS 3, a dwarf and gracile specimens appeared, which is correlated with the genetic turnover ca. 48–45 ka.
The Pleistocene lion was one of the earliest disappeared large carnivores predated only by a cave hyena. There are no direct evidences of P. spelaea encounters with humans. The extinction of P. spelaea is broadly correlated with the general collapse of the “mammoth steppe” ecosystem and was resulted of multiple reasons like climatic changes, re-building of herbivore guilds, competition and human pressure. Wolf and, to a lesser extent, bears were the main competitors for the Pleistocene lion in Poland. Reply

[Matias]

@Sully 

I would like to read, but the link takes you to the University of Bristol - needing login and password to access. Reply

[Sully]

(12-17-2021, 02:18 AM)Matias Wrote: @Sully 

I would like to read, but the link takes you to the University of Bristol - needing login and password to access.

Yes sorry about that, my mistake. Here is the paper as accessed through sci-hub: Sci-Hub | The Pleistocene lion Panthera spelaea (Goldfuss, 1810) from Poland – A review | 10.1016/j.quaint.2020.12.018 (hkvisa.net) Reply

[Spalea]

Cave lion, drawed and retouched...

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply

[acutidens150]

Panthera spelaea cave paintings show that, unlike the modern lion species, there was no mane or likely very small manes on the males. They also had tail tufts, just like Panthera leo. Panthera spelaea had smaller ears, I also noticed when someone mentioned it. Faint, primitive stripes are also barely visible on the species. I'm not sure of Panthera fossilis. As far as I know, Panthera fossilis is the largest lion species, larger than even Panthera atrox. Reply

[acutidens150]

I believe Panthera fossilis and Panthera spelaea are different enough to be classified as different species. Reply