There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
"Yes I am told T3 recently gained a weight around 240Kg. Even Panna 111 also gained the same weight (around). I dont have the rest of the comparative details." - Personal comm. with Panna field director Sreenivasa Murthy.
(01-24-2022, 01:26 PM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Rage2277, P212 was the 218 kg tiger (if my recollection is any good).
218 kg tiger wasn´t ID-ed.
In the new study, only subadult weights of P212 are listed, but Dr. Roamin told he went up to 205 kg. Don´t know which capture that was but he definitely didn´t reach his prime before his death. Tiger P212 was captured 8 times in total
(01-24-2022, 01:26 PM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Rage2277, P212 was the 218 kg tiger (if my recollection is any good).
218 kg tiger wasn´t ID-ed.
In the new study, only subadult weights of P212 are listed, but Dr. Roamin told he went up to 205 kg. Don´t know which capture that was but he definitely didn´t reach his prime before his death. Tiger P212 was captured 8 times in total
"Thanks for giving some importance to our dear p212.
Our team of researchers from Wildlife Institute of India found out that He is blend of old panna genes and kanha.thats why he was so important.!
Only 3 individuals(1st liter of reintroduced female T2) i:e; 2males and a female caring old panna genes,not the T3's.
As panna genes were believed to be extinct,this news bought a huge cheer among us!
But P212 Rarely shown 'individual fit for wild' characteristics after he injured in territorial fight at panna(begining of 2013).and he had already left the park in 2012(same time we found about old panna connection of his). So all the hard work we did was to keep the old panna gene revival in the landscape. That we achieved in the end just before the heroic end of P212's life as individual." https://i.imgur.com/4Ap6Kpq.jpg
Him during a capture
"Vijayarajan Muthu
Meet P212, the male tiger from Panna who was presumably unheard of in Kanha. Please do take a moment to read this.
He was born in 2010 to the Indri Tigress who was trans-located to Panna in 2009 & believed to have been sired by T-3, the Male brought in from Pench. As a strapping young radio-collared lad, P 212 left the park in 2014 and headed towards Bandhavgarh, traversing through human settlements in a journey which perhaps created history by retracing a lost corridor between the two parks. The Panna authorities monitored him closely during this period and needless to mention, the radio-collar turned out to be of immense value.
Within a month of his departure from Panna, a decision was taken to shift P212 to the lesser known Sanjay Dubri Tiger Reserve. No sooner did he arrive at SDTR, P212 courted with two resident females and sired litters of 4 and 5 cubs respectively by late 2014. All was hunky dory until another Male (SD005) crossed his path. As is the norm, the rival Male began wandering into P212’s territory which resulted in brutal fights for supremacy. After a series of battles, P212 was left badly injured & had lost all his canines. But the true fighter that he was, the SDTR authorities decided not to tranquilize him for medical aid as he seemed to recover naturally, albeit with a limp.
However, in a remarkable turn of events during the summers of 2015, SD005 male appeared to have plotted a move to eliminate the cubs sired by P212 and the females ran for cover. It was believed that P212 ushered the female & cubs to safety in a ravine and went back to fight it out with the intruder, a broken leg & loss of canines didn’t seem to deter him. At the end of the final brutal battle which lasted a few days, P212 eventually succumbed to injuries and died a heroic death. While most (injured) males flee the scene during such hostile takeover bids, P212 chose to stay put and go down fighting. He may have lost his life but ended up saving his offspring and thereby leaving a huge legacy behind.
He was given a grand funeral and the forest personnel remember him fondly as a legend of SDTR. Although not much is known of the rival male who must have wandered off to other parts of the park which had 2 other resident females, the mates of P212 and his 9 cubs are believed to be still ruling SDTR.
I’ve shared the true story of P212 (as per info obtained from the authorities & sources of SDTR) at our forum since he was a direct descendant of our very own Indri / Pattewala / Limping Male / Heartshape female. Kanha’s genes are not only alive & kicking in Panna but also in Sanjay Dubri Tiger Reserve now. Info as well as photos courtesy : SDTR."
"Raman Kalika Srivastava Good account Sri Vijayarajan Muthu and Anupam Sirohiji
However, there are a couple of corrections, which I would like to bring to your notice. They were posted way back in August 2015 along with the the photographs that you have reposted
P212 was killed by sd005 who is original inhabitant of sdtr and was under park monitoring since past year and a half. It fought way back in April 2014 just about a fortnight after p 212 was introduced. P212 was treated by a team of doctors for more than a week to help it heal its wounds. It was twice tranquillised in jul 2014 and in 2015. No radio collar could be put on it due to deep neck wound it had sustained, in fact it was decollared and monitored for next nine months without radio collars. Wii team radio collared it in May 2015, detailed account is there in the Facebook page of sdtr.
Prior to 2013, there was no evidence of resident tigers, they were believed to be using sdtr as a stepping stone. There has been no case of poaching or poisoning of any individual since then. For the first time we are witnessing the presence of resident tigers with regular litters surviving under park monitoring.
Thanks and regards"
The following 1 user Likes Pckts's post:1 user Likes Pckts's post • Ashutosh
01-25-2022, 03:04 AM( This post was last modified: 01-25-2022, 03:04 AM by Pckts )
(01-25-2022, 02:26 AM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Pckts, great find. Limping male of Kanha was Munna’s father.
I don't think the old Limping Male was his father, I thought it was the Old Mukki male and Minkur Female.
Munna and His brother Pattewala
After the Mukki male's death in 2004, the Limping Male then took over and Minkur moved her cubs to the southern part of Mukki.
You also had Gaursingh floating around at that time.
I'm not sure how current this info is but this is what was said back in the day.
Sharad would certainly know better than me so I assume he's correct, it just wasn't the information going around back in the day.
But if the timeline is correct than the Limping male wasn't quite on the scene just yet.
01-25-2022, 03:33 AM( This post was last modified: 01-25-2022, 03:40 AM by Rage2277 )
patttewala is younger than munna with diff parents i had pics of pattewala and his siblings munna wasn't among them and i believe chain male was munna's father if i recall..munna also had the chain stripe pattern on his flanks i can't find pics of chain male never saved them @Pckts @Ashutosh
(01-25-2022, 03:33 AM)Rage2277 Wrote: patttewala is younger than munna with diff parents i had pics of pattewala and his siblings munna wasn't among them and i believe chain male was munna's father if i recall..munna also had the chain stripe pattern on his flanks i can't find pics of chain male never saved them @Pckts @Ashutosh
I always read that they were from the same litter, I guess not.
It's so hard to know exactly which male is which's father, especially in areas with so many males roaming around.
The following 1 user Likes Pckts's post:1 user Likes Pckts's post • Rage2277
01-25-2022, 03:58 AM( This post was last modified: 01-25-2022, 04:02 AM by GuateGojira )
(01-23-2022, 04:43 AM)Khan85 Wrote: Here you can find very detailed measurements on 38 bengal tigers (11 males + 19 females) along with age - growth curve chart, collared in Panna and some other National Parks.
Remarks about the biggest male I think that P-111 is the biggest male tiger in the study.
- Captured 5 times in total
Capture 3
- Age = 5yr 6 mn - Weight = 226.7 kg - Head Body length = 184 cm - Total length = 283 cm - Shoulder height = 127 cm - Neck girth = 70 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Capture 4
- Age = 8yr 10 mn - Weight = N/A - Head Body length = 211 cm - Total length = 311 cm - Shoulder height = 120 cm - Neck girth = 76 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Measurements were taken in straight line, I believe (first, the length of head and then the length of body). In capture 3, his head-body length was 184 cm and total length was 283 cm at the age of 5yr 6mn. On his 4th capture, his head-body length increased to 211 cm and total length increased to 311 cm.
Since the strongest correlation of weight is with HBL/TL, he could have been heavier than 226.7 kg on his 4th capture.
I was checking the information on the tables and also checking the comments from other posters about it. So, this is my first impresion on the data:
1 - The information is good, but it has errors, however that is not necesarily a dissaster, I have saw other studies when the data is even more problematic, like that of Hobatere lions for example. Like many other modern documents on great cats, like for the example the Indian lions reported by Dr Jhala or the Kalahari lions from Dr MacFarlane, the tables do had errors but this is probably because they manage to much information and one incorrect movement in your keyboard may create an important damage.
2 - There are a few incongruences in the data, that is why in the next table, were I summarize the information of the adult specimens over 3 years old, I decided to include also the measurements and weights of some specimens when they were cubs or young adults in order to see if there is an increase or what effect is presented. Check this:
*This image is copyright of its original author
In the table you can see that, with the males at least, the problem is with male P-111. What I noted is that some information make sense IF we order it in a different form. For example, that chest girth of 132 cm definitelly is not from a cub of less than 2 years, but it correspond with a male over 5 years old. The body length of 211 cm definitelly is not the one from when he has less than 3 years, that is for a older male. So what I see here, and what I suspect, is that they put the incorrect information in the incorrect ages. Interestingly the tail length did make sense, so I guess that the data may be correct but is mixed. Finally the very small chect girth of 75 and the abdomen girth of 90 cm do not appear in pages 25 - 28 where is the summarization of the information, so again, I guess that this is human error and that information came from a cub or small young adult female.
Other thing that I see is with female T-4, check that the body measuremenst when she was over 8 years old are very small, in fact, it looks like a cub, so again, I think that is another error. With female P-213 we can see all her changes since more than 1 year up to 9 years, It looks like she was decreasing in size since the 3 years old, which do not make sense and the chest girth of 136 cm with the belly girth of 104 cm as definitelly of a male, or if we put it at other way around, the chest of 104 cm is an adult female not a cub, and the belly of 136 is a big male or a heavelly gorged female, which is not the case for a cub of only 87 kg.
Finally the female P-213 (22), at less than 2 years, are reported with measurements from an adult female and a very large one (chest of 124 cm is more for a male). So again, is this an error of mixed information? That is my only explanation.
So, the data is useful, I think that we can use it if we ignore the information that seems incorrect, but at the end the main issue that the measurements in red do not match the age reported or in some cases, the sex of the animal. If someone can contact one of the authors and get an explanation that will be great.
(01-23-2022, 04:43 AM)Khan85 Wrote: Here you can find very detailed measurements on 38 bengal tigers (11 males + 19 females) along with age - growth curve chart, collared in Panna and some other National Parks.
Remarks about the biggest male I think that P-111 is the biggest male tiger in the study.
- Captured 5 times in total
Capture 3
- Age = 5yr 6 mn - Weight = 226.7 kg - Head Body length = 184 cm - Total length = 283 cm - Shoulder height = 127 cm - Neck girth = 70 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Capture 4
- Age = 8yr 10 mn - Weight = N/A - Head Body length = 211 cm - Total length = 311 cm - Shoulder height = 120 cm - Neck girth = 76 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Measurements were taken in straight line, I believe (first, the length of head and then the length of body). In capture 3, his head-body length was 184 cm and total length was 283 cm at the age of 5yr 6mn. On his 4th capture, his head-body length increased to 211 cm and total length increased to 311 cm.
Since the strongest correlation of weight is with HBL/TL, he could have been heavier than 226.7 kg on his 4th capture.
I was checking the information on the tables and also checking the comments from other posters about it. So, this is my first impresion on the data:
1 - The information is good, but it has errors, however that is not necesarily a dissaster, I have saw other studies when the data is even more problematic, like that of Hobatere lions for example. Like many other modern documents on great cats, like for the example the Indian lions reported by Dr Jhala or the Kalahari lions from Dr MacFarlane, the tables do had errors but this is probably because they manage to much information and one incorrect movement in your keyboard may create an important damage.
2 - There are a few incongruences in the data, that is why in the next table, were I summarize the information of the adult specimens over 3 years old, I decided to include also the measurements and weights of some specimens when they were cubs or young adults in order to see if there is an increase or what effect is presented. Check this:
*This image is copyright of its original author
In the table you can see that, with the males at least, the problem is with male P-111. What I noted is that some information make sense IF we order it in a different form. For example, that chest girth of 132 cm definitelly is not from a cub of less than 2 years, but it correspond with a male over 5 years old. The body length of 211 cm definitelly is not the one from when he has less than 3 years, that is for a older male. So what I see here, and what I suspect, is that they put the incorrect information in the incorrect ages. Interestingly the tail length did make sense, so I guess that the data may be correct but is mixed. Finally the very small chect girth of 75 and the abdomen girth of 90 cm do not appear in pages 25 - 28 where is the summarization of the information, so again, I guess that this is human error and that information came from a cub or small young adult female.
Other thing that I see is with female T-4, check that the body measuremenst when she was over 8 years old are very small, in fact, it looks like a cub, so again, I think that is another error. With female P-213 we can see all her changes since more than 1 year up to 9 years, It looks like she was decreasing in size since the 3 years old, which do not make sense and the chest girth of 136 cm with the belly girth of 104 cm as definitelly of a male, or if we put it at other way around, the chest of 104 cm is an adult female not a cub, and the belly of 136 is a big male or a heavelly gorged female, which is not the case for a cub of only 87 kg.
Finally the female P-213 (22), at less than 2 years, are reported with measurements from an adult female and a very large one (chest of 124 cm is more for a male). So again, is this an error of mixed information? That is my only explanation.
So, the data is useful, I think that we can use it if we ignore the information that seems incorrect, but at the end the main issue that the measurements in red do not match the age reported or in some cases, the sex of the animal. If someone can contact one of the authors and get an explanation that will be great.
It's possible but the shoulder height and chest girth both are too large for a 226kg cat.
Also T-7's growth in a year of 15cm or almost 6'' is too much in that short of a time span, especially on a cat that is already 5 years old.
(01-25-2022, 03:33 AM)Rage2277 Wrote: patttewala is younger than munna with diff parents i had pics of pattewala and his siblings munna wasn't among them and i believe chain male was munna's father if i recall..munna also had the chain stripe pattern on his flanks i can't find pics of chain male never saved them @Pckts @Ashutosh
Interesting enough it was the Thin Stripe male who killed the Chain Male then it was Umarpani who made the Thin Stripe Male run for cover then he was driven away by Kankata at Baba Thenga Talao and was never sighted thereafter. -Vijay Rajan
(01-23-2022, 04:43 AM)Khan85 Wrote: Here you can find very detailed measurements on 38 bengal tigers (11 males + 19 females) along with age - growth curve chart, collared in Panna and some other National Parks.
Remarks about the biggest male I think that P-111 is the biggest male tiger in the study.
- Captured 5 times in total
Capture 3
- Age = 5yr 6 mn - Weight = 226.7 kg - Head Body length = 184 cm - Total length = 283 cm - Shoulder height = 127 cm - Neck girth = 70 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Capture 4
- Age = 8yr 10 mn - Weight = N/A - Head Body length = 211 cm - Total length = 311 cm - Shoulder height = 120 cm - Neck girth = 76 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Measurements were taken in straight line, I believe (first, the length of head and then the length of body). In capture 3, his head-body length was 184 cm and total length was 283 cm at the age of 5yr 6mn. On his 4th capture, his head-body length increased to 211 cm and total length increased to 311 cm.
Since the strongest correlation of weight is with HBL/TL, he could have been heavier than 226.7 kg on his 4th capture.
I was checking the information on the tables and also checking the comments from other posters about it. So, this is my first impresion on the data:
1 - The information is good, but it has errors, however that is not necesarily a dissaster, I have saw other studies when the data is even more problematic, like that of Hobatere lions for example. Like many other modern documents on great cats, like for the example the Indian lions reported by Dr Jhala or the Kalahari lions from Dr MacFarlane, the tables do had errors but this is probably because they manage to much information and one incorrect movement in your keyboard may create an important damage.
2 - There are a few incongruences in the data, that is why in the next table, were I summarize the information of the adult specimens over 3 years old, I decided to include also the measurements and weights of some specimens when they were cubs or young adults in order to see if there is an increase or what effect is presented. Check this:
*This image is copyright of its original author
In the table you can see that, with the males at least, the problem is with male P-111. What I noted is that some information make sense IF we order it in a different form. For example, that chest girth of 132 cm definitelly is not from a cub of less than 2 years, but it correspond with a male over 5 years old. The body length of 211 cm definitelly is not the one from when he has less than 3 years, that is for a older male. So what I see here, and what I suspect, is that they put the incorrect information in the incorrect ages. Interestingly the tail length did make sense, so I guess that the data may be correct but is mixed. Finally the very small chect girth of 75 and the abdomen girth of 90 cm do not appear in pages 25 - 28 where is the summarization of the information, so again, I guess that this is human error and that information came from a cub or small young adult female.
Other thing that I see is with female T-4, check that the body measuremenst when she was over 8 years old are very small, in fact, it looks like a cub, so again, I think that is another error. With female P-213 we can see all her changes since more than 1 year up to 9 years, It looks like she was decreasing in size since the 3 years old, which do not make sense and the chest girth of 136 cm with the belly girth of 104 cm as definitelly of a male, or if we put it at other way around, the chest of 104 cm is an adult female not a cub, and the belly of 136 is a big male or a heavelly gorged female, which is not the case for a cub of only 87 kg.
Finally the female P-213 (22), at less than 2 years, are reported with measurements from an adult female and a very large one (chest of 124 cm is more for a male). So again, is this an error of mixed information? That is my only explanation.
So, the data is useful, I think that we can use it if we ignore the information that seems incorrect, but at the end the main issue that the measurements in red do not match the age reported or in some cases, the sex of the animal. If someone can contact one of the authors and get an explanation that will be great.
It's possible but the shoulder height and chest girth both are too large for a 226kg cat.
Also T-7's growth in a year of 15cm or almost 6'' is too much in that short of a time span, especially on a cat that is already 5 years old.
I dont know how it is for tigers but lions reached 140cm with a max range weight if 214.5 kg, which was from Rhodesia as i know and was already a big suprise. This is one of the most impressive girths in correlation to weight i have ever seen.... so 154cm with 226 kg would be even more special. I came to a conclusion that its too large after seeing his numbers after/before the age of 5.5 and to compare them we have the neck girth at least. I contacted now some guys that can help us to get the real numbers or confirmation. First of all i think there are typos and false numbers based on the other study that were quite significant (140 vs 105 kg) for example.
(01-23-2022, 04:43 AM)Khan85 Wrote: Here you can find very detailed measurements on 38 bengal tigers (11 males + 19 females) along with age - growth curve chart, collared in Panna and some other National Parks.
Remarks about the biggest male I think that P-111 is the biggest male tiger in the study.
- Captured 5 times in total
Capture 3
- Age = 5yr 6 mn - Weight = 226.7 kg - Head Body length = 184 cm - Total length = 283 cm - Shoulder height = 127 cm - Neck girth = 70 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Capture 4
- Age = 8yr 10 mn - Weight = N/A - Head Body length = 211 cm - Total length = 311 cm - Shoulder height = 120 cm - Neck girth = 76 cm - Chest girth = 154 cm
Measurements were taken in straight line, I believe (first, the length of head and then the length of body). In capture 3, his head-body length was 184 cm and total length was 283 cm at the age of 5yr 6mn. On his 4th capture, his head-body length increased to 211 cm and total length increased to 311 cm.
Since the strongest correlation of weight is with HBL/TL, he could have been heavier than 226.7 kg on his 4th capture.
I was checking the information on the tables and also checking the comments from other posters about it. So, this is my first impresion on the data:
1 - The information is good, but it has errors, however that is not necesarily a dissaster, I have saw other studies when the data is even more problematic, like that of Hobatere lions for example. Like many other modern documents on great cats, like for the example the Indian lions reported by Dr Jhala or the Kalahari lions from Dr MacFarlane, the tables do had errors but this is probably because they manage to much information and one incorrect movement in your keyboard may create an important damage.
2 - There are a few incongruences in the data, that is why in the next table, were I summarize the information of the adult specimens over 3 years old, I decided to include also the measurements and weights of some specimens when they were cubs or young adults in order to see if there is an increase or what effect is presented. Check this:
*This image is copyright of its original author
In the table you can see that, with the males at least, the problem is with male P-111. What I noted is that some information make sense IF we order it in a different form. For example, that chest girth of 132 cm definitelly is not from a cub of less than 2 years, but it correspond with a male over 5 years old. The body length of 211 cm definitelly is not the one from when he has less than 3 years, that is for a older male. So what I see here, and what I suspect, is that they put the incorrect information in the incorrect ages. Interestingly the tail length did make sense, so I guess that the data may be correct but is mixed. Finally the very small chect girth of 75 and the abdomen girth of 90 cm do not appear in pages 25 - 28 where is the summarization of the information, so again, I guess that this is human error and that information came from a cub or small young adult female.
Other thing that I see is with female T-4, check that the body measuremenst when she was over 8 years old are very small, in fact, it looks like a cub, so again, I think that is another error. With female P-213 we can see all her changes since more than 1 year up to 9 years, It looks like she was decreasing in size since the 3 years old, which do not make sense and the chest girth of 136 cm with the belly girth of 104 cm as definitelly of a male, or if we put it at other way around, the chest of 104 cm is an adult female not a cub, and the belly of 136 is a big male or a heavelly gorged female, which is not the case for a cub of only 87 kg.
Finally the female P-213 (22), at less than 2 years, are reported with measurements from an adult female and a very large one (chest of 124 cm is more for a male). So again, is this an error of mixed information? That is my only explanation.
So, the data is useful, I think that we can use it if we ignore the information that seems incorrect, but at the end the main issue that the measurements in red do not match the age reported or in some cases, the sex of the animal. If someone can contact one of the authors and get an explanation that will be great.
I know its not the right topic but as you mentioned it i wanted to mentioned it. If you play with the numbers from the Hobatere study you come to a easy conclusion that the BL from the lion LEO was already his overall body length. Substract neck, head and you get 129cm which is in the normal range for just body length excluding head and neck. Same goes for the lion named Spot.
The lion Volkel was huge but looking at his dimensions like chest girth it may be possible to reach a HBL of 223-228cm(using diff head lengths). As its the ALPRU protocol it could have been 210cm between pegs. If the neck length was a typo (31 instead of 41 because its 10cm longer than the necks from the other lions) and 44cm head length his absolute minimum length would be 213 cm over curves.
Thats just my opinion although im pretty sure about the body length of both spots and Leo.
Look at the whole time span of P111 and you might see that the numbers arent matching up. Beside the thought of pckts hat the size in general wasnt enough to reach such dimensions. Im guessing its a mixture of typo and wrong numbers.
Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers
