|
Are Tigers 'Brainier' Than Lions?
|
Tiger has larger brain than lion, this must be an evolution trait, just like its larger canine teeth.
BTW, i heard this new remake of the Godzilla movie has the real Godzilla in it, not the impostor AKA Zilla in the 1998 movie.[img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] 
I believe they difference between individuals is different. I do not know if cranium size will give a heavier brain but from the sources I've seen the tiger has a slightly heavier brain (Bengal I believe) than the lion, by a couple of grams. What extra information or knowledge does these extra grams carry?
Peter and quate made a great points as well. Circus trainers will tell different stories of who they believe is smarter, easier to train does not always mean smarter. Different people view intelligence differently. I believe both animals are very close in intelligent, but brain size alone cannot provide evidence enough for superior intelligence.  (05-28-2014, 06:17 PM)TheLioness Wrote: I believe they difference between individuals is different. I do not know if cranium size will give a heavier brain but from the sources I've seen the tiger has a slightly heavier brain (Bengal I believe) than the lion, by a couple of grams. What extra information or knowledge does these extra grams carry? Vratislav Mazak: "Tiger is, at least according to prof. Hemmer and other scientists, the most intelligent felid". http://hobby.idnes.cz/soukroma-zoologick...zlicci_mce this trainer says "tygr je mnohem chytrejsi nez lev" which means "tiger is much smarter than lion". I´d say that tigers would be more intelligent or effecient in solving indivudual tasks, while lions would be more effective as a group. I personally don´t think that we will ever be able to state which cat is overall more intelligent... btw I think that brain size is an evidence, but probably not a decisive and unquestionable evidence 
This is what we call debate. A mature and clean debate. Every Person has its opinion and they are free to put it but never insult or try to impose it on others.
 (05-28-2014, 04:59 AM)'Apollyon' Wrote:"In 1982, the clinic was visited by a zoo director who introduced Doc to a Siberian tiger cub. He was so amazed by the presence of the tiger that he asked if he might use it at the end of one of his lectures, to demonstrate how even the most powerful animals were greatly affected by their environment. The presentation was a great success and after it was over an impressed audience member introduced himself as the local head of Exxon Oil. He asked Doc if he would present the tiger and his message of the dangers of environmental damage at an upcoming Exxon Convention. Needless to say, they were blown away and an amazing partnership was born between Doc Antle and the big cats of the world. T.I.G.E.R.S. was soon created as a wildlife education organization, dedicated to promoting global conservation with informative, educational, and entertaining interactive programs. It's animal ambassadors are important living examples of current worldwide environmental issues, helping to educate the world about the importance of conservation and global biodiversity. Today, Doc is widely recognized as one of the foremost animal trainers in the world, having worked with thousands of animals, and traveled the globe promoting the education and conservation of some of our planet's most rare and endangered species."(05-27-2014, 09:40 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: This is fanatical nonsense that we were trying to get away from on this forum. Once again, I specifically make mention to Dr. Antle who states that he can see how much smarter tigers are than lions as well as Saffoee, both of which defeat the debate of "larger brain size doesn't = smarter" since it has nothing to do with brain anatomy, simply observations from eye witnessed accounts. The larger brain size just backs their observations. http://www.tigerfriends.com/docbio.html Other then having 30+ years of hands on expierence? Come on, this is a guy who has every right to make that observation. It's like telling a mother of 3 that she has no idea who is her smartest child becasue she is not a expert in brain composition. Of course she will know, she observes, raises them, sees their weaknesses and strengths, etc.... Then lets not forget Craig Saffoe said it as well. Are you going to question his qualifications as well? These are observations of experts who have hands on expierence with both species, often. Their opinions are not uneducated guesses, they are backed by years of expierence. Then the fact that the Tiger has a 16% larger brain case, what do you think that means? Similar sized animals, similar proportions, yet for some reason the Tiger has a 16% larger brain? What fact or account do you have that backs anything you are trying to say? Any experts make mention to lions being smarter than tigers? Any Biologists or 1st hand eye witnessed accounts? Just curious if there is anything that makes you so skeptical of actual data and eye witness accounts.
Its the closest thing we have to find out who is more intelligent yes! But, there is much more to the brain and the way it works other than size. [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img]
(05-28-2014, 10:59 PM)'TheLioness' Wrote: Its the closest thing we have to find out who is more intelligent yes! But, there is much more to the brain and the way it works other than size. [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img] Of course, but you have eye witnessed accounts backing it as well as scientific evidence. These are proof. Its like somebody who is in shape telling a heavier person that they will feel better if they get in better shape. That person doesn't need to be a nutritionist to make that observation, they have seen and felt it and just because they may not be able to explain it on a scientific level, they are still qualified to say it and be correct. The argument of lions being social and tigers not, is false as well. Look at Harbin, lions and tigers live together in harmony, tigers live with other tigers, etc... Habitat dictates the need to be social, not intellegence. If it is an advantage, you will take advantage of it, if it is not, then you won't. There is no advantage to more mouth's in the tigers landscape. Not only that, but we even see tiger males raise orphaned cubs on their own, I never see a lone male lion raise a cub on its own, that I am aware of, at least. So obviously tigers are very social in their own way. 
Maybe my next words will be a blasphemy for some people, but I think that maybe, just maybe, tigers are slightly more social than lions.
Why? How is possible that I could say this? Well, tigers themselves are my evidence. We know that tigers are highly territorial, at least when plenty of prey is available. For example, in the single year than Schaller studied tigers in Kanha, he found that the male tigers were territorials but females no, although they had some particular areas that were used only by the owner of the home range. However, in 1977, Panwar (in Sunquist, 1981) studied the same population and found that after over 10 years, the Kanha NP had changed, there were more prey and the habitat was much better than in the time of Schaller. The results was that in this moment, Panwar found that the tigress were highly territorial, just like those of Nepal! Nepalese tigers are highly territorial too. Although Sunquist (1981) stated that he had not found any injure in its radiocollared tigers, he recognize that Dr McDougal, with more time in the field, found several injures in the same tigers, caused by intraspecific conflicts. Latter documents of Dr Dave Smith and others showed that that injures were more severe everytime and cased dead in some cases and that this was caused because the available territory was now full, so new adults most travel or fight to found a territory, the worst of it was for the young males. In fact, they discovered that: 1. Males and females tigers are highly territorial. 2. Females tigers share part of the territory to its daughters, when they can. 3. Tigers are highly aggressive between them, when they are not related, but they respect they own territories and avoid conflict when they are related (they DO have familiar bounds and memory). 4. Most, if not all the tigresses of certain area are normally highly related, and although they are territorial, there are moments when mother, old daughters and the cubs of both, can be reunited, sometimes, with the presence of the territorial male, father of all the cubs. Latter, the amazing observations of Valmik Thapar showed that the male tigers are incredibly good fathers. He observed territorial male tigers sharing kills with its “wives” and its sons. Further observations recorded a group of eight of nine tigers sharing a kill, all the individuals were related! It seems that tigers do group on kills and can share it without violence, but just because they are all family. Using all this data, we can draw a wider idea of what is the behavior of the tiger in the wild: It seems that tigers are not antisocial, they keep contact with they own families and although they prefer to avoid close contact, this is more related with prey availability than aberration to see each other. Females share they kills with its daughters, when the prey is large (over 200-250 kg) and they feed amicably and in order, with the dominant tiger been the one that killed the prey, the sex of the tiger is irrelevant in these moments. Male tigers are true gentlemen, they share kills with its mates and kids and give them privileges over its own kills! This is something that can’t be seen in male lions. These observations had been recorded by Schaller and Thapar (semi-open habitats) and inferred via radiocollared signals by Sunquist, Smith and Dinerstein (closed habitats). However, there are anecdotal reports in literature of tigers sharing kills and fathers caring and even feeding its young, but sadly, the myth of the blood-thirsty beast was stronger and those early observations were obscured as simple hearsay. So, tigers are territorials and will not allow other tigers in its territories, but mothers can share kills with its older daughters in some type of “neutral zones” between its territories. This type of behavior has been described as an incipient tigresses “pride”, while the male tiger had a behavior closer to the male lions in Gir, although they present a bigger instinct for caring its own sons. The statements of Kailash Shankala, that tigers are not territorial, are incredible WRONG, as he never (he don’t even tried) know the relation between the tigers, and what he described as a “group of non-territorial tigers”, was in fact, a family, like the several observations of Valmik Thapar in Ranthambore. Lions do hunt in prides and share meals, so they must be social, but most of the time they fight for it and conflicts are nasty. They tend to be antisocial when prey is scarce and for the male lion, they eat first and all the others in the pride can go to hell when he is feeding (he eat first, period!!!), although in some rare cases, when the prey is relative large, he shares part of it with its sons; when the prey is huge, all eat together, but never stop scratching each other. Obviously, this behavior of the tigers is the norm in the habitats with good prey density, but is possible that some aberrant possibilities can happen in weird areas, like for example The Sundarbans, when territorial boundaries are erased every time that the tide goes up in the mangroves. However, recent studies show that tigers in the Russian Far East, despite the large territories and the incredibly low prey base, they also have the same ecology than tigers in Nepal: tigresses share part of its areas with its daughters but they have exclusive territories, while male tigers do have exclusive areas and only share them with the females in its territories. I see a tiger group like a big family that like to live in they own areas and that respect each other. But this balance is broken when the male died and then, all the hell breaks loose. In Nepal, when Sauraha male died, there were hard years and for about 2 or 3 years, as far I remember, tigresses could not rise a single cub, as the male power was not established. The stability and power of the male tiger is BASIC in tiger sociability too, if there is a big strong male in the power, everything is Ok. Do you still think that tigers are just a plain, bi-dimensional animal? [img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] I think NOT.
Great stuff Gaute, I totally agree.
Both cats are obviously social, just in very different ways. 
Pckts:
"Other then having 30+ years of hands on expierence? Come on, this is a guy who has every right to make that observation. It's like telling a mother of 3 that she has no idea who is her smartest child becasue she is not a expert in brain composition. Of course she will know, she observes, raises them, sees their weaknesses and strengths, etc.... Similar sized animals, similar proportions, yet for some reason the Tiger has a 16% larger brain? What fact or account do you have that backs anything you are trying to say?" Trainers are highly biased...just like anyone else. You provided no objective criteria. It is quite likely that 'smarter' means 'easier to train'. Are Dogs smarter than Cats? The larger brain size is a possible indication of greater intelligence. However it is certainly not definitive and, to my knowledge, difficult to show how this greater intelligence manifests itself. Set aside the Lion and let's use the Leopard. As far as I know, the Leopard's brain is, proportionally, the same as the Lion. But, it is a solitary hunter and inhabits a wide variety of environments. What actions/behaviours differentiates the Tiger over the Leopard that would be an indication of superior intelligence? As to my lack of evidence for my position...I never stated my position. I simply challenged yours. Many trainers have said Lions are harder to train (than Tigers). Is this due to inferior intelligence or due to a different temperament. Which is more likely?
-So now Craig Saffoee is a trainer?
-These are not "dogs and cats" they are "cats and cats" -This is in regards to lion and tiger brains, not leopard and tiger, lions and tigers have similar sized skulls and tigers have a far larger brain case and many Biologists and trainers back them being smarter -Eleaborate on "harder to train" what would that have to do with being smarter? Many more trainers state tigers as being individuals, always scanning surroundings, more unpredictable, etc... Individuality is a sign of intellegence, follow the leader is refusing to think on your own, no matter how you slice it. Clyde Beatty was a super lion supporter yet he makes specific mention of tigers and their intellegenceClyde BeattyIt doesn't seem a coincidence that all the intelligent 'prison-breaks' by the circus animals mentioned by Beatty, are by tigers. About a tigress, Gracie, he mentions, "Certain aspects of Gracie's behavior interested me more than the escape itself - her cunning, for instance. ……… This cleverly executed escape called for ability to fool people completely." He recalls "another escape that ranks with Gracie's nocturnal adventure" where sixteen tigers collaborated to make an escape route! In another incident, a Siberian tiger named Monarch had made a similar intelligent escape. Beatty went on about intelligent tigers: "The most shrewdly calculated escape that I can recall was carried out by Big Ross, the brainiest tiger I've ever handled. What this animal succeeded in doing called for a careful study of the prospects, the decision that it was possible to break loose and the cleverest kind of planning for each and every step involved. ……… It was an astonishing feat and Big Ross had figured it out perfectly Alfred CourtAlfred Court,"the celebrated animal trainer, mentioned, "Tigers are my weakness. Despite my satisfaction in our eleven lion, …… This set me free to return to my seven tigers, who were, and always would be, my consuming passion. I have trained many cats since then, but it is that princely pleiad that I remember most affectionately today." In the same chapter he said, "….. the trick is less risky with a lion, for tigers in general are more intelligent." another study "well a study was done to find out more than intelligence,BFQ of various carnivores...and if we look at the table then we find a tiger has more intelligence than a lion...this was a scientific study made by scientists...4 tigers were used and the BOM worked out to be 160kgs...6 lions were used and the BOM or body mass worked out to be 176kgs...apparentlly the tigers may have been tigresses or sumatran/indo chinese tigers...here the lions BOM was higher than tigers  *This image is copyright of its original author from the table it shows tigers are a lot smarter than lions...the Encephalization Quotient of lion is lower than tigers. the tigers BOM was 159.2kgs and the lions was 176kgs. the EQ of the lion was 65.5 and the EQ of tigers was 84.4 so what is Encephalization Quotient? Brain to body mass ratio (also known as the Encephalization Quotient or EQ) is a rough estimate of the possible intelligence of an organism. Dolphins have the highest brain to body mass ratio of all cetaceans. Sharks have the highest for a fish, and octopuses have the highest for an invertebrate. Humans have a higher brain to body mass ratio than any of these animals. tigers are smarter and more intelligent than lions and a scientific study conducted suggests lions are less intelligent than tigers...tigers score a point here also...tigers are a lot smarter than the lions http://en.w...pedia.org/w.../Brain_to_body_mass_ratio" There are many more quotes and studies as well.
http://bigcatrescue.org/who-is-smarter-lions-vs-tigers/
Interesting study from Yamuguchi on sub species terrain affecting brain sizeABSTRACT Intraspecific encephalization of the lion and the tiger is investigated for the first time using a very large sample. Using cranial volume as a measure of brain size, the tiger has a larger brain relative to greatest length of skull than the lion, the leopard and the jaguar. The Asian lion has a relatively much smaller brain compared with those of sub-Saharan lions, between which there are few differences. The Balinese and Javan tigers had relatively larger brains compared with those of Malayan and Sumatran tigers, even although these four putative subspecies occupy adjacent ranges in south-eastern Asia. Differences in brain size do not appear to correlate with any known differences in behaviour and ecology and, therefore, may reflect only chance differences in intrageneric and intraspecific phylogeny. However, captive-bred big cats generally have a reduced brain size compared with that of wild animals, so that an animal's life history and living conditions may affect brain size and, hence, functional or environmental explanations should be considered when linking brain size differences to intraspecific phylogenies. © 2009 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2009, 98, 85–93.[l http://www.researchgate.net/publication/..._captivity
Being slow afoot, bulky and not all that bright, the lord of the jungle would change the pace and alter the style of Gebel-Williams' show. This performance, which you may have seen or heard about if you are among the 10 million or so Americans who went to a circus in the past year, includes GG-W's amazing multiple tiger act, his incredible leopard, panther and puma act, the unbelievable elephant, tiger and horse mixed routine he conceived and now entrusts to an assistant, and the stupendo-fabuloso-socko, stop-the-world-I-want-to-get-on number in which Gebel-Williams bounds across three rings barking commands while combinations of 18 various size elephants stand up, sit down, run around in circles, dance on tubs, play on teeterboards, roll over and balance on their heads, lift, carry and bounce their master on their backs to ultimately consummate the 107th edition of Ringling Bros, and Barnum & Bailey Circus, The Greatest Show on Earth."
"With this I need lions?" Gunther Gebel-Williams says Here is a point from Wade Burck in regards to solitary personality vs follow the leader personality "Tigers are harder to train than lions, because tigers are solitary animals. Lions will follow a leader. If you teach one lion to roll over, the others will roll over. With a tiger, each one has to be taught separately. If a lion attacks you, others will join in. They're gang fighters, pride animals. But the consolation is that the lion will cow down if you strike him. A tiger won't. All he knows is he's supposed to be his own leader." ... ..."When you're dealing with wild animals, there are things you can't prevent. Two male tigers get in a fight over a female, and they'll try to kill each other. You've got to jump in the middle and break it up."... ..."When I am asked, "what is the difference between a lion and a tiger", I respond with,"the same difference between driving a pickup and a Ferrari" - Wade G. Burck "Lions are social animals vs. tigers being naturaly solitary animals. this has a great effect on their attitudes and habits in life. Lions grow up fighting for position in their social group, both as punks and then later in bachelor groups. They seem to truly enjoy fighting and losing has little meaning to it. A limping lion that can make it to the group feed can survive. The tiger on the other hand is solitary basically from the time of puberty. Even small injuries can effect their ability to hunt, thus meaning death by starvation. Consequently, I believe, tigers are not as willing to quarrel over insignificant insults to their social rules.As a seperate specie we make many social errors,in their world. Tigers seem to be more studious and manipulative of their environment (heirarchy)knowing this is very useful in manipulating the learning processes.They seem to me to be more thoughtful, being less willing to be argumentative,just for arguments sake. Male lions seem to have more testicle to testicle conversations, so it helps to have a pair so as not to get left out of the conversation. So where male lions like to fight more often, tigers are more treacherous when they do decide to fight." - Larry Allen Dean "Lions have a reputation, partly because they run in packs." ne said. "But tigers are loners. In a head-to-head battle, I'd bet on the tiger. The lion has an advantage with that mane, so you get a mouthful of hair before you reach his neck, but the tiger is swift and can think. The lion has a one-track mind." - Pat Anthony Quotes from Peter and Mazak Peter: intelligence of tigers...Czech animal trainer Jan Ringell told me, that tiger is much smarter than lion (he also told me, that tiger would win in a fight - not because tiger is bigger, stronger and more agile, but because it´s a solitary animal). So, that´s another opinion of a trainer. Mazak also stated that tiger is the most intellignet felid (although it´s not a statement of Mazak that much...he cited this as an opinion of prof. Hemmer and other scientists). It is by no means my attempt to bash Lions, but these quotes come from people with lifetimes of expierence with all big cats. Their opinions and observations should be looked at very seriously when trying to come up with any theories or hypothesis'
Quotes from Peter and Mazak
Peter: intelligence of tigers...Czech animal trainer Jan Ringell told me, that tiger is much smarter than lion (he also told me, that tiger would win in a fight - not because tiger is bigger, stronger and more agile, but because it´s a solitary animal). So, that´s another opinion of a trainer. Mazak also stated that tiger is the most intellignet felid (although it´s not a statement of Mazak that much...he cited this as an opinion of prof. Hemmer and other scientists). [/quote] These quotes are not from Peter, but from me :-) Anyway...the intelligence of animals is very problematic matter... tiger vs. lion: I belive both have some advantages against the other (physically as well as mentally)
I thought it said Peter, doesn't matter though, you're both smart and know what you're talking about.
I think if you wan't to use the lion and its "simply mentality" towards fighting as an advantage, that is understandable. They will fight no matter the odds, they are driven by mating and food and nothing will get in the way of that etc... But I think no matter what, wether fighting, hunting, war etc... brains are the bigger advantage. But obviously both have adapted to live in their natural habitat, but still the tigers larger brain and multiple accounts regarding intellegence leads most to think that the tiger is indeed the smarter cat. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 4 Guest(s) |