|
Massive Head, Neck & Muscles
|
@Spalea
Here is what I see...  *This image is copyright of its original author 1.Tiger has a longer crease from the hip to the mid section, probably due to the longer body type 2.Tigers Rear Leg looks a bit larger 3.Lions neck looks a bit larger 4.Bicep/tricep of the tiger seems a bit larger 5.Tiger forearm appears a bit larger (more noticeable than the bicep IMO) 6.Lions forearm and foot placement appears to be more upright or elongated while the tigers appears a bit more bent and less on its "tippy toe" (could just be limb positioning) 7.Lions taper begins early and more sharply while the tigers is a bit longer and less exaggerated My notes: (not starting a debate) Tigers are longer in body, larger in limb girth, slinky head and neck and walk more crouched, spine generally is arched and taller than the shoulder, appears more stocky. Lions are shorter in body, head held more upright, larger heads, sharper body taper, spine appears more flat, shoulders generally taller than spine, appears more lanky(relatively speaking) When a lion is empty or thin, its body sucks upward sharply or tapers if you will, when a tiger is empty or thin its body sucks in from side to side rather than up and down like a lion. Similarities: Chest girth, neck girth, shoulder height: These measurements are negligible, we can see numerous specimens of either side that can compare one to the other and so on. Let me know anything you guys think I missed or notice differently 
90 Kg (probably and over) of pure leopard muscles. The great Mbavala/Vin Diesel.
As told by Majingilane, in leopard (and jaguar) is difficult to look to defined muscles like lion and tiger. But i think this guy is very massive and muscular.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author This last photo is cropped. 
@Pckts:
Thank you but I didn't want a so long answer ! I would distinguish a lion's body with a tiger's body thank to the head. But from what I see, 2 nice but small sized photos, I cannot discern some minutiae with the naked eye as you can. Because you already knew the differences between the two felines, or because you looked very meticulously the two photos you have answered me with such details. But bravo ! Nevertheless, may I observe that the postures are not the same ? The tiger is moving forward while the lion stay still. Thus, the tensions on the hind leg muscles (wher you marked "2") are not the same, the "fascia lata" is clearly more increased (same case as concerns the leopard and the jaguar, look at them, you will not pretend that the leopard' s fascia lata is more muscular than the jaguar' s). By the way I don't want to quibble. In term of anatomy, I believed a skinned lion was undistinguishable from a skinned tiger (I don't speak about heads, skulls skinned). You demonstrate me that a trained eye can spot some differences.
This certainly is a topic I have discussed till blue in the face, I've looked at numerous records, images and eye witness accounts for more hours than I care to think about.
I was just explaining the differences I saw in the 3d printed cats, then added my personal observations made over the years, obviously looking at the real thing can reveal more detail than anything else, but I thought the artist did a phenomenal job. I doubt he took into account limb length, girth etc, so that may answer why some proportions seem a smidgen off. Looking at the jag and leopards fascia lata or thigh area, you are correct, one is more bent and flexed which may also contribute to the similar size between the two even though the jaguar would usually have the larger girth but even still while the leopards is flexed and the jaguars is relaxed they look extremely close so that would mean the jaguars would be larger when both or relaxed or flexed but we'd need to get clarification from the artist before we come to that conclusion. @Spalea let me know if you order the lion, I'm ordering the Tiger then I will continue to add to the collection and hopefully assemble most of them in the next few years.  (05-25-2016, 11:45 PM)Spalea Wrote: @Pckts: I've read its difficult to tell the difference between a skinned lion and tiger. Their musculature and anatomy are quite similar, though there is significant variation amongst individuals. Good topic 
The spine, shoulder, and midsection structure is dependant upon the individual cat instead of species dependant from what I've seen.
Based on my personal collection of feline documents and pictures, at equal weights (IMO): Forelimb Girth (Jaguar=Tiger>Lion>Leopard) Chest Girth (Jaguar=Lion>Tiger=Leopard) Neck Girth (Lion>Jaguar>Tiger>Leopard) Hindlimb Girth (Jaguar>Lion>Tiger=Leopard) Skull Size (Jaguar~Tiger~Lion~Leopard) Tail Length (Leopard>Tiger>Jaguar=Lion) Limb Robusticity (Jaguar=Tiger>Leopard>Lion) That's all for now. If any of you have any suggestions, then just clarify that for me to help me edit my post. 
@Polar:
Excellent info, but I have a question... Nothing to say as concerns forelimb girth, chest girth, skull size and so on, because, directly quantifiable, you can measure them directly (cm, inch...). But about the last parameter, "Limb robusticity", how do you evaluate it ? Is it a ratio of size, amplitude ? (05-27-2016, 04:19 AM)tigerluver Wrote: @Polar, if possible, could you list the numerical averages and the sources? Perhaps in the cat anatomy thread as well. It'd be excellent info. Most of my analyzations were based off of feline picture files and documents containing big cat pictures, not actual statistical data. They were merely visual determinations, not scientific (like Pckts and the 3D computer drawings of the felines.) Although, if there possibly is statistical/scientific data for my visual determinations, then I will post the data, and I believe Peter has some data for forelimb girths/weights of big cats (mainly tigers) in the Tiger Extinction thread. (05-27-2016, 10:38 AM)Spalea Wrote: @Polar: Limb Robusticity (mainly referring to forelimb robusticity) is the ratio of the upper forelimb/lower forelimb. (05-27-2016, 09:20 PM)Pckts Wrote:(05-27-2016, 06:01 PM)Polar Wrote:(05-27-2016, 10:38 AM)Spalea Wrote: @Polar: About the skull size: usually at equal weights, lions normally have a longer skull, and tigers usually have a wider skull, so I don't get how lion is greater than tiger in total skull area (looking from top to bottom). The skull depth is about equal within both cats, so taking the total volume, the results would be based on the individual cat instead of the cat as a species (hence why I made all the cats approximate in skull length.) Limb robusticity = "mass per square inch"? In that instance, then that is close to impossible to calculate. Different muscle fibers have differing muscle mass densities, with type-I fibers being more denser than type-II fibers, and "limb robusticity" can be measured anywhere within the forelimb and produce vastly different masses per square inch. In all, carnivores (both caniform/feliform) share the same muscle neuron density and arrangement, FYI.
Another example of my definition of limb robusticity:
A 500-pound polar bear has a slightly longer humerus, radius, and ulna than a 400-pound tiger. However, the polar bear's humerus takes about 56-58% of the total arm length; the tiger is 54% of the total arm length. Even though polar bears have a greater arm span than tigers, the upper arm of the polar bear still is responsible for more of the total arm span than that of the tiger's, thus greater limb robusticity= ratio of upper arm length/lower arm length.
In regards to the skull, a tiger generally has a wider skull per inch but when both skulls are at their maximum, a lion will usually hit the 15" while a tiger will hit the 14" mark and both are fairly close in width, thus the lion having the larger skull in absolutes. Usually both weigh close to the same but once again the lion generally has the longer skull.
If the tiger skull library was larger in regards to 16"er's my opionion may change but the fact remains that those skulls are very hard to come by. Interesting notes on limb robusticity, but I'd have to research on what fiber differences they would have compared to one another. I'd assume that two animals built for the same thing and being of the same genus would share mostly the same fiber distribution. In regards to the sq inch remark, you can generally see that both have similar front limb lengths but do not share similar girths, thus my mass per sq inch remark. 
Hi pckts. I edited the picture of the lion and tiger muscle comparison because the lion in the picture shown before seems to be scaled quite a bit larger then the tiger. In the below picture. I scaled both animals to the same shoulder height. And skull size. To represent average individuals.
Lion left, Tiger Right. -The lion seems to have a shorter tail then the tiger. -The hind quarters of the tiger are larger. And more evenly balanced with front quarters. -The lions front legs are proportionally larger then its hind legs in comparison to tiger. -The tigers body is longer, the lions shorter. -The lions face is longer, the tigers shorter. -The tigers forearm appears to be more heavily muscled. -The paws are about the same. -The lions spine tapers down towards the back legs. The tigers not as much. In conclusion. The lion is built more like a hyena (upper body greater then lower), where as the tiger is more like a cat.  *This image is copyright of its original author
We cannot say those specimens have 0% fat. Atleast there must be a layer of belly fat hanging downside. My theory is that old time reptiles like dinosaurs had 0% fat. As time progressed animals evolved into developing fat for reserve energy. Hence they became less cruel than the animals of dinosaur period.
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 3 Guest(s) |