WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Extinct Animals
›
Pleistocene Big Cats
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines
|
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines
|
 (05-20-2016, 04:28 AM)tigerluver Wrote: @Polar, it's opening fine on my end. What browser are you using? Maybe the default opening settings on your machine accidentally changed? I am using Google Chrome. I don't know about the default opening settings, but the link works well!  Thank you. 
Hopefully there will be enough of fossil samples from Northeast China being available to analyze, since these tigers represent the largest population for the Amur subspecies.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/06/f...tooth-4957
First fossil footprints of saber-toothed cats are bigger than Bengal tiger paws By Sid PerkinsJun. 10, 2016 , 9:00 AM A famous fossil trove in Argentina recently gave up a new treasure: the first fossil footprints ever reported of the saber-toothed cat Smilodon (above). The four tracks, discovered last year,are larger than those of today’s Bengal tiger, measuring—in one case—19.2 centimeters across. That’s approximately the span of an adult human hand with fingers spread wide. At the time the tracks were made—about 50,000 years ago in the middle of Earth’s most recent ice age—global sea levels were much lower and the site, now a wave-washed portion of the coast near Miramar, Argentina, would have been a few kilometers from the sea, the researchers reported at the 30th Argentine Meeting of Vertebrate Paleontology last month. The ancient footprints were probably made by S. populator, a species about 20% heftier than today’s Bengal tiger and known to live only in South America. (Its better-known relative, S. fatalis, is the saber-toothed cat of La Brea Tar Pits fame.) But because it’s so difficult to definitively link fossils such as footprints to the animals that made them, the newly discovered tracks will get their own species name, in accordance with longstanding scientific tradition. The team suggests that the name should be Smilodonichnum miramarensis, a Greek phrase that roughly but aptly translates as “Smilodon footprint from Miramar.”  *This image is copyright of its original author 
Fascinating photograph. Was there a report?
The comparison with the Bengal tiger, however, is incorrect. In order to get an idea about the size of the cat that left a print, you need to measure the width of the pad. In adult wild Amur tigresses, the width ranges between 8-11 cm. In males, the pad width is 9-13,5 cm. A print with a pad width of 10-12 cm. is impressive:  *This image is copyright of its original author In spite of the size of the print, the male tiger who left them most probably didn't exceed 200 kg. In India, a tiger who leaves a print of the size seen in the photograph above usually is well over that mark. One could say wild Amur tigers have large paws for their size. As to Indian tigers and paws. Those with experience wrote hill tigers, in spite of their large size, often left prints not much larger than those of a large male leopard. There is a relation between pad width and size in tigers, but it is not a strong one and it differs from place to place. In India, elevation also is a factor to consider. To return to the photograph taken in Argentina. The pad width seems to be 9-10 cm. If the cat who left them compared to an Amur tiger, chances are it could have been an adult female ranging between 100-140 kg. Smilodon, however, was a robust cat. Good find, Brotherbear.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art...8215302962
This paper presents information derived from the taphonomic reevaluation of the Hauthal collection from Cueva del Milodón, Última Esperanza, Chile. This is a bone assemblage recovered in 1899 and 1900 at that cave and stored at the Museo de La Plata, Argentina.Mylodon darwini, Hippidion saldiasi, Panthera onca mesembrina and Camelidae are among the most important extinct animals represented at the site. These materials were studied and analyzed several times between the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th Centuries. However, a detailed study with a taphonomic perspective such as the one presented here was lacking. Contrary to most previous evaluations, this analysis shows that an archaeological component can be defended at the end of the Pleistocene on the basis of the presence of cut marks on Hippidion bones. However, Lehmann-Nitsche excellent description of damages recorded on the ground sloth bones, that he attributed to humans, could not be confirmed. Instead, those damages are here interpreted as large carnivore tooth marks. They are concentrated on ground sloth remains and are attributed to Panthera onca mesembrina. It is here suggested that panthers used the cave and surroundings to prey on ground sloths. The study of the marks and their distribution, especially on ground sloth skulls, indicates the use of a hunting strategy which was similar to that used by jaguars (Panthera onca) when hunting large prey. 
Interesting note: In the old days, it was believed that the large cats found in Peru were the fossils of American "lions" Panthera atrox. This is quoted by Kurten and Turner & Anton. However, modern studies show that those "large" cats (skull less than 35 cm in G.L.) were in fact jaguars, specifically Panthera onca mesembrina. This was confirmed by Dr Yamaguchi and the modern maps shows that the limit for Panthera atrox was the south of Mexico (Chiapas).
I would kill for a Panthera atrox or a Smilodon fossil in Guatemala!!!  Sadly, Paleontology is a very underrated science here. 
The attached study proposes P. spelaea and P. leo split 1.89 million years ago and this split came before the presence of P. fossilis (at least whats on record). The dating of the split is highly indicative a distinct speciation, as in P. spelaea is the correct taxonomic classification. P. fossilis is then hinted to be just a type of P. spelaea.
Did the Cave Lion (P. spelaea) have some vastly different cranial properties from modern lions? From the various portraits I saw, their facial/head structure seemed really similar to that of a lion.
That could help determine who exactly the modern lion split from, and what modern lion species today most resembles the Cave Lion in cranial anatomy. The latter could possibly give us an idea of where the split also occured.
Cranially, P. leo is very similar to the cave lions. Mandible:skull length ratio and nasal aperture structure are nearly identical. P. spelaea (the form present in the late Pleistocene) has a wider skull and P. fossilis (the form present in the early-middle Pleistocene) a thinner one (tentatively, P. fossilis has a uniquely shaped cranium thus its skull proportions don't exactly compare perfectly), however. The mandible shapes in the cave lion are also distinct from P. leo. There are dentition proportion and shape differences as well across P. leo, P. fossilis, and P. spelaea. P. atrox is closest to P. fossilis in its cranial characteristics buts still has some advanced differences.
The split probably occurred once the African stem group that migrated to Eurasia was isolated, either by geographic distance or rising of sea levels I assume. Perhaps the lion went into Europe the same way homonids did. From Muttoni et al. (2010):  *This image is copyright of its original author Human migration into Europe during the late Early Pleistocene climate transition
@Polar most likely in Africa where the basal group of the lion-like cats originated from.
@tigerluver, if P.spelaea has been genetically diverged with P.leo for about 1.89 mya as per se, then this might hint that the lions may have migrated out of Africa much earlier than we previously thought, just like those early archaic human populations such as the Homo erectus being moved out of Africa much earlier than the ancestors of the modern humans.
These archaic humans to the modern humans is practically equivalent as the Cave lions to the modern lions. (07-04-2016, 09:05 PM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:(07-04-2016, 04:40 AM)tigerluver Wrote: A. africanum was a Pliocene species, and as the others have said, likely missed coexisting with either cave lion or modern lion. It likely did coexist with the stem group of lions, although. Quoting from the other thread, sorry for the late reply. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't H. sapien diverge/evolve and replace(not sure which one occurred) in Africa and not Eurasia? Regardless, for felid this image beautifully sums up what likely triggered migrations (from The Late Miocene Radiation of Modern Felidae: A Genetic Assessment... See attached).  *This image is copyright of its original author Around the time the lions differentiated from the stem-group (readers, please see post #679 for further info), sea levels dropped severely and dropped in rapid cycles. One of the earlier sea level drops probably opened many land bridges connecting Africa and Eurasia and so species migrated. It seems populations of all living things work like atoms, diffuse naturally from areas of higher concentration to areas of lower concentration. The rapid sea level cycles may also support the theory of three waves (I think that was the number, does anyone remember the source?) of migration conducted by the lions. The first wave would be P. fossilis. Sea levels rose, blocked off the stem-group, and by the time the levels fell again P. fossilis had speciated. At this we could hypothesize that P. spelaea then landed on Eurasia. Finally P. leo made its way once the niche was cleared of the cave lions.
Nice job there, @tigerluver! You really seem to be knowledgeable about the evolution and history of lions. (athough your username seems to favor the evolution of another cat...)
@tigerluver Indeed, Homo sapiens evolved from an African hominid species known as Homo rhodesiensis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_rhodesiensis However, the lions in Africa remained as Panthera leo for more than 2 million years, which means the ancestor of the modern African lions also belonged to the same species. In comparison, the ancestor of the modern humans was a different species. Why the lion stem group in Africa was capable to retain as the same species for more than 2 million years?
Well, it depends on what we are considering the lion stem group.
P. spelaea and P. leo diverged 1.8 MYA, but that doesn't mean P. leo stayed unchanged as divergence dates between lineages don't regard the future of the diverged species, if you get what I mean. For example, if we take the P. spelaea fossilis (I refer to this not as P. fossilis for the sake of the scenario) to P. spelaea spelaea theory as accurate, then even though P. spealea diverged 1.8 MYA it did undergo significant change by the late Pleistocene. Similarly, I am sure the P. leo of today is not exactly the same as the species that broke from P. spelaea 1.8 MYA. Now, would you folks like to see the fossil of the likely stem group, Panthera shawi?  *This image is copyright of its original author Enjoy the short read. You might notice that the size of P. fossilis originates from this lost freak felid of 2 million years ago. To not lose all conversation material at once, I'll leave with this for now. More P. shawi data will be on the way. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |