Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines

[Pckts]

A skull size of 15” isn’t unusual for modern day lions so I’m curious if the skull is at least 15”s and probably much larger if it was in good condition or is that the total length? Reply

[GrizzlyClaws]

(04-02-2018, 01:33 PM)Spalea Wrote: @GrizzlyClaws :

About #852: since the modern lions, Asiatic and African, are well-maned lions, whereas the Cave lions and Panthera Atrox (or the North American Lion) were very poorly-maned, we can indeed suppose that the true origins of the mane belongs to the Natodomeri lineage. And perhaps before the split African lion/Asiatic lion. But of course we cannot determine how much the Natodomeri lion's mane was developed. And thus the origin picture of the youtube video (#851) is only a pure speculation.

Inside the "Sciency Thoughts" article, it is said that the Natodomeri lion' size and the Panthera Atrox' size were as big one than the other. The poorly-maned North American lion and the perhaps well-maned Natodomeri lion would be the opposite tendancies as concerns the mane among the Pleistocene lions.


As concerns the size, we can believe, according to the skulls fragments known, that the Natodomeri lion's size and the North American lion's size were equal. After the split African lion/Asiatic lion the lions' size were smaller. But as concerns the Spelaea lineage, the differents lions invading the nothern countries were more and more bigger till they regained, with the North American lion, the Natodomeri lion's size with which he was in part coeval.

I hope not to be confused in my interpretation but...

Now I just make a brief aside in the children novels of the 60th... I have kept from my childhood two prehistoric novels from the french writer, Rosny Ainé (1856-1940) : "The quest for fire" continued by "Le félin géant" (i.e. "The giant felid", doesn't exist in the Wikipedia english langage). According to the described fauna, the two novels happened in the North of the Asian continent.

Just look at how was represented one of the protagonist of the story, a giant lion, the same giant lion in both  books (same author but two different illustrators):

Inside "The quest for fire": A kind of cave lion... 

*This image is copyright of its original author

And inside "The giant felid": a very developed-maned lion "as tall as a human", hairy everywhere. Perhaps a vision we could have about the Natodomeri lion.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Rather funny isn'it ?

Natodomeri lion - real life version of Aslan

Cromerian lion/American lion - giant lion with sparse mane

Cave lion - giant lion with sparse mane perhaps with some tiger facial tendency Reply

[GrizzlyClaws]

(04-02-2018, 06:46 PM)Pckts Wrote: A skull size of 15” isn’t unusual for modern day lions so I’m curious if the skull is at least 15”s and probably much larger if it was in good condition or is that the total length?

The 15 inches figure might be the fragmented length or basal length, not the GSL.

Since the GSL according to @tigerluver 's study, it is about 18 inches, and there could even have potentially unknown larger specimens. Reply

[tigerluver]

(04-02-2018, 04:13 AM)brotherbear Wrote: Is there enough information collected to create a comparison picture of Natodomeri lion with a modern African lion? A picture is worth a thousand words.

Give me some time and perhaps some nice side views of lions and their skulls and I'll make something happen. Reply

[tigerluver]

(04-02-2018, 06:46 PM)Pckts Wrote: A skull size of 15” isn’t unusual for modern day lions so I’m curious if the skull is at least 15”s and probably much larger if it was in good condition or is that the total length?

As @GrizzlyClaws mentioned, the length reported by the study basal length, which is quite a bit shorter than the greatest skull length. Reply

[epaiva]

(04-03-2018, 10:44 PM)Utigerluver Wrote:

(04-02-2018, 04:13 AM)brotherbear Wrote: Is there enough information collected to create a comparison picture of Natodomeri lion with a modern African lion? A picture is worth a thousand words.

Give me some time and perhaps some nice side views of lions and their skulls and I'll make something happen.

@tigerluver
Very good my Friend I will be waiting for your valuable information Reply

[tigerluver]

(12-04-2017, 08:57 AM)peter Wrote:

(12-03-2017, 11:56 PM)tigerluver Wrote: Panthera atrox in South America?

A new paper was just published stating that a fossil pantherine of South America, known as P. onca mesembrina, has been misidentified at least a few times. The true identity of this cat they assert is Panthera atrox. Their assertion is based on morphological similarities of the specimen to P. atrox rather than the jaguar. The skull they reference is the best example of their point. The paper.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Take a look at the above photos. Which species does the skull in the top photo looks most similar too? Based on visibility of the incisive foramina and the nasal shape, the authors conclude that the skull is actually of P. atrox.

At first take, the logic looks good. However, Dr. Ross Barnett disagrees, mentioning on twitter that cats of these areas have been DNA tested and shown to be jaguar. He cited this paper. 

The authors in a way already had a response built into the paper to such a rebuttal, stating that the ancient jaguar and American lion would have shared the domain. So what does everyone think? Is this skull of a jaguar or an American lion?

JAGUAR OR LION

Based on the shape and relative length of the nasals (a), the shape and relative width of the rostrum (b) and the transisiton from the maxillary bone to the arches ©, I would get to Panthera leo.


JAGUAR SKULLS

Based on the skulls I saw, I'd say that jaguars are closer to lions and leopards than to tigers. Of these three (Panthera leo, Panthera onca and Panthera pardus), however, jaguar skulls show more features typical for tiger skulls.


EVOLUTION

I remember a discussion on another forum quite some years ago. The discussion was about the Americas, lions, jaguars and evolution and it started with a very old skull attributed to Panthera atrox. I participated, but to a degree only.

My feeling was not everything was known about the two big cats in the Americas (referring to Panthera leo and Panthera onca). 

I know there was a split in Panthera a long time ago. Based on the skulls I saw, my guess is tigers split first. They're different from the other three species (not counting P. uncia for now), whereas the other three (P. leo, P. onca and P. pardus) seem to be related. 

Of these three species, lions could be crucial. Their way of life offered many opportunities. When they spread out, they met no opposition. Not in the open landscapes they preferred. 

Leopards adapted to woodland and elevated regions, but jaguars seem to be typical forest cats. I always wondered about the robustness of jaguars, as they mostly hunt smallish animals. In South-America, there are no large herbivores in the forests. Not any more, I mean. Jaguars didn't quite adapt. In a way, they seem to be overpowered. Why is that?

My guess was (referring to the discussion mentioned above), that they're relatively new. Did they migrate from Europe? Lions could and did cross Berengia and settled in the northern part of the Americas, but solitary big cats struggled to cross Berengia. This means that lions should have been the only representative of Panthera in the Americas. But they're not. So where did jaguars come from?

The only logical explanation I could find back then was they have to be related to Panthera atrox. When the climate changed in the Americas and big herbivores started to disappear, lions had to adapt. Maybe prides were replaced by small groups first and maybe some individuals started living on their own later. Maybe the conditions in the northern part of the Americas were too difficult to survive and maybe the conditions in the south offered more opportunities. Over time, individuals in the south adapted to forest life and water.


SIZE AND ROBUSTNESS

The scenario discussed above can explain why jaguars of large size only occur in regions where the forest is less dense (Venezuela, the Pantanal and a few other regions): open woodland offers more opportunities for large herbivores and those who hunt them would be able to maintain a large size. 

This scenario however still doesn't explain the robustness typical for jaguars. So what is the reason?

My feeling is that jaguars are big cats that had to scale down over time in order to survive. The question is where the scaling down started. Did Panthera onca develop in Europe and split a long time ago, or did they develop from a population of Panthera atrox in the southern part of North-America? 

Skulls can help to a degree. Jaguar skulls are closer to Panthera tigris and Panthera leo than to Panthera pardus. My take is they're closer to Panthera leo. Maybe the features in jaguar skulls also seen in tiger skulls are a result of adaptation to forest life.

Quoting the discussion of the South American P. atrox to start another discussion here. Namely, the relationship between S. populator and P. atrox with the new information that P. atrox existed further south than previously thought.

If it is of help for the discussion, the South American P. atrox skull measures around 340 mm complete.

A few niche partitioning scenarios come to mind. As mentioned by @GrizzlyClaws One scenario would be essentially the opposite of the situation in North America, whereby Smilodon would be the larger predator of the two and prey mass ranges would be assigned accordingly. This scenario would be the best fit if we assume Smilodon arrived in South America before P. atrox and used this time to become a superpredator in terms of mass due to the open niche. The smaller P. atrox specimens were pushed to the south later, allowing them to coexist with the larger S. populator if this scenario were to be true. This could be explain why the South American skull is rather small. 

Nonetheless, a single skull cannot speak for the true size of the South American population. This leaves many more questions for discussion. Did two similar size predators coexist or was one indeed pushed to become smaller? If so, was the 10%-20% size difference enough for niche partitioning? Knowing P. atrox was an animal built for a more open landscape, perhaps size did not solely allow niche partitioning but habitat preference did as well. On top of all these questions, could the closeness of niche between P. atrox and S. populator be part of the formula that doomed both species to extinction in the south? Remember, P. onca was able to get past the Pleistocene extinction while both these giants disappeared rather suddenly. Please share your thoughts! Reply

[GrizzlyClaws]

Since Smilodon fatalis and Smilodon populator were likely derived from the more primitive Smilodon gracilis, and ironically both species had predated Panthera atrox in the history of America.

But why Smilodon fatalis just let the newly arrived Panthera atrox seized the niche position as the top predator in its domain, while Smilodon populator remained occupying that position?

Maybe fatalis was positioned to be the second fiddle, while populator chose to evolve as the apex predator? Reply

[tigerluver]

Maybe a difference in the carnivora guild between the Americas kept S. fatalis smaller from the start? Or perhaps some type of social structure?

Panthera atrox probably arrived onto the Americas as massive as it was from the start because it was closely related to or simply an offshoot of P. fossilis. Considering the disappearance date of P. fossilis and relationship to P. atrox, P. atrox probably arrived onto America much earlier than fossil record shows. Thus, the S. fatalis and P. atrox interactions and thus evolutionary forces they had on each other probably started earlier too. 

Considering how the fossils recorded are rather recent, perhaps P. atrox being giant it was from its appearance inhibited S. fatalis slow progression to a larger size like its cousin in the south and thus by the end of its time, S. fatalis found it better to stop increasing in size and let P. atrox have the superpredator niche. Reply

[GrizzlyClaws]

Panthera atrox could possibly be evolved from Panthera youngi, which could be the Asian offshoot of Panthera fossilis.

Unlike Panthera fossilis from Europe, Panthera youngi was always deemed as its smaller relatives.

Maybe during the arrival of Panthera atrox, its size was rather moderate like Panthera youngi, and Panthera atrox from North America has seized the position as an apex predator, while Panthera atrox didn't seize the domination position, thus it didn't grow larger at all. Reply

[Richardrli]

If Panthera onca mesembrina is now invalid because those supposed fossils are of lions then the question when and in what form did the jaguar enter South America? Would they be a remnant of Panthera Onca augusta that travelled south? Reply

[tigerluver]

Regarding P. onca mesembrina, I will say the paper is wrong in invalidating its entire record. As Ross Barnett mentioned, this paper does prove the existence of P. onca mesembrina at the end of the Pleistocene. The specimens reclassified as P. atrox by Chimento and Agnolin (2017) are probably from the end of the Pleistocene as well. Reply

[johnny rex]

Can someone give some estimations for the skull size of the Ngandong tiger with 480 mm femur? Reply

[GrizzlyClaws]

(06-29-2018, 04:46 PM)Wjohnny rex Wrote: Can someone give some estimations for the skull size of the Ngandong tiger with 480 mm femur?

The skull alone of a late Pleistocene Sumatran tiger is probably about 480 mm, so this has definitely pointed out a larger specimen than the Ngandong tiger with 480 mm femur. Reply

[Smilodon-Rex]

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Giants of Ice Age——American Lion＆Smilodon designed by myself
 @GrizzlyClaws ,  Smilodon populator's size may just equivalent to modern big tiger's subspecies, however, they still heavier than modern lions and tigers, and can also grow into 400 kg. Moreover, Smilodons have the more powerful body than modern lions and tigers since they born.
 American Lions also have the more powerful body than modern felines too, be different from Smilodons, American Lions are taller and their heads are bigger. 
    Here are the bodysize's range of few prehistoric big cats:
Smilodon populator——from 420 to 430 kg
Amphimachairodus giganteus——it may the biggest machairodontinae in history, according to the estimates of 460 mm skull, the weight limit may achieves  450 kg
American lion——from 450 to 465 kg  
Eurasia Cave lion——from 430 to 450 kg
Mosbach lion——from 450 to 493 kg
Ngandong tiger——from 350 to 370 kg
Natodomeri lion——from 350 to 370kg Reply