Login

johnny rex · 12-04-2014, 07:48 PM

(12-04-2014, 07:25 PM)peter Wrote:
(12-04-2014, 10:27 AM)'johnny rex' Wrote: @Pckts Male tiger (Bengal and Siberian tigers) and lion (Kruger lions) skulls both average 15-16. Some specimen even go to 17 inches. Just like most of the male ligers. Skull width tend to be the same for those three animals except tigers or maybe some ligers tend to have much wider skull. If I am not mistaken I saw a picture showed two circus lions and a liger, and there were no differences between the sizes of their heads eventhough the lion head looked a little bit longer. I will try to find the photo and then I will post it later.

Hi Johnny, Hope you like it here.

1 - Greatest skull length of Indian tigers, Amurs and lions

I have well over hundred reliable measurements of skulls of wild male Indian tigers. Although they average well over 14 inches in greatest total length, the average for all, as Pocock (1929) suggested, could be just about 14 inches. The average of skulls of captive male Indian tigers is a bit below 14 inches. Wild skulls are larger (and much heavier), that is.

In Amur tigers, it's the other way round. Skulls of captive adult males are about 14,5 inches in greatest total length, whereas skulls of wild males seem (I never measured skulls of wild Amur tigers, meaning I'm not sure about this statement) to be a bit shorter. Although they are longer than most male skulls of captive Indian tigers, they are not as robust. In upper and lower canine length, however, Amur tiger skulls are unsurpassed.

Over the years, I measured many big cat skulls in museums and private collections. The largest skulls (wild or captive) are always lion skulls. There's no question lions, at the level of species, have longer skulls than tigers. This is in absolutes. Same for relatives, because lions usually are a bit shorter in head and body length. Skulls of wild male lions in south-east Africa quite often get to 14,75 inches. The longest I measured, however, was from Ethiopia. This skull was just over 16 inches. Skulls of captive animals seem to be longer than wild skulls. The reason is lions, in contrast to tigers (with the exception of Amur tigers), often do well in captivity. Same for skulls. In beauty and density (weight), however, captive skulls do not compare to wild skulls.

In absolutes, the difference in greatest total length between most skulls of male lions and most skulls of large tiger subspecies is limited. Could be just about 1 cm., I think. In skulls of wild animals, the difference could be even less. The longest Indian tiger skull (Hewett, 1938) was 16,25 inches. I never saw one, but expect wild Amur tigers could be similar or a trifle longer. The longest skulls of wild lions are a trifle longer (up to 16,5 inches or a bit over).

Lion skulls are longer, because they have longer snouts (extended maxillary bone). Tiger snouts, although shorter, usually are a bit more robust. The reason is they have larger canines. The rostrum, therefore, needs to be reinforced. In zygomatic width, there's little to choose between the two. Relatively speaking, one could say tiger skulls are a bit wider and be right. The reason is they are usually a bit shorter.

2 - LIGERS AND TIGONS

I saw a few skulls of ligers and tigons. All were shorter than an average lion or tiger skull. The exceptional animals who feature in many debates about freaks (referring to ligers, tigons and all the rest of it) are few and far between. But when they are large, they are larger than the largest lion or tiger. I saw many and felt pity for them. The reason is they belong nowhere. And they know.

The photograph of the tigon was first posted by me on AVA some years ago. It was a very large male, but he was the exception to the rule. Ligers usually are larger.

When you debate freaks, remember they, apart from one (a mix between a wild Indian tiger and a wild Indian leopard seen by Hicks more than a century ago), are never seen in the wild. Mixes are a result of captivity and humans. For every giant you see, there are many disabled and blind animals.

Here's the story about the mix Hicks saw in India:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Thanks for the responses @peter. But how about this 17 inch lion skull? I think this must come from the Kruger subspecies.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Have you seen Guate's post about the largest liger, Hercules? When he compared the animal with Jaipur the Siberian tiger, it seems they are comparable in size and weight. I think liger is larger than tiger and lion only in general.

GuateGojira · 12-04-2014, 07:53 PM

(12-04-2014, 01:04 PM)'Richardrli' Wrote:
(12-04-2014, 10:39 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: Just a suggestion to both of you, why you don't use centimeters or millimeters, instead of inches? Inches are a raw and unpractical type of measurement, millimeters are more exact, especially in the case of skulls.

Just to help in the debate, here are the record skulls with that of the liger skull that I post (greatest length x zygomatic wide):
* Liger skull: 432 mm x 279 mm (http://schreckensart.homestead.com/skullscats.html)
* African lion: 432 mm x 281 mm (Ward, 1914).
* Bengal tiger: 413 mm x 251 mm (Hewett, 1938).
* Amur tiger: 406 mm x 286 mm (Mazák, 1983).

Please check that all the skulls from the wild are "Record" specimens (which means that they are not the norm), while that of the liger, we simply don't know if it came from a large or a small specimen, or even its sex.

Hope this helps.

The 406mm Amur skull has width 3mm larger than the record Bengal skull, this is the widest tiger skull on record.

Just to add more information, in Bengal tiger skulls, here are the widest on record:
* Rowland Ward (1914) - 400 mm x 283 mm - No location.
* Hawkins (1954) - 387 mm x 279 mm - Asaam.
* McDougal (1977) - 381 mm x 279 mm - Chitwan, Nepal.

Although not as wide in absolute values, they are wider than that of Manchuria in relative values. There are some long but narrow skulls, and other short buw wide skulls. Overall my samples, the average ratio between GSL-ZW in both subspecies is of 1.44.

johnny rex · 12-04-2014, 07:59 PM

@GuateGojira are there any tiger skulls reached width of 12 foot? If there are no tigers attain this skull width, so far, can tigers attain 12 foot width in zygomatic width?

peter · 12-04-2014, 08:32 PM

Johnny,

You need to have seen hundreds of skulls in order to fully appreciate a 15-inch lion skull. We know 16-inch lion skulls have featured in a few peer-reviewed documents and we also know they can get to 16,5 inches and, possibly, a bit over. A 17-inch skull, however, is so much larger than an average skull that one would like to see a bit more than a picture and a report.

GrizzlyClaws · 12-04-2014, 09:37 PM

(12-01-2014, 11:46 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: If you watch the Super Cat doc they have a lion, Tiger and Liger skull all side by side

The liger skull is massive, obviously we don't know if the Tiger and lion skull are male or female but they don't come close to the liger skull size.

Hey Grizz, how do you know captive tiger skulls are larger than wild ones, out of curiousty?

Some captive Amur tigers have been known to have their head measurement up to 20 inches, so their skulls are probably up to 17 inches as well.

BTW, the monstrous specimen like Baikal probably got a skull between 17 to 18 inches.

GrizzlyClaws · 12-05-2014, 10:46 AM

(12-04-2014, 11:07 AM)'johnny rex' Wrote:
(12-04-2014, 10:39 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: Just a suggestion to both of you, why you don't use centimeters or millimeters, instead of inches? Inches are a raw and unpractical type of measurement, millimeters are more exact, especially in the case of skulls.

Just to help in the debate, here are the record skulls with that of the liger skull that I post (greatest length x zygomatic wide):
* Liger skull: 432 mm x 279 mm (http://schreckensart.homestead.com/skullscats.html)
* African lion: 432 mm x 281 mm (Ward, 1914).
* Bengal tiger: 413 mm x 251 mm (Hewett, 1938).
* Amur tiger: 406 mm x 286 mm (Mazák, 1983).

Please check that all the skulls from the wild are "Record" specimens (which means that they are not the norm), while that of the liger, we simply don't know if it came from a large or a small specimen, or even its sex.

Hope this helps.

@GuateGojira Actually if you see a female tiger and a female liger together in a circus or a zoo, there is only a lil bit size difference. This is a good size comparison between a tigress with a ligress at McCarthy Wildlife Sanctuary.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

So we can assume the liger skull is belong to a male liger. I think I want to see size comparisons between Baikal, "Amur" and Kaziranga male tigers and various male ligers. Oh, skull size comparisons between those tigers and various male ligers would be nice too.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Apollo · 12-05-2014, 02:45 PM

Here are some good looking specimens

Baikal

*This image is copyright of its original author

Another giant amur

*This image is copyright of its original author

This one, a captive (Duisburg Zoo) male Amur tiger (born in Rotterdam Zoo). He was 320 cm. in a straight line and estimated at 280-300 kg. in his prime. Must have been quite a tiger.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Another photograph of this giant. The other tiger is a full-grown female.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Huge snow white tiger from Bhagavan Antle

*This image is copyright of its original author

Big boy from China

*This image is copyright of its original author

Sabre, 1060 lb tiger, once topped 1205 lbs (according to owners)

*This image is copyright of its original author

Thunder's (son of Sabre) weight is unknown but he's also estimated around the 408 kg (900 lbs) mark or more

*This image is copyright of its original author

This man named Nyoka came to live at Colchester Zoo in 1970. This picture comes from a short feature by the BBC about Nyoka at Colchester Zoo. The lion is Simba, who weighed about 826 pounds.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Some comparisons

*This image is copyright of its original author

Huge neutered lions

*This image is copyright of its original author

A huge siberian from a facility in Slovakia

*This image is copyright of its original author

Giant from Harbin

*This image is copyright of its original author

Pckts · 12-06-2014, 12:22 AM

(12-04-2014, 09:37 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:
(12-01-2014, 11:46 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: If you watch the Super Cat doc they have a lion, Tiger and Liger skull all side by side

The liger skull is massive, obviously we don't know if the Tiger and lion skull are male or female but they don't come close to the liger skull size.

Hey Grizz, how do you know captive tiger skulls are larger than wild ones, out of curiousty?

Some captive Amur tigers have been known to have their head measurement up to 20 inches, so their skulls are probably up to 17 inches as well.

BTW, the monstrous specimen like Baikal probably got a skull between 17 to 18 inches.

Its to hard to know what actually skull measurements would be off of head size.
Muscle mass, fur densisty, etc will play a huge role.
From the sizes of skulls confirmed of captive Siberians that I have seen. They don't seem any larger than wild. 280kg specimens with 14.24'' skulls, seems to fit nicely. Also, skull size is not direct relation to tiger size, body length is usually a better indicator to tiger weight.

GuateGojira · 12-06-2014, 09:31 AM

(12-04-2014, 07:59 PM)'johnny rex' Wrote: @GuateGojira are there any tiger skulls reached width of 12 foot? If there are no tigers attain this skull width, so far, can tigers attain 12 foot width in zygomatic width?

I think you are referring to 12 inches. Well, in this case, I have not read about any skull from a modern tiger or lion with a zygomatic breath over 11.3 inches. All skulls (even record ones) are lower than that, and the average is even less.

GrizzlyClaws · 12-06-2014, 10:05 AM

(12-06-2014, 12:22 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(12-04-2014, 09:37 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:
(12-01-2014, 11:46 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: If you watch the Super Cat doc they have a lion, Tiger and Liger skull all side by side

The liger skull is massive, obviously we don't know if the Tiger and lion skull are male or female but they don't come close to the liger skull size.

Hey Grizz, how do you know captive tiger skulls are larger than wild ones, out of curiousty?

Some captive Amur tigers have been known to have their head measurement up to 20 inches, so their skulls are probably up to 17 inches as well.

BTW, the monstrous specimen like Baikal probably got a skull between 17 to 18 inches.

Its to hard to know what actually skull measurements would be off of head size.
Muscle mass, fur densisty, etc will play a huge role.
From the sizes of skulls confirmed of captive Siberians that I have seen. They don't seem any larger than wild. 280kg specimens with 14.24'' skulls, seems to fit nicely. Also, skull size is not direct relation to tiger size, body length is usually a better indicator to tiger weight.

The freak Amur like Baikal is absolutely massive and absolutely dwarfs any other modern cats including the infamous Kaziranga giants.

Every part of his body is prehistoric, so no need to doubt his skull size.

We all know that Bengal is king in the wild, but in the captivity, Amur still reigns supreme.

The biggest skull and biggest canines all belong to the captive giant Amur.

johnny rex · 12-06-2014, 10:25 AM

(12-06-2014, 09:31 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:
(12-04-2014, 07:59 PM)'johnny rex' Wrote: @GuateGojira are there any tiger skulls reached width of 12 foot? If there are no tigers attain this skull width, so far, can tigers attain 12 foot width in zygomatic width?

I think you are referring to 12 inches. Well, in this case, I have not read about any skull from a modern tiger or lion with a zygomatic breath over 11.3 inches. All skulls (even record ones) are lower than that, and the average is even less.

Oh yes sorry my bad. [img]images/smilies/undecided.gif[/img] I should type it 12 inch not 12 foot lol. How about the measurements of Panthera atrox and Cromerian lion skull width?

johnny rex · 12-06-2014, 10:27 AM

(12-06-2014, 12:22 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(12-04-2014, 09:37 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:
(12-01-2014, 11:46 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: If you watch the Super Cat doc they have a lion, Tiger and Liger skull all side by side

The liger skull is massive, obviously we don't know if the Tiger and lion skull are male or female but they don't come close to the liger skull size.

Hey Grizz, how do you know captive tiger skulls are larger than wild ones, out of curiousty?

Some captive Amur tigers have been known to have their head measurement up to 20 inches, so their skulls are probably up to 17 inches as well.

BTW, the monstrous specimen like Baikal probably got a skull between 17 to 18 inches.

Its to hard to know what actually skull measurements would be off of head size.
Muscle mass, fur densisty, etc will play a huge role.
From the sizes of skulls confirmed of captive Siberians that I have seen. They don't seem any larger than wild. 280kg specimens with 14.24'' skulls, seems to fit nicely. Also, skull size is not direct relation to tiger size, body length is usually a better indicator to tiger weight.

So, @Pckts you believe Baikal actually have a rather small skull measuring only at 14-15 inches at that size? In most videos that I had watched that showing Amur tigers and lions together, it is always the Amur tigers that have the larger head size when compared to lions. For example, those videos show a comparison between a male lion and an Amur tiger.

GrizzlyClaws · 12-06-2014, 10:29 AM

All we have focused so far was mainly about the GSL, not much about the width.

The largest Panthera atrox skull on the record is 467.5mm and 304.5mm.

The largest Cromerian lion skull is 484.7mm and the width is unknown, but their skull is proportionally narrower compared to other big cats.

So we can assume that the largest skull of the prehistoric lions or lion-like cats should be around 12 inches.

johnny rex · 12-06-2014, 10:37 AM

(12-06-2014, 10:29 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: All we have focused so far was mainly about the GSL, not much about the width.

The largest Panthera atrox skull on the record is 467.5mm and 304.5mm.

The largest Cromerian lion skull is 484.7mm and the width is unknown, but their skull is proportionally narrower compared to other big cats.

So we can assume that the largest skull of the prehistoric lions or lion-like cats should be around 12 inches.

Okay we assumed that the prehistoric lions or lion-like cats largest skull width is around 12 inches, so considering the fact that tigers have much wider skull than lions, then should we assume prehistoric tigers or tiger-like cats have much wider skull than prehistoric lions/lion-like cats?

GrizzlyClaws · 12-06-2014, 10:37 AM

Baikal looks even bigger than the Cromerian lion specimen with a 460mm skull.

This guy is absolutely a freak, he is not just a normal captive Amur tiger, but a reincarnation of the giant prehistoric tiger.

At the age of 12, he was weighed at 850 pounds, but his prime weight could be even higher.

Even during the prehistoric era, a big cat with his size would have very few feline rivals.

He was incredible, just see how he was agile and flexible for his size.

The average male captive Amur tigers weigh about 500 pounds which is the same as the male wild Amur tiger in the past.

But Baikal is exceptional, since his race can still often produce some specimens like him in the captivity, this has granted so much credit from many experts, and also lead them to believe that the Amur tiger still deserves the title of the largest cat.

Login
Email:
Password: Lost Password?
Remember?