Who is the "king" of tigers? - Bengal or Amur

[peter]

Many thanks, Jonathan. Excellent. A few remarks:

1 - Pm4. The length should be measured at the outer tips of both edges, not at the insertion in the upper jaw. I should have been more accurate about that in my post. Apologies. Could you give it another try?

2 - Condylobasal length. At about 290,00 mm., the skull seems to be average (a tad shorter). In adult male tiger skulls, the difference between condylobasal length and greatest total length ranges between 35,00 and 60,00 mm. As the last part of the sagittal crest is missing, we can't be sure about the greatest total length. However, the photographs suggest 340,00 mm. could be about right for greatest total length. 

3 - Weight. I would be very interested in the weight of the skull. Any scale would do. You could weigh both parts (upper skull and mandibula) seperately.

4 - Rostrum. See if you can give it a try. Same for the width of the upper canines. Would be appreciated.

Skulls of wild male Indian tigers, depending on the sample, average between 345,00 and 355,00 mm. in greatest total length. Your skull is a bit shorter, but the owner very probably wasn't full-grown when he was killed. If he would have been older, chances are the skull would have been about average. It definitely would have been a bit wider. In height, however, the skull, as a result of the vault, could be a bit over par. It also seems to be muscular and robust. All in all, I'd say roundabout average. 

Skulls of wild male Indian tigers are rare. Take care and many thanks on behalf of all of us. Reply