The Java Tiger (Panthera tigris sondaica)

[GuateGojira]

The size of the Sunda tiger (Panthera tigris sondaica):

After gathering all the data available about the size of this tiger subspecies, I made a comparison of the skull size (the most reliable of all, search my previous posts here) and get to the conclusion that the Sumatran and the Javanese tiger were of the same size (the largest specimens were from Java, although from a marginal difference). On the other hand, Bali tigers are portrayed as the dwarfs of the tiger world, however a skull comparison shows that they are not "so small" and that the smaller Sumatran and Javanese specimens are, in fact, smaller than the smallest Balinese tigers. Probably the dramatic difference is caused by the small sample size and the Balinese tigers were of the same size than the small-to-medium size Sumatran and Javanese tigers. Mazák (1983) stated that based on the skull size, Javanese tigers were probably of the same size of the South China tigers, which allows the possibility of some specimens reaching up to 180 cm in head-body "between pegs" and about 160 kg, if not a little more. Take in count that the average Bengal tiger skull measure 353.4 mm, which is slightly longer than the largest Sumatran and Javanese tigers skulls measured.

Here is the comparative image of this subspecies, following Wilting et al. (2015) which summarize the three island groups (Sumatra, Java and Bali) in one single subspecies (P. t. sondaica):

*This image is copyright of its original author

Most of the measurements available were from Sumatran tigers, so I decided not to mix them with those of the two only Javanese tigers and the one Balinese tiger available, measured in the flesh. The average skull figures came from the studies of J. H. Mazák and Yamaguchi, choosing those with the largest samples, and the range figures states the largest and smallest skulls reported overall.

For females of Java and Bali, there are no reliable measurements, as those reported were probably taken from skins, as Mazák stated. I decided to include the large Javanese tiger of 275 cm, because based in the largest skull, this size is completely plausible. However, as I used only secondary references for this specimen, I don't know if it was actually taken "over curves", so I put a sign of "?" in any case. The Gondol tiger (Bali) was a "large" specimen, based in the picture and the skull, but the skull-body ratio of 5.4 produce only a head-body of c.168 cm, which suggest that the measurements were taken "over curves". However, this is the only Balinese tiger, actually measured in the flesh, that came from a reliable source, so it most be included.

This image summarize the data available that I could get, and provide a good idea of the size of this subspecies.

Just one final thing. The known range of sizes of the Bali tiger using in Mazák (1981) and copy-pasted in all the books and the internet, were calculated based in skins measurements and did not represent real sizes taken "in the flesh", check this out, from the document of Mazák of 1976 "On the Bali tiger, Panthera tigris balica (Schwarz, 1912)":

*This image is copyright of its original author

So, using the smaller Balinese male tiger skull (295 mm) and the ratio of 5.4, it produce a head-body of c.159 cm, which suggest a total length of at least c.235 cm, which is larger than the smaller range calculated by Mazák. The problem in estimating sizes from skins is that some times, the skins are stretched to unreliable sizes, while in other cases they are shrink and cut when thy are mounted for exhibition, presenting underestimations of the real size (check the case of the Tsavo lions, which  look like "big" dogs instead of lion sized specimens). Reply