Modern Weights and Measurements of Leopards

[Balam]

Quote:You're gonna need to prove that. As far as I know, +80kg male leopards occur in different countries unlike jaguaresses who seem to occur solely in the Pantanal and rarely in other South American area's.

There's nothing to prove here, the global percentage of leopards that reach or surpass 80 kg in range is less than 1% based on the hundreds of captured and weighed leopards by reliable entities for decades. Leopards only surpass this threshold in certain prey-rich African savanna reserves and Iran (where they achieve their maximum sizes). The global distribution of leopards is the greatest among any cat, and the number of leopards across multiple regions and countries who attain 80 kg in body mass or more can be counted in the lower double digits.

Pantanal jagauresses alone almost entirely outnumber the number of leopards who reach or surpass this size, but they're not the only ones capable of doing this. Since the body mass of jaguars is directly correlated to the prey biomass of the environments, they inhabit one can definitely expect Llanos, Cerrado, Llanos d Moxos, and other areas to produce females achieving this threshold, and we have data of Llanos females doing this without an issue. The sample size for females in most of these areas is much lower than what's available for multiple leopards across Africa and Asia, yet they still manage to outnumber them in this regard.

Quote:Again the weights themselves originate from scientific studies. I don't care who decided to collect them. 

You edited that post from this initial statement you made:

Quote:

Quote:The tables for Indian leopards are weights gathered from scientific studies, none come from hunter records which you for example like to stick with for cougars. Just saying.

After the author of said table admitted to using plenty of doubtful and exaggerated hunting records.

Quote:You realise the samples are small and most of the time an individual pops up right? 

The exact same thing could be said about Atlantic Forest and Chaco jaguaresses but that didn't stop you from using them as props to say they don't surpass 80 kg in weight, despite one At female being nearly 90 kg and one Chacoan female being close to the 80 kg threshold with extremely limited sample sizes for the Chacoan side:

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

This is of course counting that the body mass of prey in the At Forest is significantly lesser than the prey availability of leopards in places like Sri Lanka where they also have yet to produce a single 80+ kg specimen. Let me guess, small sample size for those as well?

Quote:The two Indian male leopards are a great example.

Only the 83 kg male, which was said to contain stomach content, comes from a reputable source, which matches the one jaguaress from the At Forest at 86 kg which is to be expected considering both populations are close in average size, the At Forest jagauresses being still the largest animal on averages and maximums when compared to Indian leopards.

Quote:And? This isn't an excuses only applied to jaguars. This happens to all animals, it's called variation.

Size variations based on external factors are convenient for those who want to create agendas around small representatives of one species against the largest representatives of other species. The fact is that once jaguars get access to prey which body sizes and quantities similar to what leopards have at their disposal they quickly dwarf them in size. This can be attributed to jaguars having a wider genetic predisposition to larger skeletal growth. It doesn't matter how much a leopard eats, it will never attain the dimensions of the largest jaguars in a healthy state.

Quote:Leopards have to compete with larger carnivores in both Africa and India so there's that.  

The competition argument is extremely poor, competition is moot when leopards are able to feed on medium-sized prey with frequency. The fact that they don't go after the larger game because such game is generally outside the size threshold of what leopards can take down with regularity counteracts any niche partition they might have established with larger carnivores that do tackle this prey. Leopards still kill animals like kudu, warthog, and a wide variety of antelopes that overlap in body mass with the young cattle that jaguars at times kill, and generally surpass in body mass the caiman and capybara that jaguars kill in floodplain areas, and yet despite this the jaguar still vastly surpass these leopards in size. 

Sri Lankan leopards are the apex mammalian carnivore in the environments, and yet they do not grow larger than their Indian counterparts despite this. In fact, both populations are petty much equal in size, which is to be expected because the variables that actually matter: prey size and availability is practically the same in both areas

Quote:When they don't have to compete, they turn out to be more impressively built and Central African leopards are the prime example. You of course can stick with those flattering camera trap angles. I couldn't care less. Skull data proves enough and so does Dr. Philipp Henschel.

Learn to differentiate between a subjective opinion and an objective one. It is your subjective opinion that those leopards are "more impressive built", this of course doesn't translate to the data gathered by scientists who have captured and weighed these leopards: Powell and Jackson - Wild cats status survey and conservation action plan 1996

*This image is copyright of its original author

None of these healthy adult males surpassed 60 kg in weight, which is to be expected for leopards that at best match the size in skulls of Central American and Mexican jaguars, but don't surpass them in absolute measurements.

Also please stop twisting the words of Dr. Henschel on here, he's never once said Central African leopards are the world's largest, is he aware that you're using him as a probe to spread your propaganda on online forums?

Quote:Once again the jaguar isn't subordinate to larger carnivores unlike the leopard. Persian and Central African leopards show that they become larger when they're aren't subordinate anymore.

And neither are lions or tigers but it doesn't matter because when all variables are equal those three cats will always be larger in size than leopards.

Quote:What a lame excuses; the list becomes larger the more animals are being weighed but the same could be said vice versa. You're forgetting the huge sample size of the biggest jaguar population in the world. You have no idea what of luxury you're dealing with. 

You have hundreds of leopards weight at your disposal, but I could say the same thing about the small sample sizes of female jaguars in many areas and the complete absence of sizes in floodplain areas such as the Colombian Llanos or the Llanos de Moxos where they likely grow just as big as those form the Pantanal, and recently w received confirmation of a 2-year-old female from the Colombian Llanos weighing 70 kg, without a doubt, she'll be 80+ in her prime by a decent margin. Every excuse you have poorly come up with for why leopards don't grow larger than female jaguars can be utilized for these jaguars as well.

Quote:Give it some time until data becomes available in Central Africa. In the mean time, let's focus on the skull data and visual footage. We're dealing with leopards who possess the largest skulls in the world and they're very clearly robust in appearance. Unfortunately researchers and rangers are putting their life at risk for leopard (and other animal) conservation in an extremely dangerous environment.

The data on weights for these leopards has just been posted above, what the sample size is small? So is the sample size for jaguaresses in the Chaco. And no, their skulls are not the largest in the world, Persian leopards outsize them in average and maximum measurements, do I have to go over this again?

Quote:That is the biggest joke I've ever read regarding jaguars; Central American male jaguars average more than 50kg and females more than 40kg:

Quote:Meanwhile Arabian barely manage to average 30kg for males and 20kg for females:

The point is that when if you're going to cherry-pick the smallest populations of one species to compare to another one, you also have to choose the smallest populations of the other species. Of course, here you are proving my point again, despite both populations living in areas with small and scarce prey, the smallest jaguars still outsize the smallest leopards. Reply