The strongest bites in the animal kingdom

[LonePredator]

(04-28-2022, 08:36 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(04-28-2022, 08:10 PM)LonePredator Wrote: @Pckts And you said that Jaguars are the most dense cats which is most likely false. Tigers and Jaguars should be nearly equally dense.

Just because Jaguars are proportionally shorter does not mean Jaguars are denser. Jaguars have a proportionally big belly and big chest (in volume)

While Sumatran Tigers have taller and bulkier legs so they have bigger limbs (in volume)

So both are dense but in different places. Never mind, you are free to disagree and I don’t mean any offense to you but I don’t agree with the claim that ‘jaguars are pound for pound strongest’. It is true in theory but practically, that is not how it should work.

You keep saying to Isometrically scale them but you’re not factoring in the differences in their morphology. *not proven yet* But I think tigers Grow longer and taller than a Jaguar at equal weights. No matter how you extrapolate it, a Jaguar at equal weights should generally be a bit shorter in length and height while thicker in chest and abdominal. Neck and limbs are unknown, I certainly won’t put a Tigers forelimb ahead of the Jaguars just yet, I need to see real data on that. Skull size and weight to body size needs to be determined for both before extrapolation as well. 


I’ll see what I can find on skull size tomorrow but if you want to look, check the Java Tiger thread on page 4, you’ll see some good skulls to get started then look at Almeidas skulls for comparison.

Even if we do go by what you are saying then that makes Jaguars LESS OR EQUALLY dense than Tigers. You are saying Jaguars are shorter in height and length BUT have more chest and belly girth.

This means that the VOLUME of Jaguars’ chest and belly is higher than the Tiger and more volume means less density.

Density and Volume are INVERSELY proportional to each other and if the Jaguar’s chest and belly are of higher volume then that means it is of LOWER density.

And I don’t mean any offense to you. The uppercase words and the exclaimation marks are just to make it easier for you to understand because you are not getting my point.

An average jaguar (who is not too bulky but of average bulkiness) will have a slightly lesser bite force than an average Tiger (which is not too bulky either). In short, the morphology of both the animals should be the same as it was in the study. Reply