Smilodon populator

[jrocks]

(06-02-2022, 08:40 AM)LonePredator Wrote:

(06-02-2022, 08:12 AM)jrocks Wrote:

(06-02-2022, 07:54 AM)LonePredator Wrote:

(06-02-2022, 06:56 AM)jrocks Wrote:

(06-01-2022, 08:46 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:

(06-01-2022, 10:15 AM)LonePredator Wrote: If you use the Van Valkenburgh formula to estimate Lions then the weight will be a huge underestimation, if you estimate Tiger, it will still be a big underestimation and if you estimate Smilodon Populator then it will be a big overestimation.

Actually it will be a gross overestimation, and here is an example, using the biggest CBL from the Panthera cats, taken by scientists, here you can see the weights calculated (in red) and at the right the maximum weights actually recorded (in blue):

Formula use: log mass = 3.11 * log CBL - 5.38 - Van Valkeburgh (1990) - only felids.

Tiger - 342 mm. = 316.8 kg (Est.) ---- 260 kg (Real)
Lion - 355 mm. = 355.8 kg (Est.) ---- 250 kg (Real)
Jaguar - 280 mm. = 170.1 kg (Est.) ---- 148 kg (Real)
Leopard - 256 mm. = 128.7 kg (Est.) ---- 96 kg (Real)
Snow leopard - 174 mm. = 38.7 kg (Est.) ---- 52 kg (Real)

Now we can see why thise formula is not reliable, not with Panthera cats at least.

would using the van vaulkenburg formula on populator skulls create huge overestimations as well, also i think a way to get an exact weight for the biggest populators is to scale it up from the skull of bonaerensis 46, as the entire skeleton of bonaernesis 46 managed to get completely preserved, although its just my opinion and i dont really know to much so idk

That would still not be a good way to estimate because of the same reasons as I described previously.

And yes, a big overestimation is possible but how big or small can’t be said with absolute certainty. Let’s just say it was somewhere between 350-400kg rather than 436kg since apparently some felids with relatively even smaller skulls were used to make this equation.

i feel like it would be best if smilodon bonaerensis 46 was between 350-400 kg, the reason i think that is because the largest populator specimen christiansen and harris estimated was 360 kg, and smilodon bonaerensis 46 was even bigger than that 360 kg specimen christiansen and harris estimated in 2005. christiansen and harris also said that there were large specimens of populator that exceeded 400 kg, and they said that in their study in 2005. 2005 is before the 15.4 inch uruguay skull and the 16.07 inch skull were taken into account, both skulls of which are now considered the 2 largest specimens of populator and both of those skull specimens are much larger than bonaerensis 46

I don’t know the exact measurements of the specimens you are mentioning. Do you have all the bone measurements of all these specimens? And also the measurements of the 360kg specimen estimated by Christiansen and Harris?

Maybe if we have the measurements then we might be able to make a better comparison and get a rough idea of their weights.

But once again, we can’t say from minor skull variations that the whole specimen was bigger. The difference in skull size is not that much after all.

https://peerj.com/preprints/2327.pdf

this is a sherani study from 2016, it says on the 15th page that christiansen and harris estimated that the largest of the same specimen did not exceed 360 kg, and because of that i think the specimen that sherani puts as 450 kg is the one that christiansen and harris put as 360 kg, although i dont know for sure if that same largest specimen was the one chrisitansen estimated at 360 kg as i cant get access that full christiansen paper. what i do know for sure is the specimen christiansen and harris estimated to be at 360 kg is smaller than smilodon bonaeresis 46, and tigerluver said that himself, you should ask tigerluver or guate to make sure the 374.5 mm humerus is the specimen christiansen estimated at 360 kg, below here is a link for i think the entire skeletal measurements of bonaerensis 46

https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-smilodo...-a-species Reply