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

[GuateGojira]

(06-10-2022, 12:16 AM)Dragoon Wrote: Hello @GuateGojira

I hope you are doing well!
I'm new to the forums so forgive me if I make any mistakes. 

I was wondering If the weight average for the tiger is calculated with stomach content? 

I was also wondering if we could create a distribution between Amur and Bengle tigers? I think it would be interesting to see the standard deviation between the two.

Hi, nice to meet you.

Sure, we can create that distribution. Tell me what do you need and I will provide it to you.

About the stomach content, with lions and tigers, is partially included, but let me explain. All the studies and hunting records of great cats ignore the point of the stomach content, they just recorded the figures and leave it like that. Only three authors (Smuts (with South Africa lions only), Bertram and the Maharaja of Cooch Behar) adjusted some of they weights for stomach content. After that, none do that with lions and tigers. Now, as we know the single specimens from Nepal, I adjuted them using the figures of Sunquist (1981), but that is all. Once I consulted Dr Sunquist about this issue and he told that if I am going to adjust all the records of the tigers, I should adjust all the records of all the other cats to make a fair comparison, a work that will be titanic and at the end, impossible. So, in conclution, some of the records of the tigers are adjusted for stomach content, and all of the figures that clearly mentioned any stomach content (like "gorged" or "full of beef") were remouved from the sample. The remaning figures were left like they are assuming that the inevitable inclusion of young or ill specimens in the old hunting records will level any stomach content that could be included by error in the sample, and the same process was done with lions, jaguars and leopards. Reply