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

[JUJOMORE]

(11-26-2021, 10:28 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:

(11-20-2021, 01:22 PM)LonePredator Wrote: However, I have a question regarding the 389kg Royal Bengal Tiger specimen.

Don’t you think that estimating it’s weight at 322kg could be an underestimation since it’s very unlikely for a tiger to have 67kg of stomach content especially when he was said to have eaten about 7 hours prior to the time he was hunted??

Talking about the Smithsonian tiger is like a rabbit hole, too many things to take un count. I tried to make a good post about this specimens but I never got the time.

I can tell you that a big male tiger can eat up to 35 kg in 24 hours, confirmed, but regularly is between 14 - 19 kg, including big males. The Smithsonian tiger certainly could not eat over 45 kg, that is an exageration, but based on the facts that I have, it seems that the weight itself is also exagerated or taken with an innacurate scale 

I will provide more details on this case.

 
This is my first post in this forum, I hope I could contribute  with something new.

In this case it is a comment on Hassinger's famous tiger that is exhibited in the Smithsonian Musesum in Washington. I know that it has been extensively discussed but perhaps some complementary data will come in handy.

First of all, there is no doubt that Hassinger's tiger is the one on display. The comparison of the photo of the dead animal with the photos taken demonstrates this and also the file of the Museum itself in which the details of the specimen are detailed. However, it must be taken into account that the Smithsonian received only the skin and skull of the dead tiger, so it could not verify the data provided by the donor.

The attached photos are from 1997, the date on which the animal was exposed at ground level, so it could be observed in detail and with absolute tranquility. My impression when I see it was that it was a large tiger, but it did not seem exceptional to me either in size or volume. Assuming that the naturalized animal respects the proportions that the animal had in life, it is highly doubtful that it weighed much more than 250 kg or perhaps 275 kg at best. Obviously a visual assessment is not a scientific measurement, but anyone with minimal experience can appreciate that this tiger could never weigh 389 kg, although it is supposed to have been weighed on a scale in a sugar mill. I have seen captive tigers at the same distance with a reference weight of about 200/220 Kg and by comparison, it would be impossible for the Smithsonian tiger to weigh almost twice as much.
 
 It should also be discarded that the dead tiger was gorged,  the belly does not appear swollen in the original photo

Photo from Smithsonian

*This image is copyright of its original author

File from Smithsonian

*This image is copyright of its original author

Hassinger's photo

*This image is copyright of its original author

Photos from 1997

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply