Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences

[Luipaard]

Quote:I've literally posted the weights and specimens used for them

You didn't give info of all 22 males, just a handful.

Quote:You mean for Jaguars that were actually measured Twice? Or if an error was created, it was actually corrected where as this isn't and get's misrepresented time and time again.

The 95kg isn't verified, just around that when time of euthanasia. The cat wasn't able to be released, his body condition was fine, injury wasn't. In fact he's a bloated specimen as shown, don't make up claims his body condition suffered.

Both actually. Higher weights have been chosen when an individual was weighed more than once. And indeed an outlier was added twice. Also please provide evidence that both 95kg and 115kg figures have been used instead of just one. Because you've shown yourself that 91kg is the maximum in the table (because they did not include the 115kg male but did in the chart for some reason).

Yes, at the moment they decided to end the cat's life, he weighed 95kg. At the time of the capture he weighed 115kg because he was found near a carcass. Indeed he appeared bloated/gorged at that time. But if you search up photos, you'll see the male is almost emaciated. Not surprising considering he was in great stress and apparently started to eat his own paw... So no his body condition was far from 'fine'.

Quote:Yet there is no confirmation on weighing at the time of capture no photos of a scale on site or weighing process. The idea of getting weighed at time of arrival isn't backed by fact, just assumption.

The only mention was at the time of euthanasia. On top of that, again there has been no presentation of verified measurements or post mortem.

It's a standard procedure that they weigh, take blood, clean or heal wounds, remove a snare for example, ... And then keep, publish or submit the data. In this case it's held private until now. Your verification in this case is again first-hand source Iman Memarian who's also mentioned in the study as the source of this 115kg male.

Quote:Of course you did, every argument you tried to make was disproven.  You desperately trying to discredit Biologists and Vets words via FB or IG yet use the same means for 95kg Leopard is laughable. 

The table includes all cats captured, high and low numbers. No weight presented wasn't actually obtained, not to mention no weight presented didn't come with 1st hand confirmation from the ones involved. 

Actually I'm already fine with the weight mentioned in the study and it being included in the weight chart. It is you who refuses to accept it hence why you, me and another person received voice messages of Iman Memarian who confirms it once more.

"High and low numbers", well especially the higher ones when there are multiple figures. Again if you need examples just let me know.

Quote:"similar"
Again you evade the truth, the frequency favors the Jaguars as you are aware. And this is with a much larger specimen pool, which of course would decrease an average, not the other way around. 
And the data for N. Iranian males is far from non-existent, you have numerous cats, over double digits in fact. 

Similar already that is without so much data compared to Pantanal jaguars. I'm not talking about averages I'm talking about the frequency in %. Again data has been collected and the figures originate from different populations yet they (+80kg males) already occur despite a small sample. Gather a sample of northern Iranian males only and the frequency only increases.

Over double digits? Please post all the data there is of northern Iranian male leopards and we'll see how many data there is. Less than a dozen I tell you.

Quote:No Persian leopard has weighed over 90kg other that the *115kg alleged leopard* according to the ones involved in the study. The max weight is 95kg from said study, the omitted 115kg weight isn't used while the 95kg weight is. Kambriz specifically states they used 95kg for said male and outside of that the largest male used was 88kg. 

The average as mentioned from the person responsible from the study is 70kg. 

No male weighed over 90kg that they witnessed you mean. Obviously the creators of the study weren't there with each and every leopard which would otherwise mean they have data of 22 males. They sent you like what, 3 males? And that's assuming they were included in the study.

They didn't use the 95kg figure, and they only included the 115kg male in the chart but not for calculating the average weight. The 95kg is never mentioned in the study at all. It's only mentioned that a 95kg male was euthanized via a Facebook post.

Quote:No, he said the average weight is 70kg. Don't make up claims, never once did he state "at least."

He said that but it's not what he meant. This is due to a language barrier. He means that an adult male will weigh at least 70kg unless you believe a prime male at around 7 years of age weighs only 70kg in northern Iran? Meanwhile prime males in South African averaged 72kg and there's absolutely no way they're bigger than northern Iranian male leopards. So please elaborate.

Quote:Once again, anything added to the table comes directly from the source. Far more intricate than you using 2nd hand studies that never weighed the cats or even old skull measurements from people who gave no information about them. Let alone protocol, cat involved or so on. You don't hold the same criteria to your leopards while trying to discredit the Jaguars and every time you flaunt your bias intentions.

Do you hold the same criteria for jaguars? Because for leopards you demand "confirmation on weighing at the time of capture" or "photos of a scale on site" or "weighing process" but for jaguars a simple answer via Facebook/Instagram where a weight has been given, it's okay. And there have been answers where circa weights were given. Plus a huge male is added but was never accurately weighed. It was too heavy to correctly weigh him so an estimation was given and it was included in the table. Nice "weighing process".

Quote:78.31kg https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-modern-...#pid134877
You want to bicker over 1.7kg?
Ok, so instead of being 15% larger on average, they are 11% larger. And again this is using scientifically verified cats with a far higher data base. 

I'm not using that table as if it's an offical figure. It's still circa 76kg. You can call it bickering.

Quote:There you go again... 
"Rival" 
You mean smaller
The Rowland Wards measurements are SCI protocol, you can't say how any other measurement was taken. In fact you can't say anything about any cat, dimensions, weight, etc. But basing off SCI/Rowland Wards, it's probably safe to assume those leopards were measured in the same way. And since Rowland Wards/SCI both have Cats from Mountanous E. Africa, Iran and C. Africa and all show similar measurements at maximums, it's certainly possible. 

"It's probably safe to assume..." that's an assumption. Let's not forget you were butthurt that Persian male leopards overall already come close to Pantanal jaguaresses without focusing on a specific population. You immediately brought up excuses such as possible sub-adult jaguaresses being included. Or a different protocol was used for the Persian leopards. How about you prove Persian leopard skulls were measured the "Ward/Sci way"?

Quote:Pantanal in Brazil so.... Yes you need to go to Brazil to see them. 
Having seeing Lions, Tigers, Jaguars, Leopards, the answer is absolutely! You have to see them in person and in their wild setting to make any real comparison when it comes to physical traits. 
And lastly, Panthera is a non profit, they bring in researchers who are students or graduates, etc. They are no different than any other Wildlife Conservation program. The only thing that matters is experience. Henschall has experience in C. Africa, he has every right to speak on that. He has no experience in the Pantanal or with Jaguars in general, thus he has no right to speak on them from an expert point of view since he isn't one. 

You said he never went to Brazil so he never saw a jaguar. But you don't have to go to Brazil per se to see a jaguar. We don't know if he has seen one in real life. And yes he has experience in both Central and West Africa so he has every right to claim that Gabonese male leopards are bulky and look more like jaguars.

Quote:According to him, he's seen 5 Leopards in his life and only one from ground level and even then, it was over 150 feet away. Dutoit has seen 100s and absolutely seen as large or larger Leopards. 
What metric do you want to use?
Skull Size?- African Leopards
Body Weight?-African Leopards 
And even then, it doesn't matter, just the sheer number of cats Dutoit has seen is going to far out weigh Henschel when talking about Leopards. The idea that out of 100s of Leopards from all over africa can't rival 4-5 Leopards throughout 5 years of observation in C. Africa is non sense.
Lastly, a guide/photographer with that kind of experience is an expert. In fact, when it comes to eye witnessing their behavior and traits, he far surpasses Henschel. Because you've never experienced these places first hand, you have no clue what you're talking about. But once again, no researcher can trek these areas without the help of guides. 

I'd be careful with the claim that Dutoit has seen "100s of leopards". He might have seen the same individual more than once plus he likes to repost a lot so the amount of Instagram posts isn't a good indicator. Lastly Henschel is the reason we started seeing Gabonese leopards via camera trap. He has seen more than he published for sure. I doubt Dutoit has ever been to a remote location closed for tourists and started placing camera's in order to capture leopards like Henschel did.

Quote:Dutoit has been to the Serengeti, Masai Mara, C. Africa, S. Africa and so on. 
Henschel has seen 5 leopards *according to that article* If anyone has seen larger leopards, it's Marlon, and it's not even close. 
Leopards from the locations he's been too have all produced specimens larger than Leopards from Mt Kenya or C. Africa. 

That article is old, from 2010. He has seen more than 5 leopards and I've already proven that he doesn't just sit behind a computer looking at camera traps in the past.

Quote:No, based on a fan made table. 

Rowland Wards is scientific data, and it says otherwise. 

The table itself is "fan made" but the figures are exclusively from scientific sources. And Rowland Wards isn't scientific data, it's a hunter record.

Quote:Almeida is a scientific source and a far more reliable one than any other mentioned. 

And don't make up skull size, the largest measured from the fan made table is 281 x 186mm. The idea that you claim "scientific" yet use a skull that's not even in tact to try and exaggerate maximums is wrong. Then on top of that, you can't even use the cats mentioned on the fan made table. You can't even provide measurement protocols for the skull or the cat used for them while I can provide, weights and measurement protocols for all of Almeidas jaguars. 

Almeida is a hunter source, but a very reliable one.

There's nothing to exaggerate; the 290+ mm skull already had a condylobasal length of 264 mm - the longest ever recorded. That means there's the sagittal crest that must be measured too to conclude the total length of the skull. This can add a great portion. That skull would've measured at least 290 mm and Chui was conservative to give a 297 mm length but it could've passed the 300 mm mark too.

Quote:You literally spent your entire post talking about Pantanal Jaguars, you obviously know those are the cats I'm discussing and it's always been the debate. Stop changing the goal post because you're wrong.

Our previous debate was which cat generally surpassed the 80kg mark. Remember on Carnivora? But as I said you fled the scene. Reply