There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
04-22-2014, 11:17 AM( This post was last modified: 04-22-2014, 11:19 AM by GuateGojira )
Definitely, weight and body size are probably not related with canine length. In that case, a light but large bodied tiger with a big head will have large canines.
The longest canine for a wild Amur tiger, that I remember is that of the skull of 40 cm of Baikov (1925), which have an upper canine length of 8 cm, which would mean a crown height (up to the gum line) of c.7.5 cm, the same than the Indian tiger Madla. This would mean that both Amur and Bengal tigers have a maximum canine length of up to 7.5 cm to the gum line in the wild. The largest skull measured by Mazák (383 mm) had a canine length of 7.45 cm (Mazák, 1981 - 1983), which will produce a crown height of c.7 cm, slightly smaller than the previous records.
Wild lions, based in actual measurements, don't surpass the 6 cm in upper canine length. So those exceptional cases over 6 cm came only from captive specimens.