The Cave Lion (Panthera spelaea and Panthera fossilis)

[GrizzlyClaws]

(11-19-2017, 09:16 AM)Polar Wrote: Tigers are usually a bit more robust, especially the ones from the Sunda region (the hotter region). Bergmann's rule also dictates that animals also become wider for their length (more robust) as temperatures get colder in order to conserve body heat by limiting body size relative to height. However, the more robust tigers actually occured within the Sunda region and, now, the Kaziranga and Nepal regions (which are actually colder). Most lions, even the more robust ones, don't seem to match the skeletal robustness of the prehistoric tigers or even modern ones.

However, robustness doesn't indicate possible maximum size. Brown bears are quite robust for their size, at least compared to polar and black bears, yet polar bears have the ability to genetically achieve sizes that brown bears can not and black bears the opposite. Even if an animal species is more robust than the other, it doesn't indicate whether its potential for growth is greater than the less robust animal. Even though the tiger is normally more robust, I still think the tiger has greater genetic potential for a greater average and exceptional size based on the prehistoric specimens and skulls.

The modern Amur tigers have suffered the genetic depression, hence they are not the ideal candidate to apply for the Bergmann's rule.

Although the prehistoric Sunda tigers were showing the impressive robusticity according to @tigerluver, but their skull is always showing the narrower features compared to the prehistoric tigers in the northern latitude.

The modern Amur tigers with the genetic depression is also proceeding under the radical gracilization, their skull are becoming less broad and vaulted in proportion, it is even becoming less robust compared to the Bengal tiger's. Reply