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.
11-08-2014, 07:23 PM( This post was last modified: 11-08-2014, 07:24 PM by GuateGojira )
That is great summary Peter. I most read it today, that is for sure.
Just one thing, I have noted (in the internet mostly) that there is a common myth that the Wanhsien tiger (Panthera tigris acutidens) was larger and more robust than the Ngandong tiger (Panthera tigris soloensis), but this is incorrect.
The only base for that is that the metapodials of the northern subspecies were larger and more robust than those of the south. However, this is not enough evidence as Bengal tigers had relative smaller paws in comparison with the Amur tigers and they are still much heavier than they northern counterparts. Besides the few long bones recorded from China show that they were not exceptionally robust, in comparison with other specimens.
Based on the few fossils available, the largest Wanhsien tiger was about the same size than the largest Amur-Bengal tigers on record, with an estimated weight of up to c.270 kg. In this case, the only tiger that surpass the 360 kg was the Ngandong tiger with estimated figures of up to c.370 kg (based in several formulas) and probably c.400 kg acording with Tigerluver.
The only fossil that suggest an exceptional size are the huge skull and the mandible from northern China. We have compared them with other specimens and even cave lions, but the result was that the mandible had a match with the tigers from Java, suggesting a link between them. On the skull, I made a previous estimation and the skull probably measured 442 x 293 mm (length x wide). If this is the case, this specimen was among the largest on record, been only 6 cm less than the largest Cromerian lion skull, which in big cats, is a irrelevant difference. This size is about the same that the estimated skull length for the largest femur from Java (skull of c.440 mm). In this case, they should be of the same size, in the best case, but as we don't know the real size of the Chinese skull and if we base our data only on the known fossils, the Wanshien tiger was not larger than the Javanese counterpart.