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.
11-19-2018, 07:01 AM( This post was last modified: 11-19-2018, 07:47 AM by GrizzlyClaws )
(11-19-2018, 06:54 AM)tigerluver Wrote:
(11-19-2018, 06:49 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: In that chart, the skull length is about 1.5 times longer than the lower jaw length.
Is this a little bit too long for the CBL?
Did P. Christiansen (2008) really state this is the CBL, not GSL?
I noticed that too. Something is odd about the way the mandibles were measured for the CBL to relate by 1.5x. The paper is attached. He only refers to CBL everywhere.
Maybe the measurement came from the bottom of the lower jaw instead of the entire mandible?
BTW, the Padang specimen might have proportionally smaller canine teeth than the modern tigers, hence the difference of proportion needs to be coped.