Who is the "king" of tigers? - Bengal or Amur

[GuateGojira]

(11-15-2018, 12:51 PM)johnny rex Wrote: Are you sure the greatest skull length and head length are correlated, @GuateGojira ? If I'm not mistaken, there is only little difference between head length and greatest total skull length. But the head length of these two tigers is almost two inches larger than their greatest total skull length. Weird.

I don't remember that I ever found a relation between head length and skull length. I thing that there is no direct correlation, because there are tigers with more skin and flesh in the head than others, just like you can see in the table.

@peter once said that there are diferent morphotypes of captive Amur tigers, some with small heads and long bodies and other with smaller bodies and larger heads, some are lower to the shourder and fat while others are very tall and lanky. In the table that I made it seems that the observation of @peter is correct. Reply