Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project

[chaos]

(12-08-2014, 11:13 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(12-08-2014, 12:38 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:

(12-06-2014, 12:36 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(12-03-2014, 12:21 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:

(12-03-2014, 12:33 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: I assume you are going off of the single weights where the sizes of asiatic lions were equal to the sizes of west african lions. But there are more weights than that, and they show that the average of the asiatic lion is lower.

If you really compare, Lions from all over africa, the weight discrepency is nearly nothing. They are all extremely close in weight, max weights from all over can be more than others from areas with a higher average. You don't see that in Asiatic Lions, you don't see 250kg specimans, you don't see 200kg specimens usually. That is a sign that they are not as successful. In terms of prey availability, I'm not sure what they have in Gir, but Indian tigers are able to obtain massive size in similar conditions compared to a Asiatic lion.

In terms of Tiger vs. Lion interaction,
Of course a pride of lions will be too much for a tigress, but prides are very small in India, usually one or two sisters I believe. I am not saying that Lions have not adapted to live in India, they obviously have. I am saying they are'nt as successful as their African cousins. Hence why they have smaller manes, prides, and size. Those are the factors of a strong lion, are they not?





 

So what are the average weights of west/east/south african lions? Are there differencies? Do these differencies mean that some subspecies is more successful than other?

And what about other felids - there is also variation in size among their subspecieses. Are bengal tigers more successful than sumatrans? Are captive amur tigers more successful than sundarban tigers? Are persian or amur leopards more successful than leopards from tropical rainforests?

250 kg lions...there could be couple of lions like that in Africa and not in India, but number of afican lions is 50-100 times higher.

Asiatic lions and bengal tigers: yes, bengal tigers are bigger, but they are different species. You have to compare subspecieses of the same species, not different species (tigers with lions, leopards with jaguars and so on). Bengal tigers are 3-4 times bigger than indian leopards...and who is more successful, tiger or leopard? You have to compare african lions and their prey base with asiatic lions and their prey base.

Tiger vs lion: asiatic prides are smaller, but lone tigress is no match for 2-3 lionesses.

Smaller manes, size, prides: adaptation to different (more forested) environment.  Who would do better in forest like Gir? Small pride of 160 kg lions with smaller manes or huge pride of 185 kg kruger lions with majestic manes?

Sorry, but your "unsuccessful asiatic lion" reasoning is absolutely no way to go.



 

Like I stated,
Sumatran are a completely different sub species than a Indian tigers.
But lets go deeper,
Sumatra is completely molested of forrest, prey and habitat. Tigers have nothing to hunt, no where to live and have been forced to prey on extremely small animals and man.

In regards to w. african lions, N. african, E. African, etc.
All show similar weights, maximums can be larger than others or smaller and averages are with in 10kg or so. Not much variation at all.

In regards to Gir forrest Lions,
Maybe a large mane is a hinderence, maybe not. There is no study on this, Tsavo lions have no mane and its not really any hotter there than in other parts of africa, so why is that?
2ndly, we have no idea if a larger lion is not needed in gir, gir has relatively same prey base as many other parts of india and habitat and tigers are able to still be much larger and be successful.
Pride #'s may not be a big factor, as some lions in africa have smaller prey or larger prey. So Im not sold on that.
Its a interesting debate I think.


 


 

...and asiatic lions are different subspecies than east/south african lions.

Your Sumatra reasoning: so do you think that if Sumatra forrest was unmolested the sumatran tigers would be as large as bengals?

African lions: south african lions are around 185 kg, east african around 175 kg, west african (same subspecies as asiatic lions) are even smaller (about the size of asiatic lions). Asiatic lions are around 160 kg. So what is your point?

Mane: large mane is obviously a disatvantage in forrested enironment.

Tigers: One again - tigers are different species. Btw lions are genetically closer to leopards than to tigers. Asiatic lions are much bigger than indian leopards.

Asiatic lions are very successful. They were hunted almost into extincion and now they recovered so much that they need tom expand into other territories. And there they could be a serious threat to tiger populations.  


 

Once again, sumatran tigers are a completely different sub species with completely different DNA compared to Bengals and Amurs.
Like its already been proven, before Gir lions were almost hunted to Extinction NONE of ever come close to the size of their Genetically identical cousins, N. African Lions.
Which of course I posted the largest Gir Lions EVER hunted, recorded, caught etc.

Now you want to compare Leopards to Lions.
Ok, yes Lions are genetically closer to leopards, Jaguars and Cheetah while a tiger is a different cat.
Does that mean Lions are Leopards???
They are completely different animals and may have common ancestors but they are by no means, the same cat.
Lions are Lions. Your argument and example is inaccurate.

BTW, peters quote that Chaos used says nothing about whether or not gir are the same or different than N. african lions nor does it say anything about whether they are more or less capable in India. So its another meaningless example that is misquoted. Especially since we just went over that Lions are completely Genetically different than Tigers.

 

 

That wasn't my intent when quoting his post. Read it again, hopefully you'll figure it out. See posts # 24 and 25 in this thread. Reply