Can someone explain this..

[peter]

(01-28-2015, 10:47 AM)'faess' Wrote: How are Tigers bigger than Lions on average? If you skin these animals you wouldn't see much of a difference, so how is it that  A tiger, which has almost exact structure as a lion, be bigger  of the two? 

Now on to my second question...

Are there any sources on captive weights of the bengal tiger, siberian and african lion? My sources tell me that African lions are around the same size as Tigers with captive weights, but I can be wrong


 

BONES

Lions evolved in plains, whereas tigers evolved in forested and more elevated regions. For this reason, lions usually have slightly longer and wider bones than tigers. Tigers, however, have slightly denser bones. Heavier bones need more or larger muscles to move them and larger muscles need a bit more room than smaller muscles. For this reason, tigers, at about equal spine length, usually are a bit longer in head and body length as well as a bit heavier. Lions, however, are a bit taller than most tiger subspecies, which will reduce the (relative) difference in weight (length equals weight in big cats). Apart from that, tigers have more subspecies, some of which are jaguar-sized. This is the reason lions are a trifle larger at the level of species, whereas tigers have the smallest and largest subspecies.


WEIGHT

Wild Indian tigers are heavier than all other wild big cats, because they, apart from a large prey base and intense competition in small reserves (which will result in slightly bigger animals), are a bit taller than many assume. Central Indian tigers are about as tall as large lion subspecies (like those in southern Africa) and a bit longer in head and body, which, given the difference in bone density, results in a weight difference of about 8-10%. In southern India, tigers are a bit shorter and not as tall, which results in a similar average weight (or slightly over). In northern India and Nepal, tigers are as tall or slightly taller than lions as well as a bit longer, which results in an average weight difference of 15% or just over. Remember the amount of individual variation is significant.

Amur tigers, longer and a bit taller than all other big cats, seem to be more cursorial than Indian tigers. They also face tougher conditions, more competition (from bears) and less large prey animals. As walkers, their bones are somewhat less dense (also seen in skulls). Weightwise, they compare to the average of large lion subspecies (Amurs a trifle heavier). According to Tigerluver, Sunda tigers could top the list for density.


CAPTIVE BIG CATS

Captive animals, even when healthy, often are a mere shadow of their wild relatives, meaning they wouldn't last long in an encounter. In spite of that, they usually are a bit heavier (about 10% or thereabout in most lion and tiger subspecies, but not Indian and Sumatran tigers). Lions are heavier because they face less competition (less stress) and have more access to food, meaning they should be able to get to their potential more often. Captive Amur tigers are heavier because they are not faced with empty forests and tough conditions (like a severe winter, crop failure, mass migrations of deer and wild boars and overhunting of large ungulates). Captive Indian tigers usually are smaller than their wild relatives, because those unable to compete survive more often (resulting in more smaller animals). Captive Indian tigers also are unable to go for large prey animals.

In general, captive lions often do well, whereas captive tigers often quickly degenerate. Tigers are more adaptive animals. This should result in survival of the fittest (the most adaptive) in the long run and, therefore, more competitive animals. In lions, adaptation and size are less important. The reason is they are social animals. This means males below par often are able to compete with larger individuals because of (superior) group size. A male lion defeated in a fight often survives without serious injuries. The reason is male lions often fight in prides, meaning there is no time and opportunity to finish a defeated opponent. This means a defeated lion often has a chance to start again, whereas a defeated tiger often is wounded or killed. Furthermore, a defeated tiger, in India, often has no refuge. It's do or die.    


AVERAGES IN CAPTIVITY

There's no question that Amur tigers top the list for length and weight in captivity (averages). The difference between lions and Indian tigers in captivity is close to zilch. Adult male Amur tigers range between 360-620 pounds (average 450-480 pounds, I think), whereas African lions and Indian tigers range between 350-570 pounds or a little over (average in both 400-430 pounds and closer to 400, I think). There are, of course, plenty of exceptions. I saw direct descendants of (white) Timbavati lions of 550-570 pounds in a Dutch zoo and the one I recently saw in Berlin was well over 500 pounds. In exceptional animals, the difference between lions and tigers is limited (just over 10 feet straight and close to or just over 600 pounds). The difference is tigers of large subspecies, and Amur tigers in particular, do it more often, both in captivity and in wild Russia or India.  


FOLLOW-UP

Tigerluver is able to answer most questions on bones, density and weight, whereas Guate has a few tables with averages of (captive and wild) African lions, Indian tigers and Amur tigers. My department is skulls and wild big cats. 


ONE MORE THING

I know you would want to see a bit more on lions and tigers. Yes, I saw it. Not happening. Lions, tigers and fights will not be discussed over here for the reason Sanjay mentioned. If you want to know a bit more, go to the Carnivora forum and say hello to Asad (now Asadus) and Bold. I visit that forum every now and then and recently read a post of an unknown poster on lions, tigers, fights, old Rome and Everland. As he was able to understand Korean, he got to the core of things. His analysis, although long, was well written and interesting. Most questions on lions, tigers and fights, I think, were answered. My advice is to read it.      Reply