Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)

[Pckts]

(05-14-2019, 11:44 AM)Luipaard Wrote: @Pckts 

Quote:No Leopard sub species preys on 100kg animals all the time, it's why their mean body weight on prey is between 15-60kg no matter the sub species. In Ranthambore, one of the highest density of Tigers in India, Leopards make Sambar kills regardless of Tigers being ever present and abundant.

As I've mentioned before in this post, Persian leopards predate on larger prey compared to South African leopards. Same applies to Central African (male) leopards, where their main prey are red river hogs (weight 45-115kg, average 70kg).

Quote:You always like to use Skull size to correlate Rainforest Leopards as being Jaguar sized, 100kg beast but these leopards below all scored higher than the highest Estimated Leopard Skull, it is estimated of course off of Condylobasal Length, which already has discrepancies. Just look at the different correlations between each one on this chart below you like to use, so that alone means the Largest one is not confirmed.

The skull measurements in that list are the largest ones from scientific sources, unlike estimates from hunters. 

As I've said many times before, their average is equal in size to Amazon male jaguars and Pantanal jaguaresses. The larger ones rival that of Pantanal males. Tell me, what makes you think that these males average 65kg with such large skulls? It's not accurate but still a good indicator. Photographic evidence proves that even more.

Quote:Ashok Rajasingh Big record size male will be 80 kg. Average male is 55 to 65 kg. The biggest animals seem to come from dryer open scrub regions. Varies according to local conditions. Rain forest animals are generally smaller - 50 kg

That's false... Now I have to share this once again:

"Robin Hurt had some experience hunting in Central Africa (DR Congo, CAR, Sudan). He only hunted one leopard in DR Congo and it turned out to be the biggest he encountered. He said it was almost as big as a lioness, its skull was over 11 inches long and he estimated the weight at 220lbs. According to him, the biggest leopards in Africa are usually found in the rainforest areas (both Central and East Africa). He also adds that very big leopard can sometimes be found in Southern Africa (Zimbabwe and Namibia etc) but these are exceptions. He is currently based in Namibia so he has no incentive to exaggerate the size of Congo leopards where trophy hunting is now banned. Robin Hurt's experience mirrors that of Peter TurnBull-Kemp who had also dealt with leopards from throughout Africa and similarly concluded the biggest are found in the equatorial forests. The biggest leopard Turnbull-Kemp had ever seen was a monster specimen killed in Cameroon. I'm not surprised by the convergent opinion of both these very experienced authorities on African leopards given the fact it is strongly supported by skull data and frankly a logical understanding of natural selection."

*This image is copyright of its original author

As for Sri Lankan leopard; "here are two vaguely separable types. The massive and stockily built ones, others lankier and more slenderly built. The size of a leopard, its skull etc, will depend largely on the availability of food and the age of the specimen under examination."

Numerous inaccuracies here...
First one is prey size, once again the average prey size for Congo basin Leopards is no larger than anywhere else, on top of that they have far less prey bio mass.
"Analyses of leopard Panthera pardus prey choice reveal a strong preference for species weighing 10–40 kg. In the Congo Basin rainforests"
https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2011.00826.x

"With weights of 34-45kg as the most important prey species for Leopard"
Diets and habitat use of the endangered Persian leoaprd *from n. Iran*

No place on earth comes close to the prey biomass and large ungulates available in Africa, South or East Africa. 

2nd is Skull measurements, your claim of mistaken measurements by the SCI club is wrong, in fact the criteria is heavily criticized and you must meet all steps.
You're measurements must be confirmed by an SCI official
https://www.safariclub.org/record-book
And it must be done in a valid way.
https://www.safariclub.org/sci-measuring-program-resources

If anything, the criteria is far more demanding compared to scientific measurements since there is no money or records on the line.


3rd is Jaguars compared to Leopards...once again an Amazionian Jaguar has a wider skull as well as being longer usually. Jaguars are also built far more densely. Larger bone structure, thicker limbs and mid section. Being the same length but shorter at the shoulder and still with weights higher than any confirmed leopard is proof of that. This again is proved by the fact that the highest scoring leopard skulls *larger than any Congo Basin skull* still dont produce any leopard over 92kg.
These are once again verified weights compared to much smaller verified weights from the Basin itself and surrounding C. African reserves.

4th is hunt, once again the hunters I've listed and shown photos from all have the same amount of experience if not more with Leopards so his opinion are his own only and let's not forget that neither the skull or weight were verified or even measured properly. 




Lastly is the averages on skull measurement, the table you like to use is a very limited list with only record skulls, obviously the averages go way down when you use all skulls. The fact that if we remove the largest skull which isn't verified, there are quite a few Leopards that have 281 mm long skulls or wider skulls than any of the Congo Leopards and we already know that none of them reached 100kgs. So you have a cat with far less prey biomass, smaller prey species and smaller weights verified. There is no valid proof of any Leopard sub species averaging anywhere near 85kg let alone having 100kg appear regularly. 
The flip side, Jaguars do it all the time, Amazionian ones in the 90kg range quite often and pantanal ones in the 120kg range quite often. Reply