Freak Specimens

[GrizzlyClaws]

(06-01-2014, 10:53 PM)'Apollo' Wrote:

(06-01-2014, 09:58 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:

(06-01-2014, 09:43 PM)'Apollo' Wrote:

(06-01-2014, 09:20 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Here is Guate's work, just scale the 38.3cm wild Amur skull up to 43cm, then you can see that the canine size also matches with the Duisburg Zoo specimen.

*This image is copyright of its original author

 

Yes as you said there is a symmetry in the tiger skull measurements.
But is it applicable for smaller subspecies of tigers too ? Wont they have slightly longer canines for the skull size ?

Do you have any measurements for Baikal ?
The 40cm skull measurement for Madla, is it taken when he was live or dead ?

 



 

The island tigers shouldn't take into account since their conspecification with the mainland tigers is still debatable. Amur and Bengal can be compared to each other as they both belong to the mainland tiger clade.

Baikal stands at 4 feet tall and being 8 feet in the head+body length.

Madla's skull is around 40cm, so this means his head measurement is actually a bit longer.
 


 

Thanks for the clarification and the info.

Sorry again for asking so many questions on Madla, Is the 40cm measurement was taken on the skull of Madla after his death or is the 40cm is estimated based on his head measurements ?
 

 

Madla's skull measurement was based on a rough guesstimation, that's why i think his head measurement with flesh should be actually longer than his skull measurement. Reply