There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
Well, usually a longer bone equates to a longer cat, so I wouldn't say the authors are saying height is the best predictor of body mass. Plus, they took into account bone robusticity, which is a step beyond using only height for mass estimation.
If you look at tables 3 and 4, it seems that tiger and the jaguar mis-estimated each less, and that's the correlation the author seems to describe.
The next step in understanding differences in the bones of closed and open area species would need analysis of musculature. I remember a study that discussed cortical bone thickness of different species and the lion did not seem much different from that tiger in that regard, so I'm thinking what one can get from bones has been exhausted.