Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines

[peter]

(02-12-2018, 12:31 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: Panthera tigris oxygnatha: Giant, because the Sunda Shelf was exposed, and many mainland species migrated into the Sunda Shelf.

Panthera tigris trinilensis: Dwarf, because the Sunda Shelf disappeared, and all Sunda tigers got stuck in the islands and being affected by the insular dwarfism.

Panthera tigris soloensis: Giant again, because the Sunda Shelf resurfaced again, and the Sunda tigers just got benefited from a new wave of migration from the mainland species.


What do you think? @tigerluver @peter

A - AGE, PLACE, DETERMINATION, SIZE AND MONEY TOO

Sumatra is possible, but one would have expected a more eastern location. The angles in the skull suggest that northern Asia can't be ruled out.   

The most striking features are the robustness and, in particular, the length and width of the lower canine. It's so much out of order, it doesn't seem to fit. 

When questions can't be answered, money never is far away. If the fragment really is as old as he says and if it really is from the Sunda Shelf, it would be close to priceless. Not $2500. Things don't add up in this respect.

Assuming it is the real deal, the length and width of the lower canine strongly suggests a tiger. A large and very robust tiger, that is.

Based on what is known, the Sunda Shelf qualifies, but tigers in northern Asia also have been large and robust at times. The fragment could be very old, but skulls and bones of tigers found in layers deposited in the Early Pleistocene also qualify in the size department.

B - A FEW PHOTOGRAPHS FOR COMPARISON

I could be mistaken, but I think Grizzly posted most of the photographs over the years (01, 02, 03, 06 and 08). The others were posted by yours truly. 

01 - If correct, this skeleton is from a tiger farm. If so, chances are it was a large male Amur tiger:

*This image is copyright of its original author

 

02 - Skeleton of what most probably is an adult male tiger from the Late Pleistocene (China). In that period, lions and tigers both lost quite a bit of size. More robust that the skeleton above, so it seems: 

*This image is copyright of its original author

 
03 - Upper skull of a Pleistocene tiger from China. Watch the teeth in the second picture:

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

  
04 - Skull of a wild old male Amur tiger from northern China (P. tigris altaica): 

*This image is copyright of its original author

05 - Skull of an old captive Amur tigress (P. tigris altaica):

*This image is copyright of its original author

06 - Skull of a very large captive male tiger next to the skull of an average-sized captive male (subspecies and age unknown):

*This image is copyright of its original author

07 - Skull of a captive young male Java tiger (P. tigris sondaica):

*This image is copyright of its original author

08 - Skull of an old captive male Indian tiger (P. tigris tigris):

*This image is copyright of its original author

09 - Skull of a captive male Sumatran tiger (P. tigris sumatrae):

*This image is copyright of its original author

10 - Skull of a wild male Indian tiger (P. tigris tigris). My guess is that the last part of the upper skull was sawn off (not unusual in those days). Later, it was repaired. It's very likely that the owner of the skull was a large animal: 

*This image is copyright of its original author

C - TO CONCLUDE

Interesting site and remarkable find, Grizzly. There's no question that the owner of the mandible competed for first place in the size department. It could be a fragment of a very old skull from Sumatra, but it could also be a fragment of a tiger skull from the Early Pleistocene from central or northern China.  

At the moment, there're too many unanswered questions. Maybe this is the reason that things do not quite add up in the money department. The photographs were added to get to a debate. Any ideas? Reply