ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)

[peter]

1 - FAT

Quite many skulls I saw had similar dark-yellow and brown parts. In most cases, it turned out to be fat. This means the owner had died not that long ago. Although fat can remain for many decades, fossil skulls, as far as I know, never had any.

It could turn out to be a non-issue, but one would like to know a bit more about those who found the skull. Same for the location. Could you find out a bit more, Grizzly? 


2 - SPECIES

As to species and subspecies. Based on what I saw, chances are the skull belonged to an Amur tiger. All features I consider to be typical are there. Tiger skulls often are dominated by vertical lines, sharp angles and vaults. Amur skulls, on the other hand, are dominated by straightish (horizontal) lines; a straight mandibula; elevation (at the orbit); a longish and straight snout; moderate width and a straight axis of vision.


3 - THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A LION AND A TIGER SKULL (males)

a - Wild African lion and captive male Amur tiger

Below is a comparison I did some years ago. The skull at the top belonged to a wild male lion, whereas the skull at the bottom belonged to a captive male Amur tiger. The tiger skull is a bit longer, but the difference is a few mm. only. 

The lion skull, as you can see, is dominated by the face, the limited vault (referring to the profile) and the convex mandibula. The profile of the Amur skull, although straight for a tiger, is a bit more vaulted and dominated by sharper angles and a straight mandibula. The lion mandibula, although seemingly shorter, is in fact longer: 

*This image is copyright of its original author

b - Wild Indian male tiger and wild Indian male lion

This comparison is from the JBNHS. Indian tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) left and Indian lion (Panthera leo persica) right. You can see that the skull of the Indian tiger is more vaulted than the Amur skull, especially in the facial part. The sagittal crest is straight and long (not typical for Indian tiger skulls) and the general appearance is robust. Skulls of Indian tigers often are a bit wider across the arches and more massive.

The skull of the male lion, again, is dominated by the long face, the elevated snout, the long and convex mandibula and the elevated axis of vision:   

*This image is copyright of its original author

4 - SKULLS OF WILD AMUR TIGERS

Nearly all Amur tiger skulls I saw had long or very long canines. Apart from skull size and angles, the was the most outspoken difference between Amur skulls and skulls of other tiger subspecies. This is why I concluded Amur tiger skulls, more than skulls of other subspecies, are big gun platforms.

As to skulls of wild male Amur tigers. I'd advice to read this article. Although interesting all the way, the photographs of the skulls are remarkable in particular. The reason is photographs of skulls of wild Amur tigers are quite rare: http://bigcats.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4292


5 - THE SKULL YOU POSTED

I agree the skull most probably belonged to a male, because of the width and strength of the rostrum and the size of the upper canines. Sexual dimorphism in Amur tigers is outspoken. Same in skulls.

Here, to finish the post, a photograph of the skull of another captive male Amur tiger. As you can see, it's in many respects very similar to the skull you posted:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply