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.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 12 Vote(s) - 3.83 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
( This post was last modified: 10-14-2014, 05:03 AM by Pckts )

@peter
In regards to Paw size of Bengal compared to Siberian

I just came across a interesting conversation on Kahna Tigers Pad size Compared to Bandhavargh's tiger Pad size. The tigers being quoted for Bandhavargh where Jobhi and Bamera, two of the larger tigers there but apparently much smaller in pad size compared to Kahna.


"Yes Leminh, you have another good point there. Based on the type of terrain they are staying in, evolutionary changes could have occurred to help them adapt better. The example you gave about the possibility of animals in marshy regions having bigger paws/hooves makes sense. ":)Kshitij | 11 months ago
Quote:
*This image is copyright of its original author
This is another 20x20cm pugmark,in comparison to the jeep's track width, also from Kanha, on hard ground, so it's pretty good: "http://www.jonastonboe.com/Travel/India/i-55cS59h/3/XL/IMG_0724-XL.jpg " Possessor could be Kankata or Pattewala male, the latter slightly bigger. Re Saddam Hussein was a large male indeed. I also find Saddam a shorter-fuller, meaning his body was short, just like Kankata. Satyendra also confirmed that was the case. Saddam was more or less of equal comparison with Kankata. Banda was definitely a larger male than Saddam, and longer in length.leminh | 11 months ago
Quote:
*This image is copyright of its original author
I agree with Kshitij, just like humans, similar-size tigers may have slight variations in pugmark size. Only when differences are noticeable, for instance a 14x14cm vs 17x17 cm, can we say for certain that the later tiger is the visibly larger one. Also, pugmark comparison has to be contextualized. I mean, they're useful to compare tigers residing in similar habitats, say the hilly central india. But tigers in muddy and snowy terrains, say Kaziranga or Siberia, will normally have larger pugmark than similar-size fellows from central india to help them move around in those terrains. That's why the smaller water buffalo also has larger footprint than the larger gaur who doesn't take to muddy environment. And yes, it's ideal to compare pugmark impressed into the same surface type, since its size can vary slightly with different kinds of forest ground. Re size comparison among tigers, I find it not terribly difficult to do if we have enough photos from different angles of a certain individuals plus some input from people who have seen them first hand :).leminh | 11 months ago
Quote:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Interesting discussion here. I feel it should be quite difficult to gauge a tiger's size based on the pugmarks alone. The ratio of dimensions of different body parts might vary. Though a bigger pugmark would mean a bigger tiger, if we analyze at a deeper level, there could be cases where pugmark sizes might not follow the absolute rule of bigger pug implies bigger tiger just the way in humans some have bigger feet/shoe sizes. I am just guessing, but I believe there is a probability that in closely matched individuals, there could be a chances that sometimes, the relatively smaller one might have a bigger pugmark too. Also, with pugmarks, there are different factors which can come into play like the type of soil, the season, etc. If the soil is wet after rain, or if it is the dry grainy soil of summer, the pug might appear bigger. But on hard ground, the same tiger's pugmark might appear smaller. The link which Leminh has shared about 20x20 pugmarks is interesting. But again, it says it was on soft mud. So there is a chance that the weight of the tiger pushes it deeper into the soil and hence results into an enlarged pugmark... @Kay mam Do you have any photos of Bokha after his death? If yes, can you please share some?Kshitij | 11 months ago
Quote:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Body length certainly differs between Jobhi and Bamera and yes Bamera often is seen looking rather rotund! I would say Bameras pugs are a bit larger than Jobhi's but that might be to do with muscle age perhaps.When Bamera was limping badly last year and declined to come back to Chakradhara he was pretty poor looking I thought though still capable. But poor Bokha when he died had lost all his muscle and looked terrible.Actually B2 looked fairly good when he died. I never saw Saddam just Satyendras photos, he said he was huge. But I remember always commenting in the early days here when visiting Kanha how much bigger the male pugs looked there than in Bandhavgarh. I think as a young tiger Jobhi has a ways to go in size, I doubt he will be by frame much bigger than Bamera, longer yes and therefore perhaps heavier? Only the Forest Dept has all this information on the deaths of the tigers and I dont think it indicates their actual presence if they get old or lie blotted. I have to say that I doint visit zoos much and dont really get that close totigers in many instances so talking size is kind of strange unless you take photos at the same distances from the animals and had software to work out height and length, god knows. I was actually quite surprized how big B2 was when he died as I remember him as small really as was Charger. Interesting topic but we dont have the access to work all this out I think unless we work out some scientific photography again like with the stripe recognition?KayTiwari | 11 months ago
Quote:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Hi Kay, it's indeed very interesting, I agree 100%! In 1997, the monster siberian tiger wreaked havoc and killed many people. The tiger experts gathered and tried to hunt him down. They resorted to pugmark measurement to gauge the tiger's size in his absence, and the paw-pad width turned out to be 13cm, so the pugmark would be around 17x17cm. From that Siberian tiger experts derived that this monster was of Alpha male class and the biggest in the region. Later on when he was shot, they confirmed that he's indeed a huge male. Re Saddam Hussein, his pugmark was considered exceptionally large too " https://www.dropbox.com/s/cj6ol4d6n3enzl...=110462150 ". I've seen a photo of bamera's pugmark, and to be honest it looks more or less the same size with Jobhi's here. The size of the pugmark, especially the paw-pad width, indicates the size and weight of a tiger. Also, I find it interesting you say Jobhi looks smaller than bamera. I find them similarly tall from photos, so what's your impression on their respective heights Kay? To be honest, I find that since Jobhi is a longer male, he would no doubt appear shorter than Bamera at similar shoulder heights due to longer body. Also, Bamera may appear bigger in some sightings due to full belly, so could it be another reason he appears more massive, though definitely shorter in length, than Jobhi? I actually take notice that in most of his photos, bamera has a full belly and it gives him larger than life images. Also, I find B2 looking small when he died too "http://www.indiamike.com/india/indian-wildlife-and-national-parks-f74/ambushing-a-tiger-story-of-a-teamwork-with-2-gypsies-and-what-ails-bandhavgad-today-t138677/2/#post1301652". This is definitely an interesting topic :))leminh | 11 months ago

*This image is copyright of its original author
Leminh, I have never seen a tiger pug impression anywhere near as big as you are stating. 20cm would be a monster tiger! I do know I have seen bigger ones in Kanha than here. I would say Jobhi's is fairly average for here but I have not actually had the chance to measure it accurately as one is not allowed to get down from the vehicle as you know. At this point in time I would say Shashi's is bigger but he is a compact bodied tiger like B2 was. I always thought Bohka/Shaki bigger than B2 but he looked so small when he died. I am not sure pug size tells all about the size and more important the strength and dominance of a tiger. Its all really interesting don't you think.




Very interesting to read the difference in paw size from place to place and it does tie in to the idea of terrain being the number 1 factor.
I wonder if Kaziranga Tigers would have the largest paw size to date since they live in such a marshy swamp land and must get great traction to hunt.
Sorry if this doesn't belong here, just thought it tied into Peters description of why Siberians have larger paws and canines.

 
1 user Likes Pckts's post
Reply




Messages In This Thread
RE: ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - TIGERS (Panthera tigris) - Pckts - 10-14-2014, 02:37 AM
Demythologizing T16 - tigerluver - 04-12-2020, 11:44 AM
Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 07-28-2014, 09:54 PM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 07-28-2014, 10:02 PM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 07-29-2014, 12:56 AM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - peter - 07-29-2014, 07:05 AM
Tiger recycling bin - Roflcopters - 09-04-2014, 01:36 AM
RE: Tiger recycling bin - Pckts - 09-04-2014, 02:22 AM
RE: Tiger recycling bin - Roflcopters - 09-05-2014, 01:01 AM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 11-15-2014, 10:07 PM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 11-15-2014, 10:57 PM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 11-15-2014, 11:33 PM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - Apollo - 02-19-2015, 11:25 PM
RE: Tiger Data Bank - GuateGojira - 02-23-2015, 11:36 AM
Status of tigers in India - Shardul - 12-20-2015, 03:23 PM
RE: Tiger Directory - Diamir2 - 10-03-2016, 04:27 AM
RE: Tiger Directory - peter - 10-03-2016, 06:22 AM
Genetics of all tiger subspecies - parvez - 07-15-2017, 01:08 PM
RE: Tiger Predation - peter - 11-11-2017, 08:08 AM
RE: Man-eaters - Wolverine - 12-03-2017, 11:30 AM
RE: Man-eaters - peter - 12-04-2017, 09:44 AM
RE: Tigers of Central India - Wolverine - 04-13-2018, 01:17 AM
RE: Tigers of Central India - qstxyz - 04-13-2018, 08:34 PM
RE: Size comparisons - peter - 07-16-2019, 05:28 AM
RE: Amur Tigers - peter - 05-20-2021, 07:13 AM
RE: Amur Tigers - Nyers - 05-21-2021, 08:02 PM
RE: Amur Tigers - peter - 05-22-2021, 08:09 AM
RE: Amur Tigers - GuateGojira - 04-06-2022, 12:59 AM
RE: Amur Tigers - tigerluver - 04-06-2022, 01:08 AM
RE: Amur Tigers - tigerluver - 04-06-2022, 09:08 AM
RE: Amur Tigers - tigerluver - 04-06-2022, 11:30 PM
RE: Amur Tigers - peter - 04-08-2022, 07:27 AM



Users browsing this thread:
6 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB