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

[Wanderfalke]

(03-03-2015, 09:17 AM)'peter' Wrote:

(02-27-2015, 11:03 PM)'Roflcopters' Wrote: Peter, I don't think anyone has ever asked you this question over the years but i just wanted to know if you had a favorite tiger from the past or present (captive/wild).. I'm very curious 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Or this one:

*This image is copyright of its original author

   
The forest has a tiger. One like him:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Sumatran tigers are forest animals. They blend like no other big cat and they are not there when you actually see them. Elusive animals. Although smaller than other subspecies, but they are not as small as you think. Sumatran tiger skulls have inflated bullae, because they use their ears extensively. In a forest, you got to have great ears.

Java tigers have the best designed skulls. The forehead often is very vaulted, whereas the mandibula often is more concave than in other subspecies. The vaults generates a lot of power at the tip of the canines, but also offer protection against a blunt force. Java skulls could have been the example for the engineers who developed the T-34 tank, probably the best tank of WWII. 

Indian tigers have the classic tiger design. Close to the maximum size the species can reach, they found the best combination between athleticism and strength. Although I'm amazed at the large and heavy-skulled Kazirangha tigers, no doubt the biggest wild cats of today, a tiger like Raja in his prime is closer to the typical tiger for me:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Amur tigers are walking the edge. Today's Amur tigers adapted to overcome tough conditions, long distances and tough competition, which resulted in an impossible combination of length, durability and strength. What we see today, however, is a result of a very recent adaption. It was an adaption to poverty. A century and a half ago, in the 'Sea of forest' south-west of Primorye (Manchuria), conditions allowed for animals at times similar in size to the largest shot by Dunbar Brander in Central India. Captive Amur tigers, however, show what the basic design was.

The most striking feature of Amur tigers, in my opinion, isn't size, but attitude, best expressed in the skull and face. Wild Amur tigers are tough tigers. They don't show it, but it's there:

*This image is copyright of its original author

The best photograph I saw is this one. It shows a forest, tough conditions and a big cat matching them. It also shows what the result of poaching really means. There will never be a better one:

*This image is copyright of its original author

  


Many assume tigers are typical forest animals, but I have my doubts. In Pleistocene Asia, a few million years ago, they inhabited both elevated and quite barren regions as well as low-lying and forested regions. A few centuries ago, according to J.F. Brandt (1856), tigers still inhabited different regions with very different conditions. As the largest tigers were recorded at the edges of their range in the southwest (northwest India and Nepal) and the northeast (Manchuria and Primorye), one has to assume slightly elevated and open forestlike regions could be most suited. 

Sumatran tigers developed in forests for many thousands of years. Maybe this is the reason they, as J.H. Mazak and Groves proposed, are different from mainland and Java tigers. If they are different, the reason is the forest. They are the biggest cats a dense tropical forest could accomodate, I think.

In dense forest, prey size isn't crucial for big cat size. It's the ability to get to the right place without being heard and seen and get a decent reward. Leopards are real good at it, but the Sumatrans took over, probably as a result of the rich pickings. Some hunt frogs in time of need, but others might go for very large herbivores or even elephants. The one with the widest reach has the best chance in a forest that has both small and large animals. The Sumatran forest has plenty of large animals, so the tiger was more suited in the end. Sumatran tigers could be old world tigers, but they also are new world leopards. The old world leopards, of course, had to move. In Java, they developed into Panthera pardus melas. Their airborne relatives, living in the clouds of the forest, didn't bother. They're still there and doing ok.

 

 

Nice inside look into yur mind, Peter :-) Watched some videos on this site---> http://www.animals.hbh.ru/

and realised again, how tough, demanding and energy-sapping an amur tiger´s life must be. Almost as hot as in India in the summer and freezing cold in the winter. Rough and wayless terrain, long distances to walk in order to meet mates and find prey. If I had to choose, I wouldn´t want to be an amur tiger, rather an indian or sumatra tiger. the first has better prey and protection conditions and the second isn´t bothered the whole time with tourists like in India, dense forest with a lot of potential to stay elusive and good prey base, almost a life like all tigers had before humans multiplied like a virus.
  Reply