Biggest Kaziranga tiger?

[johnny rex]

(12-04-2014, 10:39 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: Just a suggestion to both of you, why you don't use centimeters or millimeters, instead of inches? Inches are a raw and unpractical type of measurement, millimeters are more exact, especially in the case of skulls.

Just to help in the debate, here are the record skulls with that of the liger skull that I post (greatest length x zygomatic wide):
* Liger skull: 432 mm x 279 mm (http://schreckensart.homestead.com/skullscats.html)
* African lion: 432 mm x 281 mm (Ward, 1914).
* Bengal tiger: 413 mm x 251 mm (Hewett, 1938).
* Amur tiger: 406 mm x 286 mm (Mazák, 1983).

Please check that all the skulls from the wild are "Record" specimens (which means that they are not the norm), while that of the liger, we simply don't know if it came from a large or a small specimen, or even its sex. 

Hope this helps.


 

@GuateGojira Actually if you see a female tiger and a female liger together in a circus or a zoo, there is only a lil bit size difference. This is a good size comparison between a tigress with a ligress at McCarthy Wildlife Sanctuary.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

So we can assume the liger skull is belong to a male liger. I think I want to see size comparisons between Baikal, "Amur" and Kaziranga male tigers and various male ligers. Oh, skull size comparisons between those tigers and various male ligers would be nice too. [img]images/smilies/wink.gif[/img]

 

  Reply