Zoos, Circuses, Safaris: A Gallery of Captivity

[Blackleopard]

(09-10-2016, 10:28 PM)Apollo Wrote:

(09-10-2016, 05:56 AM)Blackleopard Wrote: Do you have the thread link to the verified captive weights of tigers and lions?  I realize that a 570 lb cat is is on the larger size, and many of the largest siberians that are not obese generally top out around 600.  But the statement is that the lion Asland is the heaviest lion in Europe, my point is based on what?  He would not be the heaviest lion in the United States, why would he be the heaviest in Europe?  Asland is simply a lion who happened to outweigh a tiger of similar size, which is what I was wondering.

As for the canines, you can't just show a picture of one sample, there would have to be many samples compared for thickness and length.

Dont use double standards here.
You just used an isolated London zoo incident just to prove lions have stronger canines.
Well science doesnt work like that, as per the canine morphology studies, Ive shown you one of the latest studies with a large sample size and several subspecies involved.

*This image is copyright of its original author

The results are clear, tigers have the highest bitefore, strongest and biggest (longer, thicker and heavier) canines of all bigcats period.
Now stop going around in circles and here is the link for the studies.

http://snowleopardnetwork.org/bibliograp...n_2007.pdf


What Grizzlyclaws did was to try and show you the difference between the canines.
You can see tons of pictures posted on Bigcats canines and claws thread by Grizzlyclaws.

I was actually more interested in the captive weights, but couldn't find any on this site yet.  As for the teeth, I can only tell you what I saw, and there was data and real studies showing lions having stronger teeth, it wasn't one isolated study.  The health of the animals also can impact their teeth, many unhealthy lions are strolling around in out of prides and have trouble hunting on their own.  I looked through some of the data on that study you showed, some of the data is saying the tigers teeth are thicker, some of it is saying the teeth are over all virtually the same with almost no difference in mm. 

I guess my question to you, doesn't skull size impact the size of teeth, there are many lions with larger skulls than tigers, unless you're talking about the captive Siberians.  Do you really believe a lion with a bigger head is going to have weaker teeth, and a weaker bite-force than the smaller head of the tiger?  It is well known that lions often hunt larger prey, whether in groups or pairs, they're still tackling the larger animals.  That means it takes longer to down the larger animal, so many minutes are spent with a male lion sinking his teeth into a 2 thousand lb buffalo, the buffalo's weight is being thrust back and forth against the male lions teeth and jaws.  A tiger's teeth and jaws rarely ever have to endure such a prolonged resistance against them.  Then you have to factor in the male lions fighting more, with both jaws battling it out significantly throughout their lives. How often does the tiger ever have to endure the kind of resistance an and adversarial 1,000 lb bite-force ripping against its own jaws? Reply