Amur and Kaziranga Tigers - Habitat and Prey Analysis

[GuateGojira]

I think is unfair to make a comparison between Kaziranga tigers and Amur tigers, we know everything about the last ones and we know nothing about the first ones.

Amur tigers has been studied extensible in the past and in the present, by hunters, zoologists and modern scientists, we know practically all of them, they behavior and size thanks to radiocollaring studies that are still presenting outstanding results in science and conservation (the new document of Miller et al. (2014) about the Amur tiger energetic needs is very interesting).

On Kaziranga, we only have several pictures from random people, opinions from amateur observers, a few videos and practically no hard scientific information, apart from the density levels gathered thanks to the camera traps, but nothing more, no ecological data, no biological and morphological data, nor even social data, we only have assumptions.

Now, if we are going to compare Bengal tigers (overall) and Amur tiger in they morphology, there is already this topic:
http://wildfact.com/forum/topic-who-is-t...the-tigers

Results: both are of the same size, there is practically no differences and taking in count the old records (the reliable ones, of course) about the Amur tigers, we can conclude that BOTH of them represent the largest felids that have ever existed since the Holocene period. However, there is the point why the Amur tiger developed such a massive skull while the Bengal tigers lack the large sagital crest and the larger muzzle, although they have the same massive canines.

Modern Amur tigers have smaller chest girths compared to the old ones, but still they have the same body dimensions overall. Body mass has declined and this was caused by the hunt and the poaching of its prey which now live in low densities. However, we can observe a positive change since 2005, with almost all adult males captured weighing over 200 kg (Max. of 212 kg), probably caused by the protection and the slight rise in prey density.
  Reply