Size comparisons

[GuateGojira]

(04-13-2022, 11:28 PM)Mwarcaar Wrote: The size of this smilodon populator is too exaggerated. In Facts smilodons (populator or fatalis) have a smaller head than the modern lion, whether in average or maximum size. This smilodon has a head that is almost twice that of a lion, which is completely unrealistic.
This comparison is just fantasy more than anything.

As Hello says, the image is beautifull and informative, but just like you say, there are a couple of inaccuracies.

For example, I found the webpage of the artist and he shows that they used the skeleton of a Smilodon fatalis and escalated it, apparently, to match the size of the Smilodon populator skull MNHN-P 957 from Uruguay and that is how they calculated the overall body size, but the fact is that both animals had different proportions.

This image (Smilodon from "randomdinos") shows a better comparison between the specimen MNHN-P 957 (escaled to the skull) and the biggest Bengal tiger ever recorded "between pegs" (Brander, 1927):

*This image is copyright of its original author

Tiger skull is of 383 mm while the Smilodon populator skull is of 392 mm. Now, although the skull of the lions are longer in GSL than those of any Smilodon species, the massiveness of the last one is evident, check this comparative image:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Using only verified skulls that were actually measured with standarized methods and that are fully described in litterature (no hunting records), we can see that the skull of Smilodon populator is bigger overall, alghouth the lion skull is longer in GSL and the tiger skull is wider in the zygomatic arches. And we still have the giant S. populator skull of Mendez (1933) that with 408.4 mm is even bigger than the skull from Uruguay.

So yes, the image from NatGeo shows a slightly exagerated size for Smilodon populator, but even then is a good artistic draw. Reply