Size comparisons

[Shadow]

(07-14-2019, 07:05 PM)Luipaard Wrote: @Shadow I am to blame for discussing this subject on various threads ('Size comparisons', 'Impressive females', 'Persian leopard', ...). It's just that this is such an interesting subject. We just discovered that the male jaguar weighing 158 kg was incorrect just becouse of discussing about it. 

I will try to get in touch with Jo Taylor once again. Like you said, it's worth the shot. I've been digging deep into these particular leopards and when looking at videos, camera trap photos, skull measurements... I come to the conclusion that there is many evidence of how big and impressive these leopards can get which beyond most people realize.

Not so long ago, I read something about a skull of an old male leopard killed in the North Eastern DR Congo in the 1940s. This skull (KBIN 8640) is held in the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences.

The skull has a condylobasal length of 264mm and a zygomatic width of 186mm. Its greatest length isn't stated as the occipital crest was probably damaged but would've easily been in the 290-300mm range. In any case the condylobasal length can be considered at least as good a measure of overall skull size.

For comparison, the heaviest male jaguar weighed for which skull measurements are available (there are several) was a male from the Venezuelan Llanos documented by Hoogenstein and Mondolfi which weighed 121kg (empty stomach) with a condylobasal skull length of 272mm and a zygomatic width of 185mm. Admittedly, this huge jaguar had a relatively narrow skull for its species

I know we can't directly compare skulls of both species but I say it's very impressive that a leopard can have a skull comparable in dimensions to large individual male jaguars from Pantanal and Llanos.

To put things in perspective, Indian or African savanna leopards struggle to exceed the 250mm (in total length) mark.

This particular specimen is currently the largest leopard when looking at his measurements (brace yourself, for I have shared this list many times before):

(Largest skulls from scientific sources)

*This image is copyright of its original author

As you can see, only 3 males were not from either Iran or Central Africa but from Uganda, Egypt and Sudan.

Well, we have time here, don´t we. So naturally it´s possible to take a bit time and focus certain information to one thread. 

When people are interested to find out, where biggst tigers, lions and jaguars can be found, it is obvious, that there is same kind of interest what comes to leopards. Many discussions go to wrong direction in the beginning, when "too strong statement" happens. You understand without a doubt, that when you write "Central-African leopards are the biggest there is" it can receive different kind of reaction than if you write "I have found information, which indicates, that Central-African leopards might be biggest subspecies".

I agree, that you have good points to keep that discussion alive. Still same time remembering, that current information can be enough to justify that hypothesis, but maybe not to prove it 100%. When accepting it, that there are grey areas, then it is also easier to take criticism, when not hanging yourself too early to too strong statements. 

You and @Pckts have a lot of good information about leopards, much more than I have for instance at least what comes to sizes. It would be nice to see if some energy, what now is wasted to debate same things over and over would be used to find something new if possible. As you said now, that you try to do. Maybe after a little time one good posting with main arguments favoring your thoughts. Summary of main points, what you have so far found out.

You have provided many good postings and even though criticism has been there too, that is what it is. The stronger statement you make, more criticism you have to be ready to take But that doesn´t mean, that your postings wouldn´be appreciated same time. Reply