Modern Weights and Measurements of Wild Lions

[GuateGojira]

(02-11-2022, 01:42 AM)SpinoRex Wrote: I know that. I read the page and the data from W.Campbell is really reliable(fair weights and measurements) and it seems he had contact to roberts. I was pretty disappointet that they didnt give an average but ranges. I dont have the weight but the Etosha male was estimated to be at least 240 kg, which is really big and maybe he could have even add weight as he was 5.5 years old. Are the measurements over curve or between pegs? 

Quote:Interestingly, the average for the lions of Berry is of 190 kg including stomach content, while those from Smuts average 187.5 kg excluding stomach content. This may suggest that lions in South Africa were indeed heavier than those from Etosha.

Yes thats true. But looking at the weight revealed by Africat, Van dyk and other measurements of wild lions the weight should be around 200 kg. They should be around the same weight unless the conditions or whatever are different. But the lions of smuts where definetely heavier than those of HuBerry as he included also unhealthy males and so on.

I personally dont believe in any significant differences between lions. Weights arent showing really the (genetical) size but more the condition of an animal. This is exactly what rob told me as well. The question would be are they genetically heavier (which i dont believe or the differences marginal). Asiatic lions from Jhala who were as long and tall as the Kalahari lions from MacFarlane. However the difference in weight was 50 kg with the 5 adult lions of Macfarlane averaging 211 kg. However im interested how heavy Chico would have been in his adulthood as he was at 2.5 yo 206cm long and 188 kg.

I only saw the pciture from the book of Pitman. If you have the original page from Campbell, can you share it please?

As far I know, the measurements reported by the late Dr Hu Berry in his email were taken in straight line. He estimated that male at 240 kg empty.

About the new weights, they seems to be focused in the biggest males available, Smuts did better as he included all the males available and was unbiased on it. Certainly, the avearage for the adult males is around 190 kg in the best cases, but if they focus only in the territorial big ones, it could be 200 kg. The same with tigers, overall the average is 200 kg, including youngs and old ones, but if we focus only in territorial ones it will be no less than 210 kg.

Finally, I don't think that we can compare the lions from India and those from Kalahari (the new measurements, of course). We know that both were measured along the curves, but we don't know how they applied that method, did they hold it straight?, did they pressed the tape?, how much they press it? These are questions that we can't answer unless the specific persons can explain it. Asian lions are genetically different from lions in Kalahari, so genetic is always an strong force that drive the morphology, also all the animals darted, from both places, were is excelent conditions. Both old and modern records always shows that Asian/Barbary/West-Africa lions are smaller and lighter than those from East/South Africa. If you check the measurements "between pegs" you can see the real difference.

With the male "Chico", it is no clear when he was measured, in one table it says 2-3 years and in other it says 4 years (fully adult) so it is not clear. Evidence and other adult males in litterature confirm that based in its weight and size it was clearly an adult male, unless that included a good amount of food. So in this case there are 6 males (7 weights reported), not 5, and the average will be 209 kg, not 211 kg. Reply