Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences

[Balam]

(06-26-2021, 12:09 AM)Luipaard Wrote:

Quote:You posted this same study on another forum as if it supported your claims.

I'm sorry, where exactly did I post this? Also, that study gives a jaguar skull length of 204-302 mm whereas the leopard skull length is 170-273 mm thus they overlap in this regard

This is the study I think you're talking about: IDENTIFICATION OF MID-SIZE CAT SKULLS

Quote:1. Leopards have completely different skulls, the excerpt from Mauricio Anton clearly highlighted these differences, you wanting them to be the same will not alter this fact.

The book clearly mentions that the jaguar's skull is proportionally wider compared to other cats as in all cats, not just leopards. How exactly does that make the skull 'completely different'? You realise that they're from the same genus right? In India they even mistook a tigress skull for a large male leopard so how exactly is a jaguar 'completely' different when a (small) tigress skull isn't?

Quote:2. They don't "completely overlap in length and width", jaguars completely outclass leopards in both regards at maximum levels because they are much larger cats at maximums and no population of leopards has proportions in skull length and width that match that of any jaguar population.

Read my first paragraph; they clearly overlap in dimensions. Just because they don't at maximums doesn't mean they don't in general.

Quote:The largest Persian leopard skull is the same length as the largest Mexican jaguars skull and yet it is narrower in breadth.

Mind posting that particular Mexian jaguar's dimensions?

Quote:the outliers usually reach 280-288 mm in length and are a far cry away in width

They're not a far cry away at all. The widest leopard skull is either 191 mm or 200 mm depending which type of source you consider reliable. That's very close or greater than the average width of the average male jaguar skull from the largest populations. Again it depends which source you go by.

Quote:The major differences are not only the forehead but the proportions in width and breadth, the height of the skull, and jaguars also have relatively larger lower canines, smaller p3, and shorter m1, according to Seymour (Panthera onca, 1989).

Again they overlap completely so you'll have leopard skulls being larger, heavier and taller than a jaguar skull.

Quote:You will see what suits your biases, because those skulls look completely different to anyone that sees them from an objective point of view, and they would look even more opposite when an overview from above the two is given where the width of the skulls becomes apparent. I know you're fond of "photographic evidence" but you cannot dismiss mathematical and empirical data because it doesn't suit you, your subjective interpretations will never trump the objective data, and the same could be said between jaguar and lion skulls, completely different.

I think you should compare these two Pantherinae skulls to cougar and cheetah ones. Perhaps then you will understand the difference in build and structure. It's also funny that you speak of data since I've clearly proven they overlap in dimensions. What I posted wasn't subjective but came directly from a scientific study.

Quote:His body size is close, the skull size difference is what makes Diablo appear much larger, but I will confirm the leopard weight since visual interpretations are not always accurate. Btw 60-65 kg is higher than the average weight of an Indian or Sri Lankan leopard and about the same as the average for a Persian leopard, since you like to speak of 100 kg being the benchmark to go by Pantanal jaguars, then that same benchmark is applied to leopards based on scientific publicized averages.

What? You clearly said on another forum that Shazam looks bigger than he really is because he's standing on a sand bank. Now all of a sudden he's 90% the size of the jaguar? You know well that an 80kg leopard is a large male, are you seriously telling me Shazam is a large individual? Not even close.

The reason I estimate him 60kg-65kg is because he's captive and captive animals tend to be bigger due to being overweight although Shazam seemed in pretty good shape for captive animal standards.

I'm not sure what wild leopard average weights have to do with my estimation of Shazam's weight but you're incorrect. For example, Indian male leopards in Maharashtra, central India averaged 63,4kg (source: Morphometry of Leopards From Maharashtra, India) so theoretically speaking Shazam is the size of an average Indian male. I'm okay with that.

Quote:I'm sorry, where exactly did I post this? Also, that study gives a jaguar skull length of 204-302 mm whereas the leopard skull length is 170-273 mm thus they overlap in this regard

This is the study I think you're talking about: IDENTIFICATION OF MID-SIZE CAT SKULLS

You and I both know where you posted it, that's why you knew exactly which study I was referring to despite not giving much information about it at all. Shortridge isn't your only alternate alias. They overlap to an extent in that study, not completely, but I'll go over that later on.

Quote:The book clearly mentions that the jaguar's skull is proportionally wider compared to other cats as in all cats, not just leopards. How exactly does that make the skull 'completely different'? You realise that they're from the same genus right? In India they even mistook a tigress skull for a large male leopard so how exactly is a jaguar 'completely' different when a (small) tigress skull isn't?

So is the leopard not another cat? If the skull of jaguars is completely different from other cats not only does that support my previous statements but directly contradicts your wrongful assumptions of both species having identical skulls. Being from the same genus means nothing when they are wired for different lifestyles and their morphology is a reflection of those lifestyles. Irbises are also Panthera cats, yet you're one of the people that gets triggered whenever they are compared to leopards.

The skull of the Indian tigress was never fully recognized as a leopard skull, the confusion had been derived from verbal descriptions of the fur of the animal killed which was dark. Because the dimensions of the skull were significantly above the threshold for what leopards achieve, it was later concluded to belong to a sub-adult tigress. Not to mention that this has little to nothing to do with what I initially stated, jaguars aren't tigresses so you're reasoning behind bringing this up is once again, bizarre.

Quote:Read my first paragraph; they clearly overlap in dimensions. Just because they don't at maximums doesn't mean they don't in general.

This is what you said:

"Despite this they completely overlap in length and width."

The word "completely" implies a total overlap in dimensions, which is false. The overlap in skull sizes between jaguars and leopards only occurs between specific populations, the largest jaguars outclass leopards by a very large margin (both averages and maximums). And the proportions of skull widths and lengths between populations of the two species is very different as well.

Quote:Mind posting that particular Mexian jaguar's dimensions?

This has been shared here before and I've already gone over this with you, from Cranial measurements of jaguars (Panthera onca) from the State of Oaxaca, Mexico (Lavariega & Salas):

*This image is copyright of its original author

The skull length of the largest male is 288 mm, the same as the length of the largest Persian leopard skull, yet its width of 196 is much greater than the width of 181 of the leopard and at par with averages of jaguars from floodplain areas of South America.

Quote:They're not a far cry away at all. The widest leopard skull is either 191 mm or 200 mm depending which type of source you consider reliable. That's very close or greater than the average width of the average male jaguar skull from the largest populations. Again it depends which source you go by.

Hold on, you're using the 200 mm skull that came from that hunting book from the Tanzanian specimen that had a length of 11 inches? So you're now comparing hunting records that cannot be verified to scientifically gathered measurements in peer-review papers and think this somehow makes your point more valid? There are hunting records of jaguars at 180 kg, according to your reasoning we should be using that weight as the new standard for maximums for the species. 

The 191 mm leopard is the only one that can be compared to the skulls of jaguars and that specific outlier represents less than 0% of the skulls of leopards worldwide because the vast majority of leopards skulls don't come anywhere near close to this width and yet it still fails to match the average for floodplain jaguars or the width for the largest Mexican jaguar skull. Not to mention that the broadest jaguar skull measured 223 mm and belonged to an average-sized Pantanal male of 106 kg, another male from the Venezuelan Llanos yielded a skull length of 223 mm and was included in a scientific paper from Dr. Hoogesteijn, these measurements are similar in width to the skull of certain male lions, I guess using your logic jaguar skulls now "completely overlap with lion skulls".

Quote:I think you should compare these two Pantherinae skulls to cougar and cheetah ones. Perhaps then you will understand the difference in build and structure. It's also funny that you speak of data since I've clearly proven they overlap in dimensions. What I posted wasn't subjective but came directly from a scientific study.

You haven't proven a single thing nor do you understand how the morphological adaptations of felids work. Irbises have similar skulls to cougars despite belonging to a different genus. Phylogenetic proximity is pointless when evolutionary traits are developed by different species through similar ecological constraints. Your study did not support any single claim you've made so far because it directly speaks of the skull differentiations between cats of the same genus (especially the irbis), the complete opposite of what you're claiming. The rest of your claims are purely subjective "Again I'm not seeing two entirely different skulls". What you're seeing =/= what things really are.

Quote:I'm not sure what wild leopard average weights have to do with my estimation of Shazam's weight but you're incorrect. For example, Indian male leopards in Maharashtra, central India averaged 63,4kg (source: Morphometry of Leopards From Maharashtra, India) so theoretically speaking Shazam is the size of an average Indian male. I'm okay with that.

Sample size: 3, leopards from one specific location. If you think that this study trumps Sunquist's which has not only a larger sample size but likely leopards from different parts of Indian I don't know what to tell you. I could just as easily post scientific tables of jaguars from the Pantanal averaging 110 kg or cougars from Patagonia averaging 76 kg, but you've been hellbent on the 100 kg value based on Hoogesteijn's larger sample size for jaguars, so it's either one or the other, you cannot magically choose the highest averages for leopards because it suits you, but that's your MO so nobody is surprised here.

And I will wait on an answer for Shazam's weight, direct data is much better than guesses based on photographs. Reply