Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences

[Luipaard]

@Pckts 

Quote:The weight of the cat was actually obtained and all of them were presented from the authors of the table. If you want them to add every capture to the table if a cat is captured more than once and weighed, that's your prerogative, not theirs. It takes nothing away from the accuracy of the table.

Doesn't it make the slighest sense that it's better to use the lower weight? It is likely that the animal has no or few stomach content at this point. But for the jaguar table, several males have their higher weight given.

Here are some remarks I have:

-For one; why take the highest figure of male Matheus (134kg) instead of his most recent one (118kg)? Also the lowest figure will likely lean towards an empty cat unless visible wounds are there in that case it's due to bad health condition.

-Same story with male Tupã; they went with the 123kg figure despite him being captured as a mature male at 107kg. He was a mature male so how is he going to gain 16kg of muscles as a mature male? Impossible, it's just stomach content.

-Again the same story, this time with male Brutos; he gained 10kg weight in a few months. That must be due to stomach content but there he is in the table with his heaviest figure.

-Next is Lopez, the outlier or record male; his figure dates from 2008, I don't know what they see as old and modern, but the rest of the figures are fairly recent making Lopez' figure kinda old.

-Lastly is the dubious claim of Pantanal jaguars being bigger today than in the past. The table contradicts itself; the heaviest male Lopez isn't from the present or recent past yet he's still the biggest one in the table. Also the average weight changed over the course of months; they out of nowhere averaged 115kg (based on this selfmade table), then 111kg and now it's at 108kg. Moving on to the Pantanal jaguaresses; they barely got bigger compared to this table. I thought they've grown bigger? Or does it only apply to males for some reason?

Quote:And like I said, "it's possible" since of course you have 3 weights used in the range of 90-95kg yet you only have one mention of a maximum of 91kgs then the only other was a 95kg corrected from 115kg.

For the weight table, 91kg was the maximum given but for the weight chart, 115kg is the maximum so in either case the 95kg isn't used. It's merely mentioned in a Facebook post plus that was the circa weight at the time of euthanasia anyway. 115kg was his weight at the time of his capture, confirmed by the veterinarian. That's the story of this male.

Quote:On top of that, you only even have 1 actual cat mentioned in scientific study or communication that has reached 90kg+. There is no other cat that's reached 90kg so again that is far more questionable. 

You forgot the 1977 study where a 90kg male is mentioned. 

*This image is copyright of its original author

It's because of this weight that rumours of very large males in West Asia existed in the past.

Quote:And there is absolutely nothing in the photos that shows him to be emaciated. His paw was removed because of injury from the snare. 

Have you seen the all the photos available? This is him during his capture, clearly full:

*This image is copyright of its original author

This is him around the time of euthanasia:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Do you still think his "body condition was fine" and that he was bloated? I say he was emaciated in the end.

Quote:It absolutely isn't a standard procedure. In fact weighing is a luxury rarely obtained. 

When a wild animal is brought in, it is because they can partly conclude if it's healthy based on their body weight. It's not when they have to operate in the wild. For Pantanal jaguars this seems possible every time though.

Quote:You are fine with them because after you continuously tried to discredit them you got proven wrong.
Funny enough, you know sit and defend alleged 90kg weights without any verification of a single cat other than one that is highly contested. 
In regards to Iman, you again shoot yourself in the foot

Uh, I was talking about the 115kg figure for the Persian leopard. Read my remarks above regarding your selfmade table.

Quote:Like it's been stated, we have 0 confirmation of weighing at 115kg only at 95kg. We have 0 confirmation of body dimensions even though they were said to exist. You want to use the excuse of language barrier issues yet want to assume him stating he was there for "a" weighing to be the 115kg over the 95kg or the 90kg?  

How's the 95kg figure? It's from a Facebook post whereas the 115kg figure is mentioned in the study, included in the weight chart and confirmed by the veterinarian?

Quote:And like you've been shown time and time again, it doesn't matter which leopard population you use the Female Pantanal jaguar reaches said weights more frequently. 

Reread what I stated. Northern Iranian males will best or surpass them. The frequency in % is already close despite the sample which included 40-50kg males from Central and South Iran. This is called probability calculation.

Quote:Again? We literally already did this in Carnivora. 
So once again.
21 adult males between 40-91kg. Average 65kg and mostly from the North per the Author of the actual study. 
On top of that, per the vets and data collected, all were between 70-88kg, none even reaching 90kg. Pantanal Jaguars reach 90kg's far more often than 1/21 individuals and of course of the study mentioned only 6/21 even reached the 80-90kg mark. This is of course without any real verification of a single Leopard over the 90kg mark outside of the amputated male and not to mention the likely scenario of that male being used twice. 

We don't have any info except the excluded male yet you know for a fact that most of the weights are from northern Iranian males? Can you provide evidence to back up this claim?
Also how can they average 70kg in the North when their weight range is 70-88kg? Doesn't that mean that the smallest males weigh around 70kg already?

Quote:No, I mean no male over 90kg with verification from the vet or capturing officer. He sent me all the males the 5 males from Tandoureh National park, the two largest males they received plus the 3 other males from C and S. On top of the confirmation of the 21 males averaging 70kg being from the N.

Tandoureh National Park isn't regarded as northern Iran but northeastern Iran near Turkmenistan. Northern Iran consists of the provinces Gilan, Mazandaran en Golestan and the environment is forest habitat (Hyrcanian forests). Not saying they don't grow big but the absolute biggest are from northern Iran specifically. Lowest weight from this region is 64kg and was a young male.

Quote:Once again, don't twist what he actually said into your skewed language of it. I was the one speaking to him, I asked the questions and I know how it was used. He said a prime male would weigh around 70kg. His table shows an average of 65kg give or take 3kg and he mentions older being 50kg. 

And once again, you're using a private reserves small sample size as an entire species for S. African averages? You skew too many things to twist your way out of claims and not to mention, there is absolutely a chance of them being bigger than Persians or at least the same size. 

If his estimation is based on males including those from Tandoureh National Park, then yes it's possible is stays at only 70kg. But that's merging populations. See above what is meant with northern Iranian leopards.
Yes that small sample indicates mature males are larger than the average weight.

Quote:You can't be serious. 
For Jaguars like it's been stated a thousand times already, we have first hand conformation of the capture from the one involved. Weights, measurements, images of the capture and so on. Do you really want to compare the process used for them compared to an IG verbal correspondence? 
Or no existence of the Leopard used for the weight at all? In fact, almost all of them are 2nd hand to begin with. 
If you play that game you get severely beaten. 

There are weights where just a figure was given after someone asked for it when they saw an Instagram photo of a captured jaguar. Including the word "around" which meant they had to ask again after a long time to get actual confirmation. You absolutely do not have all these 'requirements' of yours. If so give me the measurements of the outlier Lopez. Or Joker's weight and not the 'at least X' figure.

Quote:What a surprise, why would you use verified data over your personal opinion when you're proven wrong?

So sticking with scientific data is wrong and relying on a selfmade table is the better choice?

Quote:Hence why I don't state it as fact but make sure to use valid points to back said opinion. 
The only one "butthurt" here is you, which is why you continously spew nonsense over and over again after being proven wrong. 
So we're clear because you change your tone so often, you are now saying Persian Males come close to Pantanal female Jaguars?
Ok, that's acceptable. They do come close and can even overlap with them, they just don't do so as often. 
In regards to the skull measurements, I literally presented the SCI and Ward measurements, what are you talking about?
Even if they weren't done so, they still are smaller than Female Pantanal Jaguars on average. 

"Spew nonsense" while you're the one bringing up excuse after excuse in favour of the jaguar. Where's your evidence of sub-adults being included which decreased the average skull measurements of Pantanal jaguaresses? Where's your evidence of Persian leopards being measured "the wrong way" which increased their average skull measurements? I already brought up evidence for the latter.

Quote:Huh? 
How else are you going to see a Pantanal Jaguar? 
We're not comparing a Jaguar in the Zoo to a Wild Congo Basin Leopard are we? Can I compare Congo Leopards to Pantanal Jaguars because I've seen African Leopards in the wild? Can I compare Persian Leopards to wild Pantanal Jaguars because I've seen Persians in the zoo? 

It was never about Pantanal jaguars. You stated Henschel had never seen "a jaguar". Henschel says Gabonese males "look more like jags" because of their build. Nobody is bringing up Pantanal jaguars in this case.

Quote:What is there to be careful about?

He's been guiding for decades, you see Leopards almost every trip. On top of that, he also goes as a professional photographer so he doesn't even need to go with guests. His IG and FB alone have tons of them from all over Africa. Don't try and skew it like they are all "reposts" since you can see numerous different specimens. In fact, I posted dozens of them the last time you made an excuse about him not seeing big males or males from other parts of Africa. You remember right? Like all other excuse you make, the tried to twist something and throw it against the wall to see if it sticks. At the end of the day, Henschel hasn't seen even remotely close to the amount of Leopards Dutoit has. That was by his choice, he chose to study a remote part of Africa where wildlife viewing is very difficult. When you guide you have to find animals to view, it's how they make their money. Animal spottings=Tips.

You see leopards almost every trip? Based on what? Seeing is one is for many people one of their highlights because of how unique it is. That's the general consensus of course because in Yala National Park it's fairly easy to spot one due to them being less elusive and the high concentration of leopards in the park.

Henschel has spotted leopards himself as well but not doing this for a paycheck. Remember the photo of a leopard in Benin taken by Henschel himself? 

Also seeing more leopards doesn't mean you're more knowledgeable. Henschel has studies under his name, he still gets citations in newer studies. Henschel is an authority on the subject.

Quote:It doesn't matter, he specifically mentions that was over a 5 year process. At that rate, he's seen 20 now. 

And no one ever said he sits behind a computer, camera traps have to be placed on site. Don't put words in my mouth. 

I'm sorry, it was your friend who said he's "a person who's only seen leopards behind a computer screen" That rate is obviously not correct since he's been to other countries after this 2010 report. Dutoit is going to see the same leopards over and over again, the number of Instagram posts won't change this fact.

Quote:Lol
The Skulls used are from museum collections that are 2nd hand. You can almost guarantee they are hunted, or at least a few of them. Wards are measured by verified measurers like any other and are all sourced and seen first hand. They are no different, hunters have the highest library of specimens, that's common sense.

The skulls from the 2013 study from Van Neer were measured by themselves. Of course the skulls are from musuem or private collections. The origin of the measurements are scientific, that is what matters.

Quote:This same nonsense again
CBL doesn't = TL. Hence why some have shorter CBL while having longer TL and vice versa. 
And what are you talking about with the sagittal crest? TL is from one side to the other, not over the curves. 
And just so you understand 
https://imgur.com/5kOZy9i
The second longest skull had a CBL of 246mm 
The longest CBL belonged to a skull with the TL of 278mm
The 2nd longest CBL belonged to a skull with the TL of 275mm
The whole list shows a random correlation of CBL to TL. 
So I suggest you look at it closer before trying to make that claim again.

The shortest condylobasal length was 243 mm with a total length of 277 mm but in this case it's 264 mm which is a big difference. No chance that the difference between the two is only 10 cm for this skull. Also the second longest skull is as wides as the no.1 but the complete measurements are available and have been shown to you; this skull was superior in every department - it's a bigger skull so the length is no less than 281 mm.

Quote:Fled the scene?
I'm right here proving you wrong again. And the previous debate was the same as this, Pantanal Jaguars.

Yes you fled the scene on another forum. The debate back then was which cat produced +80kg specimens more often (male leopard vs jaguaress). All you did was bring up Pantanal jaguaresses who are just a fraction of the entire population. I can rely on multiple populations in different countries and even continents whereas you at best can rely on two populations in Brazil and one in Venezuela.

It's a very debatable topic but I was never proven to be wrong.

Quote:At this point we're done, you present no new data and you continuously twist and turn away from the facts to try and change the goalpost.

You're the one mixing different debates as I've shown in this post. Lastly you haven't brought up any data at all except some Instagram posts as if that confirms anything except for one single person's opinion.

Quote:Are you going to say he hasn't seen Lioness either?

I'm going to say the same thing in that he is simply boasting the jaguars and that he is again very vague in his statements. Again he doesn't specify anything as if all male jaguars are lioness-sized. We both know this isn't the case.
I created these two tables of similar-sized male leopards and jaguars:

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Can I now yell that male leopards are "just about the same size as lionesses, not too far off"? After all male jaguars are according to Dutoit. See what I mean with these vague statements? Reply