Amur Leopard (Panthera pardus orientalis)

[Shir Babr]

(07-29-2018, 09:56 AM)Wolverine Wrote: Yes, probably the presence of tiger is also a size limiting factor, as we can see in Sri Lanka where the absence of tigers has resulted in larger size of local leopards than in India.
But 50-100 years ago there were still a lot of Caspian tigers in many locations inhabited by the Persian leopard. So if the theory of tiger influence on leopards size is correct Persian leopards centuries ago should has been smaller than now, when this cat brecame the apex predator in Iran, but I am not competent to answer on this question, there is need of old data.

Well to be honest, I don't know why the notion of Persian leopards being the largest subspecies became so widely accepted in the first place. I find it similar to what happens with Siberian tigers, that are regarded as the largest by most people when in reality that title belongs to Terai tigers. It can be due to that skull from Iran regarded as the largest recorded for some time, and the appearance of some individuals in camera traps. But the biggest looking individuals in camera traps have winter coat, and a zoologist that has worked with leopards told me that record of the Iranian skull is from 1990 and outdated, and that the largest skull known is actually from Western Africa and the second largest is from India. The heaviest Persian leopard was claimed to be 86 kg, and that's less than what Bushveld leopards have weighted. Reply