WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Tiger
Biggest Kaziranga tiger?
Biggest Kaziranga tiger?
|
Biggest Kaziranga tiger?
|
 (12-06-2014, 10:37 AM)'johnny rex' Wrote:(12-06-2014, 10:29 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: All we have focused so far was mainly about the GSL, not much about the width. The prehistoric tiger skulls seem to be more robust built than their modern counterparts, but the only problem is that the exact measurements are still not available. If you ask me that could the prehistoric tiger skull exceed 12 inches in width? It is definitely possible, at least theoritically plausible.
With today's ecosystem, i doubt a big cat with the size of Baikal could survive in the wild.
Let's assume if he did live back in the Pleistocene era, he should have only few Cromerian lions/Smilodon populator/Ngandong tigers as the rivals. He should also have more muscle mass as the wild tigers always need to pack with more muscle for the hunting and struggling with the big preys. In the early of this year, we actually managed to perceive that Baikal was in fact an almost exact doppelganger of the Ngandong tiger specimen with the 480mm femur. I can say the Amur tiger still carries some recessive genes of the giant tiger, and in the captivity without facing the pressure as they did in the wild, they could manage to unleash more potential to produce more freak specimens. There is chance that Baikal's offsprings might switch back to the normal sized captive Amurs, but still they have the chance or potential to produce something big. BTW, Baikal's daughter is also huge, she weighs about 500 pounds.  (12-06-2014, 10:27 AM)'johnny rex' Wrote:(12-06-2014, 12:22 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:(12-04-2014, 09:37 PM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:(12-01-2014, 11:46 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: If you watch the Super Cat doc they have a lion, Tiger and Liger skull all side by side No johnny, I believe that there is no way to tell what his skull size would be. Its very possible that he doesn't have the largest skull ever, since many large siberians don't have extremely large skulls. Its also very possible that he does. But until its measured, I will not jump to conclusions. I wonder if extreme canine size comes with the fact that they don't wear their canines down the way the do in the wild. The longest wild canine belongs to a Bengal, not siberian. When cats eat dead prey, they crush bone and cartilage. They tackle struggling prey etc. Thats why a captive giant amur probably has the longest canines, but there are very few captive pure Bengals, and even less actual measurements of them. So that to, is to hard to say in my book.
The captive Amur with the 9cm canines has definitely a big skull, and his head is huge, and he is not fat at all.
Some tigers got a fat/meaty head, that's why its actual skull measurement is rather small, but some non-obese tigers with a large head will have a large skull as well.  *This image is copyright of its original author
(12-07-2014, 05:13 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: The captive Amur with the 9cm canines has definitely a big skull, and his head is huge, and he is not fat at all. The only argument I have to this is the fact that the siberians of 270kg or 280kg or smaller surely aren't Obese yet their skulls are still generally normal sized. So the argument of fat increasing skull head size while having a smaller skull may not be true. 
You both are right essentially due to the correlation of skull size and body size/mass being there, correlated to about r^2=0.7 I've found within species, which is a correlation, but a correlation which leaves a hefty amount of room for deviation, and often times the individual deviations themselves being very different.
The 600 pounds tigers are large nomal-sized tiger, but definitely not in the textbook of the freak tigers.
I say the deviation number of the skull for the 600 pounds is between 14 to 16 inches. Some 600 pounds tigers can have smaller skull of 14 inches, while some have larger skull up to 16 inches. As for the freak tigers like Baikal are between 16 to 18 inches. Even his skull is proportionally smaller, it would still be larger than your normal tigers. The skull and weight do not correlate is true when everything stays in the deviation range, but not true when a 900 pounds tiger can have a tiny skull of a tigress. (12-09-2014, 12:47 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: You both are right essentially due to the correlation of skull size and body size/mass being there, correlated to about r^2=0.7 I've found within species, which is a correlation, but a correlation which leaves a hefty amount of room for deviation, and often times the individual deviations themselves being very different. Exactly, for a 600 pounds tiger, the smallest skull he can get is about 14 inches, and the largest skull he can get is about 16 inches. Since today's tigers aren't capable to reach their prehistoric size, that's why we won't see any wild skull beyond 16 inches anymore.
Both 600 pounds tiger and 900 pounds tiger can have proportionally larger or smaller skull, but they still have the different deviation number for sure.
For example, let's assume that the deviation number for the skull of the 900 pounds tiger is between 16 to 18 inches. I say that most 900 pounds tigers will get a 17 inches skull, only the minorities from both extreme side will get a skull of either 16 inches or 18 inches. The 650 pounds specimen from Duisburg Zoo probably got a 17 inches, so he must be leaning towards the largest extreme of the deviation number for his league. Most tigers with similar size will definitely get a smaller skull in general.
I agree that the larger the cat the larger the skull, even if the skull is relatively "small" for its size, its still going to be large. But I think 2'' deviation between skulls of two similiarly sized cats is quite a gap. Its more than 10% difference in skull size so it kind of shows that Skull size is not the best correalation to tiger size.
(12-09-2014, 02:04 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: I agree that the larger the cat the larger the skull, even if the skull is relatively "small" for its size, its still going to be large. But I think 2'' deviation between skulls of two similiarly sized cats is quite a gap. Its more than 10% difference in skull size so it kind of shows that Skull size is not the best correalation to tiger size. I think tigerluver will be the most suitable poster to find out the deviation numbers of the cat skull. As for those Kaziranga tigers, if they are truly exceptional, then there will be no doubt that they can produce the largest cat skull in the wild. They should have larger skull than the largest lion skull as well.
We know the Assam Tigers measured have the largest Skulls on average. But Tigerluver is definitely the most knowledgable in this area.
(12-09-2014, 04:35 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: We know the Assam Tigers measured have the largest Skulls on average. But Tigerluver is definitely the most knowledgable in this area. That's why i never doubt the potential 17 inches skull from the Assam tigers. Maybe those large specimens could weigh more than 700 pounds? (12-09-2014, 04:55 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote:(12-09-2014, 04:35 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: We know the Assam Tigers measured have the largest Skulls on average. But Tigerluver is definitely the most knowledgable in this area. I see know reason why they couldn't reach those sizes. They hunt the largest prey, live in the most rich conditions, highest competition, why couldn't they reach the largest size? Makes total sense to me
Typical Tigress Tank from Kaziranga,
They just have such densisty to their bodies.Sai Adikarla Photography December 3 · My Own.. Tigress She was hiding.. watching... and finally shown up after 3 hours of waiting!! It happened when everybody else in the safari waiting at the opposite end, she walked slowly towards my vehicle, growled and disappeared in to the bushes. Later she gave me one more photo opportunity while appearing far away and being welcomed by remaining big four of Kaziranga. Same photo published in Sanctuary Asia magazine. Yes, she is My Own.. Tigress. — at Kaziranga National Park.  *This image is copyright of its original author
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 6 Guest(s) |