There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
(02-16-2015, 04:59 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Yeah, they are not exactly the descendants of the Kruger lions, but they surely belong to the South African clade.
On the other hand, the Crater lions not only belong to the East African clade, they were also directly descended from the colonial Serengeti lions.
02-17-2015, 12:50 AM( This post was last modified: 02-17-2015, 01:01 AM by Amnon242 )
I think that 197 kg average (as proposed by Peter) is fair (or perhaps generous). This would mean that crater lions are (probably) the biggest local lion population in the world.
And 197 kg lion...thats pretty impressive beast.
BTW this lion was 178 kg at the age of 8. I saw him from close distance (about 1 meter). Incredible beast. When I saw him I thought "omg, he is the same size as the 205 kg amur tiger in next cage, but probably even bigger".
Wow @Amnon242 that's an impressive asiatic lion, I saw one in Parken zoo in Sweeden 2-3 years ago, he was massive when he died of age he was 192 kg!! people might think he was fat, but he was in great shape! I'll post a video of him later! some captive asiatic Lions are huge, and appares even bigger than they are in weight, The asiatic lion looked almost as big as aslan and he's 250-260 kg!!
02-17-2015, 04:08 AM( This post was last modified: 02-17-2015, 04:34 AM by chaos )
(02-17-2015, 03:14 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(02-15-2015, 08:19 PM)'chaos' Wrote:
(02-13-2015, 10:48 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(02-13-2015, 06:54 PM)'chaos' Wrote: @Pockets - it's a well known fact both lion and tiger subspecies that dwell in prey rich regions are generally larger than their counterparts in prey challenged regions. Common sense.
You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?
@Waverider
In regards to Kaziranga tigers, you are right they have not been measured. But Assam Tigers have a few individuals who have been, and according to them, they have the largest skulls on average, and their body weight was in the 220kg range I believe. I don't know about what region in assam they were from, but Kaziranga is in assam. Lets also look at Eye Witness accounts saying that they are the largest tigers they have ever seen. Then lastly, prey density,
Kaziranga is the Only place in India with Rhino, Elephant, Water Buffalo and all the other species of prey in India for a tiger. It also has the highest Tiger Density as well, so using those proven facts, the only way a Tiger density that high is sustained, is plenty of prey, the habitat is lush, deep grass and tough treking. A animal must swim miles, hunt through elephant grass and deep wet marsh lands to make kills. All would contribute to growth in muscles and overall weight.
Lets compare these factors to the Crater,
No higher prey density than else where, terrain is similar to any where else, lion density is very low there, (growing recently) but still not higher than other areas, Coalitions are much more individuals meaning more mouth's to feed, lions as recently as 30 years ago came from the Serengeti. So its not like Kaziranga where they have had 100s of years of uninterrupted evolutionary time, they have only recently begun to live there again in substantial #s and its not like they could have adapted specific morphological traits in that time frame. So, by no means is 212kg an unheard of # for wild lions, but it certainly is not backed by evidence that those weights are the average for male lions in the crater. I have also seen no eye witness accounts saying they are any larger than any other Lions from elsewhere maybe somebody here would like to ask a few lion experts on FB?
"The 212 kg figure is an educated estimate, but just an estimate. Because it refers to an average weight of a sample it has more validity then if it would refer to any particular individual. Assuming it were correct, in the sample of N=6 individuals averaging 212 kg I would definitely expect a weight range of 200-225 kg as a minimum, more likely 195-230 kg as I conservatively predicted (actual prediction 195-243 kg likely optimistic for 6 individuals only).
I just remind that the sample of N=7 adult male tigers from Chitawan NP average 235 kg kg with a range of 200-261 kg"
Also the real average of Chitwan would be 200kg-272kg+ but thats a different discussion.
~~You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?
Spin it anyway you like. The fact is crater lions have ample food year round. Combined with other factors, that apparently makes for a larger lion.
Take that up with our creator. Like larger tigers sub species, I presume similar dynamics apply.
"Spin it"
haha
I just posted proof from packers observations over 30 plus years with the history of the "Crater" lion. They have ample food year round, but guess what, the Serengeti has wayyyy more food year round. They are no larger than anywhere else, at least nothing noted by actual biologists who study them.
"Take out all the unneccesary scientific over-complication, its quite easy to understand."
I really like that statement ^^
So we should dismiss all scientific studies now? Well if thats the case, Crater lions are Serengeti lions. No larger or smaller, lets keep it simple then.
You posted diddly squat in regards to crater lions. The Serengeti is subject to annual migrations. The crater is not. That equals a more consistent
food base which equals a heavier lion. Most agree craters are simply a larger lion. You have a tendency to read way too much into statements and
overcomplicate. Its a very simple equation. Thats where the "take out the UNNECESSARY scientific complication" you like to use in any debate you
feel slipping through your hands, comment stems from.
The following 1 user Likes chaos's post:1 user Likes chaos's post • Balam
02-17-2015, 04:14 AM( This post was last modified: 02-17-2015, 04:17 AM by chaos )
~~"Take out all the unneccesary scientific over-complication, its quite easy to understand."
I really like that statement ^^ So we should dismiss all scientific studies now? Well if thats the case, Crater lions are Serengeti lions. No larger or smaller, lets keep it simple then.
Please, am I debating a child? You know quite well the context in which that comment applies, and if you don't, you're simply in way over your head.
02-17-2015, 04:30 AM( This post was last modified: 02-17-2015, 04:39 AM by Pckts )
(02-17-2015, 04:08 AM)'chaos' Wrote:
(02-17-2015, 03:14 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(02-15-2015, 08:19 PM)'chaos' Wrote:
(02-13-2015, 10:48 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(02-13-2015, 06:54 PM)'chaos' Wrote: @Pockets - it's a well known fact both lion and tiger subspecies that dwell in prey rich regions are generally larger than their counterparts in prey challenged regions. Common sense.
You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?
@Waverider
In regards to Kaziranga tigers, you are right they have not been measured. But Assam Tigers have a few individuals who have been, and according to them, they have the largest skulls on average, and their body weight was in the 220kg range I believe. I don't know about what region in assam they were from, but Kaziranga is in assam. Lets also look at Eye Witness accounts saying that they are the largest tigers they have ever seen. Then lastly, prey density,
Kaziranga is the Only place in India with Rhino, Elephant, Water Buffalo and all the other species of prey in India for a tiger. It also has the highest Tiger Density as well, so using those proven facts, the only way a Tiger density that high is sustained, is plenty of prey, the habitat is lush, deep grass and tough treking. A animal must swim miles, hunt through elephant grass and deep wet marsh lands to make kills. All would contribute to growth in muscles and overall weight.
Lets compare these factors to the Crater,
No higher prey density than else where, terrain is similar to any where else, lion density is very low there, (growing recently) but still not higher than other areas, Coalitions are much more individuals meaning more mouth's to feed, lions as recently as 30 years ago came from the Serengeti. So its not like Kaziranga where they have had 100s of years of uninterrupted evolutionary time, they have only recently begun to live there again in substantial #s and its not like they could have adapted specific morphological traits in that time frame. So, by no means is 212kg an unheard of # for wild lions, but it certainly is not backed by evidence that those weights are the average for male lions in the crater. I have also seen no eye witness accounts saying they are any larger than any other Lions from elsewhere maybe somebody here would like to ask a few lion experts on FB?
"The 212 kg figure is an educated estimate, but just an estimate. Because it refers to an average weight of a sample it has more validity then if it would refer to any particular individual. Assuming it were correct, in the sample of N=6 individuals averaging 212 kg I would definitely expect a weight range of 200-225 kg as a minimum, more likely 195-230 kg as I conservatively predicted (actual prediction 195-243 kg likely optimistic for 6 individuals only).
I just remind that the sample of N=7 adult male tigers from Chitawan NP average 235 kg kg with a range of 200-261 kg"
Also the real average of Chitwan would be 200kg-272kg+ but thats a different discussion.
~~You like to use the term "common sense" but you don't provide evidence on whether Crater is has more or less prey density or Compare other Tigers from areas with alleged different prey density.
Just so you know, the serengeti has 1000s of more animals than the crater as well as tons more different species available than the crater. Giraffes, Impala, herda beast etc. All don't exist in the crater, even warthog was only seen recently. And many other herbivores, as well. What the crater does have is a constant # of animals throughout the year, meaning, no migratory animals.
But that just means they have the same animals year round, not more #'s aka Prey Density.
The serengeti is one of the most prey abundant places around and the Prime territory holding prides will have access to all kinds of prey year round and a high variety.
And since there is only one verified weight of 146kg for a Male Lion (injured yes) but still not skinny by any means, it proves that the male at least is not the 212kg average claimed. Since all other averages are based off a faulty chest size and not weights they are far from verified. You certainly would not allow the weight of 272kg+ to be allowed if they were simply estimated off body length or chest size, would you?
Spin it anyway you like. The fact is crater lions have ample food year round. Combined with other factors, that apparently makes for a larger lion.
Take that up with our creator. Like larger tigers sub species, I presume similar dynamics apply.
"Spin it"
haha
I just posted proof from packers observations over 30 plus years with the history of the "Crater" lion. They have ample food year round, but guess what, the Serengeti has wayyyy more food year round. They are no larger than anywhere else, at least nothing noted by actual biologists who study them.
"Take out all the unneccesary scientific over-complication, its quite easy to understand."
I really like that statement ^^
So we should dismiss all scientific studies now? Well if thats the case, Crater lions are Serengeti lions. No larger or smaller, lets keep it simple then.
You posted diddly squat in regards to crater lions. The Serengeti is subject to annual migrations. The crater is not. That equals a more consistent
food base which equals a heavier lion. Most agree craters are simply a larger lion. You have a tendency to read way too much into statements and
overcomplicate, like youv'e been doing. Its a very simple equation. Thats where the "take out the UNNECESSARY scientific complication" you like to
use in any argument you feel slipping through your oily hands, stems from.
"Morphologically, the crater lions appear more similar to the Serengeti Lions, males in both populations have fuller manes than the Manyara males and both sexes have shorter faces. The morphological characteristics of the Manyara lions are more similar to the lions from the east of the Rift valley.
Although our sample size from the Manyara is very small, genetic data also suggest a greater affinity between the Crater and Serengeti populations. First, the allesl frequencies for two blood enzyme loci in Manyara are very different from either the Crater or Serengeti. All five Manyara lions were homozygous for the TF b allele and the four animals that could be tested for ADA carried the b allele at a frequency of .625
Note however that all five Manyara animals are from a single pride. Second, DNA fingerprinting analysis indicates greater genetic distance between the Crater and Manyara. Within each population, there is a strong positive relationship of kinship of any two individuals and their extent of variable number of tandem repeat (VNTR) "band-sharing"
Band-sharing between any two individuals is the total number of DNA fragments showing similar molecular weight and intensisty carried by both individuals. On average, any two members of the Serengeti population that are unrelated to each other share 49% of their VNTR bands and most distantly related members of the Ngorongoro population share 47%
Six lions from four different prides in the Ngorongoro Crater were compared with five animals from fiveprides in the Serengeti and two animals from one Manyara lions.
Although the genetic, morphological, and demographic data clearly limited, they all consistently indicate that the Crater population is more closely allied to the Serengeti lions, and that immigrants entering the Crater after the Stomoxys' plague were also from the Serengeti."
PACKER- http://www.cbs.umn.edu/sites/default/fil...ongoro.pdf
^^^That is the crater lion report ^^^^
There is nothing on crater lions being larger than any other lions but there is absolute proof of them being serengeti lions.
"You have a tendency to read way too much into statements and
overcomplicate, like youv'e been doing. Its a very simple equation."
No, I use proof to determine my opinion. You have a tendency to completely disregard factual evidence that disagree with you and proves other wise.
In the same study posted it specifcally shows the Prey abdundance in drought or non drought years. By far the most preyed upon animal in either time, Wildabeast. Lions where estimated to eat 12-13kg a sitting (just like normal lions elsewhere) and this was off of belly size observation.
Then lastly, "However, the number of females per carcass was greater at high population densisty than at low densisty, thus the lions gained less food at high densisty despite forgaging in larger groups"
So whether drought or not, they have the same issues as any other lion population.
" Most agree craters are simply a larger lion"
Who exactly agrees with this?
The crater is larger than which lion?
Please elaborate and provide proof.
And?...............My posts are based solely on logic as to why craters could be larger. I am not the only person who
consider these lions to be one of, if not, the largest lion subspecies. Nobody knows why they're larger. Perhaps its
due to the craters environment. I'm not a scientist and I've never been there. According to waveriders previous posts
in this thread, the 212 kg estimate has been accepted as an educated "estimate" by peer reviewed scientific paper. That
carries way more weight than your desperate attempts to discredit anything and everything I believe in or post.
~~For the benefit of everybody the above on the 212 kg estimate is NOT a fact but a comment on an educated estimate suggested by a peer-reviewed scientific paper.
That makes for a larger cat don't ya think? Now whether these are genetically identical to Serengeti's? I could give two shiites. The simple fact it
obviously irks you, is your issue. I, along with many others believe craters are a larger lion subspecies. Kinda like you believe Kaz tigers are the
largest tiger sub-species without any actual proof. Now, if you agree, we'll continue to disagree. I'm on board.
Remember @Pckts alot of The prey migrates in The serengeti, unlike The animals in the crater aswell.
I think The crater Lions are bulked up serengeti lions, You can easy see they are heavier and more stocky animals than those from serengeti just by watching videos and pictures to compare!
(02-17-2015, 05:05 AM)'chaos' Wrote: And?...............My posts are based solely on logic as to why craters could be larger. I am not the only person who
consider these lions to be one of, if not, the largest lion subspecies. Nobody knows why they're larger. Perhaps its
due to the craters environment. I'm not a scientist and I've never been there. According to waveriders previous posts
in this thread, the 212 kg estimate has been accepted as an educated "estimate" by peer reviewed scientific paper. That
carries way more weight than your desperate attempts to discredit anything and everything I believe in or post.
~~For the benefit of everybody the above on the 212 kg estimate is NOT a fact but a comment on an educated estimate suggested by a peer-reviewed scientific paper.
That makes for a larger cat don't ya think? Now whether these are genetically identical to Serengeti's? I could give two shiites. The simple fact it
obviously irks you, is your issue. I, along with many others believe craters are a larger lion subspecies. Kinda like you believe Kaz tigers are the
largest tiger sub-species without any actual proof. Now, if you agree, we'll continue to disagree. I'm on board.
The only thing that "irks me" is your refusal of anybody who disagrees with your claim.
Like you stated yourself, the 212 kg is NOT a fact.
Peter writes
"Regarding Ngorogoro lions. In spite of many decades of research in many regions in Africa and in spite of countless tables with weights, only one Ngorogoro male was actually weighed. It was a young adult, who scaled 146 kg. Very different from the computed average for young adults in the page above (206 kg.). A disappointing result, but there you have it.
Anything to add? Yes. The regression equation was debated on AVA. Apollyon contacted Packer. The conclusion they got to was the equation was inadequate. More? Yes. I saw a few documentaries in which lions were measured. I noticed that chest girths were not taken in the proper way. They only measured half of the girth, as this meant they didn't have to move the lion. I understand (a male lion is a heavy animal), but I wouldn't get to satisfactory. There's one more thing. Everything I have on wild lions suggests adult males outaverage adult females by about 60-70 kg. Let's assume the average for Ngorogoro females (127 kg.) was right and let's also assume that Ngorogoro lions are big animals. I propose to take 70 kg. as the average difference. That would result in 197 kg. at best. Different from 212 kg. Maybe the relation between chest girth and weight is different in lions, tigers and bears. "
Amnon
" ...too simple. Lions are social and rely on numbers. More food should result in more lions (ofc in bigger size as well...but only to some extent). Thats why size differences between various lion populations are limited.
...and as far as I know its rather the size of prey (and not the amout of prey...that much) what increases the size of lions. "
Gaute says:
"The formula is NOT from Packer, and was not provided TO Packer also. He directly say that, this is the point, period."
Grizzly
"Yeah, they are not exactly the descendants of the Kruger lions, but they surely belong to the South African clade.
On the other hand, the Crater lions not only belong to the East African clade, they were also directly descended from the colonial Serengeti lions. "
etc.
Everybody says the same more or less, this topic is pointless to discuss any further with you. Ill stick to discussing it with people who interpret and present data.
02-17-2015, 05:45 AM( This post was last modified: 02-17-2015, 11:26 PM by Pckts )
(02-17-2015, 05:38 AM)'Pantherinae' Wrote: Remember @Pckts alot of The prey migrates in The serengeti, unlike The animals in the crater aswell.
I think The crater Lions are bulked up serengeti lions, You can easy see they are heavier and more stocky animals than those from serengeti just by watching videos and pictures to compare!
Remember, prey does migrate through the crater. It also specifically mentions that in the Crater study. In fact, the crater is susceptible to prey migration and drought the same as any where else. Over the decades it has had abundance and lack of prey, Read the study I posted from packer. They may not migrate as much as the Serengeti but they absolutely do migrate in and out.
"The legendary annual wildebeest and zebra migration also passes through Ngorongoro, when the 1.7 million ungulates move south into the area in December then move out heading north in June. The migrants passing through the plains of the reserve include 1.7 million wildebeest, 260,000 zebra, and 470,000 gazelles. The Lake Ndutu area to the west has significant cheetah and lion populations. Over 500 species of bird have been recorded within the NCA. These include ostrich, white pelican, and greater and lesser flamingo on Lake Magadi within the crater, Lake Ndutu, and in the Empakaai Crater Lake, where a vast bird population can be observed. "
(02-17-2015, 05:05 AM)'chaos' Wrote: And?...............My posts are based solely on logic as to why craters could be larger. I am not the only person who
consider these lions to be one of, if not, the largest lion subspecies. Nobody knows why they're larger. Perhaps its
due to the craters environment. I'm not a scientist and I've never been there. According to waveriders previous posts
in this thread, the 212 kg estimate has been accepted as an educated "estimate" by peer reviewed scientific paper. That
carries way more weight than your desperate attempts to discredit anything and everything I believe in or post.
~~For the benefit of everybody the above on the 212 kg estimate is NOT a fact but a comment on an educated estimate suggested by a peer-reviewed scientific paper.
That makes for a larger cat don't ya think? Now whether these are genetically identical to Serengeti's? I could give two shiites. The simple fact it
obviously irks you, is your issue. I, along with many others believe craters are a larger lion subspecies. Kinda like you believe Kaz tigers are the
largest tiger sub-species without any actual proof. Now, if you agree, we'll continue to disagree. I'm on board.
The only thing that "irks me" is your refusal of anybody who disagrees with your claim.
Like you stated yourself, the 212 kg is NOT a fact.
Peter writes
"Regarding Ngorogoro lions. In spite of many decades of research in many regions in Africa and in spite of countless tables with weights, only one Ngorogoro male was actually weighed. It was a young adult, who scaled 146 kg. Very different from the computed average for young adults in the page above (206 kg.). A disappointing result, but there you have it.
Anything to add? Yes. The regression equation was debated on AVA. Apollyon contacted Packer. The conclusion they got to was the equation was inadequate. More? Yes. I saw a few documentaries in which lions were measured. I noticed that chest girths were not taken in the proper way. They only measured half of the girth, as this meant they didn't have to move the lion. I understand (a male lion is a heavy animal), but I wouldn't get to satisfactory. There's one more thing. Everything I have on wild lions suggests adult males outaverage adult females by about 60-70 kg. Let's assume the average for Ngorogoro females (127 kg.) was right and let's also assume that Ngorogoro lions are big animals. I propose to take 70 kg. as the average difference. That would result in 197 kg. at best. Different from 212 kg. Maybe the relation between chest girth and weight is different in lions, tigers and bears. "
Amnon
" ...too simple. Lions are social and rely on numbers. More food should result in more lions (ofc in bigger size as well...but only to some extent). Thats why size differences between various lion populations are limited.
...and as far as I know its rather the size of prey (and not the amout of prey...that much) what increases the size of lions. "
Gaute says:
"The formula is NOT from Packer, and was not provided TO Packer also. He directly say that, this is the point, period."
Grizzly
"Yeah, they are not exactly the descendants of the Kruger lions, but they surely belong to the South African clade.
On the other hand, the Crater lions not only belong to the East African clade, they were also directly descended from the colonial Serengeti lions. "
etc.
Everybody says the same more or less, this topic is pointless to discuss any further with you. Ill stick to discussing it with people who interpret and present data.
There is no data on craters. Tom is not a crater lion. We have no official weights or measurements. Very similar to Kaz tigers.
The fact scientists "estimate" them at over 210 kgs for an average, speaks loud and clear "Yea they're big". Tom was from the
Ngorgora Conservation area, not the crater. I'm leaning with the scientific peer reviewed paper as opposed to the AVA debate.
No brainer there. I'm happy to move on to greener pastures.
02-17-2015, 06:00 AM( This post was last modified: 02-17-2015, 06:14 AM by tigerluver )
Peer-reviewed papers must be intrinsically respected, but they are not necessarily the final, undeniable word. By the conversations cited, something was off in the equation used and the peer-review did not catch it. Why? The peer-review process is not really focused on the data. The editors are rarely experts in the same concentration as the author. They do not know what is a right number and what's not. I'd say that a quarter of peer-reviewed works in the zoological and paleobiological field have some type of undetected data error. Rather if the work somehow gets past the "important enough" threshold, it will be more grammatically shredded than anything else. This is something to keep in mind when citing any peer-reviewed paper.
Regardless, if the chest girths are true, the transparent database indicates a population averaging about 200 kg, and a little less if the chest girth range given here if of only the young adults. A 200 kg average is comparable to the Smuts Kruger lion who were adjusted and weight on average of 188 kg, thus likely also in the 200 kg range of functional mass. In other words, the largest lion populations likely average around 200 kg.
Bengal tiger weights are pointed to often to show variation of mass across population, but from the scant data that I have posted before, the difference is essentially none.
If and when corridors are established, variation in size across population will probably be near insignificant due to the high amounts of gene flow. For instance, in P. spelaea, its size from England to eastern Russia is essentially the same across forms due to free mixing of populations.At the same time, expect larger averages if corridors are ever established due to increase in genetic variability. Want an example?
Also, please don't quote huge chunks of texts, it wastes space on the page and isn't aesthetically pleasing.
Well... until some prime males are weighed and measured, speculation is all we have. Apparently the scientific community also believes
they are larger. I feel justified in my position. Im cool with it.
Kaos out
02-17-2015, 07:59 PM( This post was last modified: 02-18-2015, 08:39 PM by chaos )
~~Amnon
" ...too simple. Lions are social and rely on numbers. More food should result in more lions (ofc in bigger size as well...but only to some extent). Thats why size differences between various lion populations are limited. ...and as far as I know its rather the size of prey (and not the amout of prey...that much) what increases the size of lions. " Gaute says:
"The formula is NOT from Packer, and was not provided TO Packer also. He directly say that, this is the point, period."
Grizzly
"Yeah, they are not exactly the descendants of the Kruger lions, but they surely belong to the South African clade. On the other hand, the Crater lions not only belong to the East African clade, they were also directly descended from the colonial Serengeti lions. " etc. Everybody says the same more or less, this topic is pointless to discuss any further with you. Ill stick to discussing it with people who interpret and present data.
Not for nothing, but Ammons comment is an opinion and Grizzlies comment don't even pertain to my argument
Thats your eveybody? impressive counter. Maybe I should reconsider my position. lol
This debate offered no tangible evidence to begin and end with. Opinions and rationale are our only weapons. The
fact many who've had the fortune of seeing craters firsthand, brought the size element to our attention, leading me
to conclude its not imagined.
You have difficulty accepting lions can reach large size. Its a prevalent theme in all of our interaction. Interesting.
Anyway, looking forward, its all good. Later
The following 1 user Likes chaos's post:1 user Likes chaos's post • Balam
BODY SIZE AND MASS OF NGORONGORO CRATER LIONS
