WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences
Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences
|
Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences
|
Male lion and leopardess. Both young
 *This image is copyright of its original author
Rio Negro - Aquidauana - Pantanal - Brazil
Left: 101 kg Mancha Preta male (captured by Onças Do Rio Negro Project) Right: Colombiano male (never captured but Mentioned by Onças Do Rio Negro Project to likely be near 150 kg, or 140ish kgs range)  *This image is copyright of its original author Colombiano was a Massive male. Video of the Fight. 
A wonderful study concerning Herpailurus Pumoides, an extinct species which offers a juxtaposition of felid morphology and taxonomy for many different cat species.
Puma (Herpailurus) pumoides (Castellanos, 1958) nov. comb. Systematic comments and fossil record [b]Summary. [/b] Among the Felinae of dubious provenance described for Argentina is Felis pumoides Castellanos 1958, found in strata assigned to the Pliocene ("Brocherense horizon") of the province of Córdoba (Argentina). The cranial and post-cranial remains of the type specimen (MUFyCA 767) were first compared with all South American felids and with Acinonyx jubatus , concluding that it bears a great resemblance to the current species Puma (Herpailurus) yagouaroundi, with some features also shared with Puma (Puma) concolor and Acinonyx jubatus,species that come from well-defined evolutionary lines according to previous molecular analyses. Consequently, the taxon should be assigned as Puma (Herpailurus) pumoides n. comb. Comparison of this taxon with North American Pliocene and Pleistocene cougar species, P. (Miracinonyx) inexpectata, and Old World P. (Viretailurus) pardoides, as well as Old World Pliocene-Pleistocene cheetah species , Acinonyx pardinensis sl showed several similarities suggesting a possible origin near the basal level of the North American cougar lineage (subgenus Miracinonyx) . Due to the associated fauna and numerous subsequent works, it is possible to state thatP. (H.) pumoides comes from the Late Pliocene ("Brocherense"), constituting the oldest record of the Felinae subfamily and the Puma lineage in South America. These affinities could be evidence that the Herpailurus genus line originated in South America before the Pleistocene. [b]Abstract. [/b] [b]PUMA (HERPAILURUS) PUMOIDES (CASTELLANOS, 1958) NOV. COMB. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AND FOSSIL RECORD. Felis pumoides Castellanos 1958 is a Felinae of dubious stratigraphic provenance, reported as coming from Pliocene beds ("Brocherence horizon") from Córdoba province, Argentina. In the present paper the cranial and postcranial remains of the holotype (MUFyCA 767) were mainly compared with other South American felids and Acinonyx jubatus. It is concluded that P. pumoides possess great similarity to the recent species Puma (Herpailurus) yagouaroundi, and some shared traits with Puma (Puma) concolor .and Acinonyx jubatus. These species belong to an evolutionary line well defined by previous molecular and morphological data. Therefore, the taxon should be referred to as Puma (Herpailurus) pumoides n. comb . The comparisons of this species with the extinct cougar species from the Pliocene and Pleistocene of North America P. (Miracinonyx) inexpectata , and the Old World P. (Viretailurus) pardoides , as well as with the cheetahs from the Pliocene-Pleistocene of Old World , show extensive morphological similarities. Comparisons suggest a possible origin of South American puma lineage near the basal diverge of North American pumas (subgenus Miracinonyx).According to the associated remains and previous publications it is possible to confirm that P. (H.) pumoides comes from Upper Pliocene levels ("Brocherense"). Thus, it constitutes the earlist record for the Felidae and the Puma lineage in South America. Phylogenetic affinities of P. (H.) pumoides also indicates that the line of Herpailurus originated in South America before the Pleistocene.[/b]  (02-23-2022, 03:06 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote: Rio Negro - Aquidauana - Pantanal - Brazil Looking at the full video the left jaguar looks larger but even then the right male is most likely heavier (02-27-2022, 02:32 AM)SpinoRex Wrote:(02-23-2022, 03:06 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote: Rio Negro - Aquidauana - Pantanal - Brazil I respect your opinion and I would agree if you said the left jaguar may look taller, but I don't think Mancha Preta looks larger in the video. Even from that angle with Mancha Preta's back towards the camera sight, the height on the shoulders looks similar and Mancha Preta could even be a bit taller than Colombiano but when it comes to the comparison GirthWise, the Head size (noting the muscular jaw cheeks on both its clear which one got the bigger head) and specially the Chest it shows a significant difference bar the sheer body mass comparison. Not the best comparison but you can see both felines bellow even Mancha Preta being closer to the camera I still think FrameWise and GirthWise (Head, Neck, Chest) Colombiano is the larger feline to me even him a bit far from the camera, his frame still screams huge. But as you see up close Mancha-Preta is a rather stocky feline, now regarding HeightWise I think it could go either way as its shown in the video. TOP: Mancha Preta BOTTOM: Colombiano  *This image is copyright of its original author Colombiano was a tank and Mancha Preta was a very fit and muscular jag and when it comes to fighting, size doesn't matter to him. Mancha Preta  *This image is copyright of its original author Colombiano Although having huge frame Colombiano's head still looks rather cartoonish related to his already big body when he is lying down in this video GIF bellow and as he stands up and walks away you can see the whole package.  *This image is copyright of its original author On top of that if Images comparisons don't do enough justice, Onças do Rio Negro Project had first hand sightings of both individuals in the area of Barranco Alto - Rio Negro and they even captured one of them and stated the other as a possible near 150 kg specimen, that alone gives us a good idea outside of these video/images on who's the larger feline overall. Mancha Preta  *This image is copyright of its original author Colombiano  *This image is copyright of its original author
This jaguar might be even bigger than the other or equal. 143 kg (not gorged but fat)
https://youtu.be/9MI1hVvzijc  (02-28-2022, 02:31 AM)SpinoRex Wrote: This jaguar might be even bigger than the other or equal. 143 kg (not gorged but fat) That’s Lopez and he’s the largest verified modern day Jaguar but joker most likely is larger than him. (02-28-2022, 02:31 AM)SpinoRex Wrote: This jaguar might be even bigger than the other or equal. 143 kg (not gorged but fat) The guy calling Lopez fat was funny, but I agree that its possible that Colombiano was even larger than Lopez, Colombiano will remain to me as one the largest non captured jags. Regarding Lopez in the pic bellow, the size of his head is what impresses me the most, he must've had a massive Head Girth Measure for sure. By the way do you know the name of this documentary of Lopez capture ?? and somewhere I can find its full version ??  *This image is copyright of its original author
Cursorial carnivoran species tend to have more proximal muscle mass in the thoracic limb, while those that require versatility and manual dexterity tend to have more muscle mass in the distal thoracic limb muscles (Souza Junior et al. 2021). Due to the interplay between hunting and locomotor pressures, the forelimbs of large felines tend to display a balance between facilitating powerful grasping abilities and maximizing speed (Meachen-Samuels and Van Vakenburgh 2009;Kitchener et al. 2016;Souza Junior et al. 2021).
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-co..._305366225 
Top: jaguar
Middle and bottom: Sri Lankan leopards  *This image is copyright of its original author Source: A Multi-Point Identification Approach for the Recognition of Individual Leopards (Panthera pardus kotiya) (03-10-2022, 02:01 AM)SpinoRex Wrote: Cursorial carnivoran species tend to have more proximal muscle mass in the thoracic limb, while those that require versatility and manual dexterity tend to have more muscle mass in the distal thoracic limb muscles (Souza Junior et al. 2021). Due to the interplay between hunting and locomotor pressures, the forelimbs of large felines tend to display a balance between facilitating powerful grasping abilities and maximizing speed (Meachen-Samuels and Van Vakenburgh 2009;Kitchener et al. 2016;Souza Junior et al. 2021). Which would also show the importance of Distal/Proximal ends that allow more muscle attachments, the increase in muscle/tendon strength in those areas allow power with flexibility that would contribute to the strength needed when grappling prey, climbing trees, dragging carcasses through rough terrain, etc. 
1. Muscular anatomy of Forelimb of Tiger (Panthera tigris) Feb 2022
- Intrinsic Shoulder Muscles - ...intrinsic shoulder comprise 35.0% of the overall mass of the forelimb, more than any other region. Within this region, m. supraspinatus is the largest, making up 34.15% of the total muscle mass of intrinsic shoulder muscles. Mm. infraspinatus and subscapularis each makes up approximately one quarter of shoulder muscle mass (24.66% and 28.15%, respectively), followed by m. deltoideus (11.74%), and m. teres minor (1.30%). P. tigris has the largest mm. supraspinatus, and subscapularis of the pantherines. M. supraspinatus makes up approximately 12% of total forelimb mass, although the differences from the other taxa are small (10.5% in P. leo, 10.8% in P. onca, and 11.7% in P. uncia). The cheetah has the largest supraspinatus of all felids, with this muscle making up 16% of the mass of the forelimb. It is possible that the relatively large supraspinatus in the tiger and cheetah is related to their predominately terrestrial mode of locomotion as this muscle contributes to flexion of the shoulder during forward movement. This is supported by a relatively large m. supraspinatus in the terrestrial domestic cat (11.9%); however, this muscle is also relatively large in the caracal (13.2%), which is considered scansorial. M. subscapularis represents 9.35% of the mass of the forelimb in P. tigris, with the next-largest pantherine being 9.29% in P. onca. P. uncia and P. leo both have a smaller m. subscapularis at 8.54% and 7.34%, respectively. Among felids, F. nigripes (12.4%), L. pardalis (11.7%), and F. catus (10.3%) have the largest m. subscapularis and L. lynx has the smallest (8.1%). Function of subscapularis - adduction (movement of limb towards mid-line of body) and internal rotation of arm. 2. Morris et al. 2016 a. Skull Shape Index - Skull width relative to total length (Skull width/Skull length). Indicates relative ability to generate bite force, given that a wider skull is associated with larger jaw-closing muscles and/or a shorter skull (i.e., shorter snout) increases the mechanical advantage of the jaw-closing muscles (Biknevicius and Van Valkenburgh 1996). - Panthera leo = 75.5% (n = 18) - Panthera pardus = 71.9% (n = 14) - Panthera tigris = 79.8% (n = 21) b. Occipital width index - Occipital width relative to length of second cervical vertebra (Occipital width/C2 length). Indicates relative size of cervical neck musculature. - Panthera leo = 172.1% (n = 15) - Panthera pardus = 169.7% (n = 11) - Panthera tigris = 171.1% (n = 16) c. Atlas width index - Atlas width relative to length of second cervical vertebra (Atlas width/C2 length). Indicates relative surface area for attachment of cervical neck musculature. - Panthera leo = 238.0% (n = 20) - Panthera pardus = 233.8% (n = 19) - Panthera tigris = 229.6% (n = 24) d. Scapula area index - Surface area of lateral aspect of scapula relative to scapula length ((Scapula area)/Scapula length). Indicates relative size of muscles involved in the transfer of forces from the trunk to the forelimbs (Carrier et al. 2006) and in stabilizing the shoulder joint (Hildebrand and Goslow 2001). - Panthera leo = 80.4% (n = 20) - Panthera pardus = 76.9% (n = 21) - Panthera tigris = 80.4% (n = 26) e. Forelimb proportions index - Length of proximal forelimb relative to length of distal forelimb ((Scapula length + Humerus length)/(Radius length + Metacarpal length)). Indicates degree of morphological specialization for producing large out-forces in the forelimb (Hildebrand and Goslow 2001). - Panthera leo = 142.2% (n = 19) - Panthera pardus = 148.3% (n = 21) - Panthera tigris = 147.8% (n = 26) f. Styloid width index - Styloid width relative to radius length (Styloid width/Radius length). Indicates relative robusticity of distal forelimb. - Panthera leo = 29.6% (n = 23) - Panthera pardus = 28.2% (n = 21) - Panthera tigris = 31.7% (n = 26) 
A reminder that lions and leopards are the most closely related among big cats despite the various differences between size, morphology and esthetics
 *This image is copyright of its original author But sometimes.... Some lions present a coat pattern that remind us how closely related they are to their smaller and spotted cousin  *This image is copyright of its original author
Forelimb Robusticity (Lion and Tiger) according to the study KILLING BEHAVIOR IN SMILODON FATALIS
 *This image is copyright of its original author Gonyea (1976) determined the robustness of the anterior limb for the felids in a different approach, by plotting the cross-sectional area of the humerus against the length of the latter. He added a regression line for the points of the various taxa and showed that there is a strong correlation (r = 0.958) between these two measurements for the “forest felids”. The data points for the cheetah clearly fall below this regression line, whereas those of Smilodon fall above it. So basically, Gonyea mentions that humerus length/Log-X Section of humerus concludes overall frontlimb robusticity. Tigers: 1.19 n=7 Lions: 1.20 n=5 Indicating that these cats must be really close in that regard
The clavicles(or collar bone) of lions and tigers
The clavicle, also known as collar bone or clavicula is the bone that connects rib cage and arm (from Sternum to Scapula), serving as strut. The Deltoid, the Trapezius, the Pectoralis Major as well as several muscles of the throat are attached to it. Bigger muscles attached to the clavicle necessitate overall larger clavicle size which will, in return, limit flexibility of the arm. That means strength and flexibility of the arms develop inversely and that animals with larger clavicles likely have stronger pectorals and shoulders while animals with smaller clavicles are more flexible. The results regarding lions and tigers are suprprising on the one hand but as expected on the other hand. The study included 9 lions (5 males, 1 female and 3 unsexed specimens) and 7 tigers (6 females and one unsexed). When compared to lions' clavicles that of tigers are smaller as well as more straight/not as bended.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's the average sizes of the claviculae measured:  *This image is copyright of its original author Not only was the lion's clavicle a third longer (78.6 mm/58.8 mm=1.3367), it was also broader at midshaft, overall and relatively to maximum length ((6.8 mm/78.6 mm)100=8.65% for lions vs (4.7 mm/58.8 mm)100=7.99% for tigers), at the acromial end (overall; 11.6 mm/10.1 mm=1.1485) and at the sternal end (overall and relative to maximum length; (6.1 mm/78.6 mm)100=7.76% for lions vs (2.7 mm/58.8 mm)100=4.59% for tigers). At sternal end the lion's clavicle was even broader than that of the fossile cats.  *This image is copyright of its original author Now, the difference is biased by different genders. While almost all the lions were males, all the (known) tigers were female. However, the differences were way too large to be linked only to sexual dimorphism:  *This image is copyright of its original author Between average sized adult males and average sized adult females the difference in bone size (length, at least) is about 10-15%, depending on the bone. Assuming this, the male tiger's clavicula would, on average, still not be as large and thick as that of the male lion (and it was mentioned that the only female lion's clavicle still belonged to the largest of the sample.) That suggests greater strength in the lion's Pectoralis Major as well as in the deltoid (on fair bone sizes, latter may be rather equal, though) while the tiger has an advantage in flexibility of shoulders. Even if the claviculae of lions and tigers were equally long and equally broad, the lion's muscles still would likely be stronger as it provides a larger surface area due to it being curved meaning higher muscle attachment area. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 4 Guest(s) |