WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Extinct Animals
›
Pleistocene Big Cats
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines
|
Freak Felids - A Discussion of History's Largest Felines
|
On the new Manchurian canine, it brings about 2 possibilities. One, all fossils from there are P. spelaea if we're still talking the same recent faunal level we concluded a while back. Two, the P. tigris and P. spelaea had an overlapping range. I instinctively lean to the first possibility because that old mandible always looks cave lion-like to me, but then that single Wahnsien skull has the same symphysis and convexity as well.
One thing we may need to note is that true tiger may have started in southeast Asia as P. t. oxygnatha of Sangiran. Tiger migration in my head went north and west from Sunda, as opposed to theories stating tigers went south and west from China. The issue with such a theory is that the authors ignored the existence of the two, maybe three (I'm not convinced P. t. trinilensis and P. t. soloensis are distinct because new studies on dating, also ignored by researchers...), subspecies of tiger in Sunda. Tigers starting off in Sunda rather than China would also explain the 10 kya expansion into Russia as hypothesized by that group of scientists, as prior to that, cave lions had the niche.  (01-05-2016, 04:44 AM)tigerluver Wrote: On the new Manchurian canine, it brings about 2 possibilities. One, all fossils from there are P. spelaea if we're still talking the same recent faunal level we concluded a while back. Two, the P. tigris and P. spelaea had an overlapping range. I instinctively lean to the first possibility because that old mandible always looks cave lion-like to me, but then that single Wahnsien skull has the same symphysis and convexity as well. Not all fossils belong to Panthera spelaea, the labeled subfossils are clearly more tiger-like. I have just created my big cat canine and claws thread as an online directory to distinguish the canine characteristics between the lion and tiger. http://wildfact.com/forum/topic-big-cat-s-canines-and-claws the subfossil and modern tiger canine  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Manchurian Cave lion/European Cave lion/African lion  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
@tigerluver, the lion canine is more spindle-shaped, while the tiger canine is more streamline-shaped.
Interestingly, the fossil canines are spindle-shaped, and the subfossil ones are streamline-shaped. Consider that the Amur tiger only managed to fully occupy Manchuria by the end of the Pleistocene, hence their remains are only displayed in its subfossil status, not old enough to be the real fossils.
@GrizzlyClaws, could you please elaborate on the spindle shaped trait? As in more tapering toward the ends?
@tigerluver, it means being wider in the middle and tapered at the end.
 *This image is copyright of its original author
See how the lion canine is tapering at the end and widening at the middle, while the tiger canine remains well proportioned in both section.
 *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
Because that's the lower canines, all big cat lower canines show the tapering root.
But when it comes to the upper canine, the lion canine and tiger canine are obviously different.
@tigerluver, I've seen examples of tiger lower canines with the tapering root, but his fossil teeth are still quite odd to me, and I am also not quite sure if it is the authentic tiger canines.
Most tiger lower fangs are just as proportioned as its upper counterparts.  *This image is copyright of its original author
(01-06-2016, 08:07 AM)tigerluver Wrote: Now that was the distinction we needed, great info @GrizzlyClaws. Consider that the tiger subfossils may be discovered in the upper level, maybe if the deeper it goes, more Cave lion fossils will come out of the light. And also by judging the spindled shape of the lower canine, it is most likely belong to an extremely large Cave lion, comparable to the 475 mm Mokhnevskaya skull.  *This image is copyright of its original author
 (01-06-2016, 08:04 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: @tigerluver, I've seen examples of tiger lower canines with the tapering root, but his fossil teeth are still quite odd to me, and I am also not quite sure if it is the authentic tiger canines. I agree with you. As much as I would like my teeth to be Ngandong Tiger, I still can't deem it 100% as them. I showed the teeth to a modern animal expert, he said the teeth would absolutely fit with a giant croc, if only they somehow had rounded root ends. Any of you ever saw croc teeth with rounded root ends?
@Fieryeel, it could be the Ngandong tiger, but I am just not certain right now.
Maybe the Ngandong tiger was more distantly related to the modern tiger, but difference cannot be bigger than that of the lion. Let's me see if there is more Ngandong samples, but your teeth are still valuable nonetheless. In measurement and density wise, your teeth absolutely fit in both, so it is getting really puzzling. Maybe it is some really badly fossilized teeth as @tigerluver suggested before?  *This image is copyright of its original author Those are the Javan prehistoric mandibles. That's all the world has. Note the cross section of the Trinil mandible (2nd from top) seems well preserved. It's completely filled, another trait I remember @GrizzlyClaws noted in all tigers.
All old tiger specimens have no cavity inside of the canines, and only the young specimens have cavity with the fluid inside.
 *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 3 Guest(s) |