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
|
@GrizzlyClaws and @tigerluver , I have never expected only 2 guys with great knoweldge of their subject will produce such an great threads, Awesome job. Well done for this thread and Big Cat's Canines and Claws
From my observation, there are several modern stem groups that have been distinguished with two separated species, like gorilla, orangutan, clouded leopard.
This was caused by the genetic isolation between the two populations of the same group/species, and the Mainland tiger/Sunda tiger is also following this trend if their population continues to be isolated from each other. Now in case with the lion group, due the isolation between the different glacial periods, they had produced more than two separated species, more likely three distinct species we known so far; Fossilis-Atrox, Spelaea, Leo. (09-08-2015, 08:23 AM)sanjay Wrote: @GrizzlyClaws and @tigerluver , I have never expected only 2 guys with great knoweldge of their subject will produce such an great threads, Awesome job. Well done for this thread and Big Cat's Canines and Claws I take the big cat's canines and claws thread as a library, and I might create a similar thread for the bears in the future.  (09-01-2015, 05:45 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: Yep, I will try to invite him to join here later. I'm the owner of the Java tooth. Decided to pop by and say hi. *waves* I like this discussion you guys are having; big cats fascinate me, and I plan to own a sabertooth fossil one day. I'm curious - if not for the testimony from the Ireland fossil-expert and my taxidermist friend, would you all still be sure of the tooth's identity as tiger?
Your tooth is reminiscent of the other big cat lower canine teeth to me, and I was pretty certain that it was a big cat tooth prior to the acknowledgement of the fossil expert.
And the size and density also match with the other tiger fossil/subfossil teeth I've seen before. PS, the sabertooth cat fangs are also very fascinating, and they are very different from that of the conical tooth cats. And please share the info with this forum if you got one. 
Great to have you here @Fieryeel! You're quite fortunate to have the tooth from the Solo river. The other tiger fossils that were found there and published (what we have focused on) seem to be lost. Would you be able to take a few extra measurements for me? Could you measure the length and width of the tooth at the root line as well as the greatest length and width of the tooth? I can show a diagram later if my measurements aren't clear.
China and Southeast Asia are some great places for the scavenger hunt over the tiger fossils.
It will be wonderful if those fossil hunters are willing to share the info of their collections with this forum. (09-09-2015, 08:44 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: Your tooth is reminiscent of the other big cat lower canine teeth to me, and I was pretty certain that it was a big cat tooth prior to the acknowledgement of the fossil expert. Aye, after looking at more photos, I agree too it's a tiger tooth. Sure, if and when I get my sabertooth I shall let you guys know. (09-09-2015, 09:29 AM)sanjay Wrote: @Fieryeel , Welcome to the forum, Its our pleasure to have a person like you on wildfact which not only love animals but also is a fossil collector Thanks! Fossils are awesome! (09-10-2015, 12:14 AM)tigerluver Wrote: Great to have you here @Fieryeel! You're quite fortunate to have the tooth from the Solo river. The other tiger fossils that were found there and published (what we have focused on) seem to be lost. Would you be able to take a few extra measurements for me? Could you measure the length and width of the tooth at the root line as well as the greatest length and width of the tooth? I can show a diagram later if my measurements aren't clear. Alright I shall do so later. A diagram would be helpful.
09-10-2015, 07:20 AM
( This post was last modified: 09-10-2015, 07:35 AM by tigerluver
Edit Reason: Clarifications
)
Here's a diagram:
 *This image is copyright of its original author That's the general idea behind the diameters. You could record the greatest diameter at each view as well as the diameter where the texture of the tooth changes, the root. So using one of your pictures, the diameters would be measured like this:  *This image is copyright of its original author Then look at the tooth from the front or back, and measure the diameter at the same areas from that angle for the tooth width. The former measurement can be used to be compare with Hooijer's tigers, and the latter are better indicators of skull size as the growth in these directions is directly related to the skull's length and width and will enable a recreation of the owner's skull. Thanks again, @Fieryeel.
Since this tooth is a lower canine, so you can only compare it with the mandible.
13.5 cm total length.
2.3 cm root diameter from front. 2.5 cm greatest diameter from front. 2.4 cm root diameter from side. 3.2 cm greatest diameter from side. (09-10-2015, 10:08 PM)Fieryeel Wrote: 13.5 cm total length. Do you have the width and the thickness of the tooth? It is the part with the greatest width and the greatest thickness. (09-10-2015, 11:17 PM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: Do you have the width and the thickness of the tooth? Yes the width is included in his measurements as diameter from front. When I get home I'll go over everything. Thanks @Fieryeel, you've done a huge favor for the fossil felid community!
To start, I attempted to fit the tooth into some fossil mandibles.
 *This image is copyright of its original author The Trinil mandible doesn't match whatsoever. The Watoealang mandible is too damaged to make conclusions. The Longdan tiger was used as comparison as well, but nothing to conclude from it as the localities of the specimens are different. The Ngandong mandible matches well in my opinion. What do you guys think? From here on, I'll refer to the greatest diameter from the side as length and the greatest diameter from front as width. Colbert and Hooijer's modern tigers had an average length of 22.45 mm (18.6 mm-24.1 mm), an average width of 16.18 mm (15.4 mm-18 mm). The average width/length ratio was 0.72 (0.69-0.78) with a standard deviation of 0.04. @Fieryeel's tooth width length ratio = 25 mm/32 mm = 0.78, just within the modern range reported by Colbert and Hooijer. The Wahnsien tigers have pretty much the same width/length ratios as well. This ratio eliminates the possibility that this tooth is a crocodiles. Crocodile teeth are completely different shaped, but also the width/length ratio is much less when compared to felids.  *This image is copyright of its original author Leopards were the only other cat to exist around the Solo river, but at 13.5 cm total length, the canine can't be of a leopard. The other carnivores of Pleistocene Java (hyena, dhole, sun bear) were much smaller than the tiger, so those are eliminated as well. It can only be of a tiger. I don't want to recreate the skull or mandible length yet. I'd like everyone's input on on how the tooth should belong in the mandible. Special thanks to @Fieryeel again for bringing this gem here. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |