WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
Maximum size of prey that a single male lion or tiger can kill
Maximum size of prey that a single male lion or tiger can kill
|
Maximum size of prey that a single male lion or tiger can kill
|
@Ashutosh
Quote:@Pckts @GuateGojira, latest research into average prey size of Indochinese tigers revealed that average weight of banteng and gaurs predated was close to 400 kilograms. That is higher than Nagarhole research and shows a presence of a decent number of adult male gaurs. If anything, it tells you, that prey size is not THE most important factor (it maybe A factor but not the mist important one) when tigers make their kills.I'm not sure what criteria they use to determine a mean weight but I again assume it's scat samples and carcasses found. A round number like 1000kg is easy to use but how often is the prey that's claimed to be that actually weighed and confirmed. If I remember correctly, very few of the actually weighed Gaur were 1000kg outside of South East Asia.  (03-16-2020, 11:33 PM)Pckts Wrote:(03-16-2020, 11:30 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:The weights claimed are estimates and Gaur predation wasn't witnessed, only scat and carcasses observed.(03-16-2020, 10:55 PM)Pckts Wrote: I'm probably more strict on my stance than most others here but as I've said before, I don't believe either a Tiger or Lion has a very good chance of taking down a Large, Alpha Cape or Gaur Bull unless some unusual circumstance is in play. During the last 13 months, I've been reorganising everything I have. The reorganisation is needed, as I want to find what I need in minutes, not weeks or months. Or not at all. Did I find good information on tigers and gaurs when working? Most certainly. There are many letters in the Journal of the Bombay Natural History about tigers and gaurs. One of the last I saw was written by a man who was very involved in hunting and good information in his day: R.C. Morris (from the Honametti estate in southern India). He often reported about unusual incidents and produced the evidence needed. Example. In a letter of January 3, 1935, he wrote about three bull gaurs killed by tigers in six months. All 3 were " ... fine solitary bull bison ... " and all carried " ... good and old heads ... ". In the 20 previous years, however, he knew of 4 bulls killed by tigers only. In another letter, he disagreed with a very experienced hunter who wrote tigers are no match for a large bull gaur. That statement also attracted the attention of others. One of them was a man who visited the scene of a battle that had resulted in the death of a bull gaur and a tigress. Based on everything else I have, I'd say incidents of this nature are rare, but not as uncommon as many seem to think. Large bulls no doubt are formidable opponents. Tigers not seldom perish in fights, but there's no question bulls have been killed by tigers in lengthy fights. To finish the post, one more letter of R.C. Morris: " ... Mr. W.S. Thom is mistaken in thinking that a tiger is no match for a full-grown bull buffalo. I have known at least six cases of solitary bulls having been killed by a tiger; about as many instances of unsuccessful attacks, including that of an old bull which had been severely mauled on its head, neck and shoulders and the near hind leg bitten through, the bone being completely severed. How this bull had managed to shake off the tiger after such a terrific mauling is difficult to imagine ... " (R.C. Morris in a letter from July 12, 1935).  (03-17-2020, 12:30 AM)Pckts Wrote: If I remember correctly, very few of the actually weighed Gaur were 1000kg outside of South East Asia. Hence why I gave you the average weight of preys of Indochinese tigers. Bear in mind, 88-95% of the diet of Indochinese tigers in Thailand is made up of Banteng, Gaur and Sambar. So, the average weight of 400 kilos (Banteng and Gaur) tells us that there are a few male gaurs on that menu. (03-17-2020, 12:48 AM)Ashutosh Wrote:(03-17-2020, 12:30 AM)Pckts Wrote: If I remember correctly, very few of the actually weighed Gaur were 1000kg outside of South East Asia. But a Male Gaur and a 1000kg Male Gaur are 2 different things. If they are using a round number, an "average" prey weight is not accurate. I'd wager that the most common prey would be Sambar and Boar, both of which aren't close to 400kg but with estimations of Banteng and Gaur at their maximum that will inflate the averages. (03-17-2020, 12:44 AM)peter Wrote:Finding a carcass and witnessing an attack are different things.(03-16-2020, 11:33 PM)Pckts Wrote:(03-16-2020, 11:30 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:The weights claimed are estimates and Gaur predation wasn't witnessed, only scat and carcasses observed.(03-16-2020, 10:55 PM)Pckts Wrote: I'm probably more strict on my stance than most others here but as I've said before, I don't believe either a Tiger or Lion has a very good chance of taking down a Large, Alpha Cape or Gaur Bull unless some unusual circumstance is in play. I'm not saying he's wrong but there is a definite grey area missing between the two. I'd have to read his books where he makes such claims and who actually told him of these alleged accounts. Hunters can sometimes make assumptions that tend to be missing some facts. Let's look at from a different perspective. Today we have more eye witness accounts than ever before and still these accounts of Bull Capes or Gaur being preyed upon by a lone Lion and Tiger are slim to non existent. We also have 0 video evidence of it being accomplished. I'm in no way saying it can't happen, I've seen firsthand how hard it is to see a kill in the jungles, all you can do is smell them most of the time and assume what the Mahout tells you is fact since the Elephant can go in many places the Gypsie cannot. I truly believe that when one of these "Kills" happen, it's probably due to some unexpected luck and most likely hamstringing at that. 
If a tiger attacks an adult rhino it must be extreamly compromised imo. Pregnant, injuried or old. Problem is why would a lone predator attack such powerful and big prey?
@Ashoutos sorry sir i have guestion..why bengal Tiger can kill a Rhino but cannot kill a bear..however that bear smaller than that Tiger?
Tigers kill bears. Carcasses of sun bear, sloth bear, himalayan and ussuri black bear and brown bear have been found from India to Siberia. So, tigers do kill bears just that it happens in very rare instances.
(03-20-2020, 05:25 PM)P.T.Sondaica Wrote: @Ashutosh but @peter say matkasur dominan male bengal Tiger cannot kills small female bear...thats fact video in YouTube..Tiger just kill young bear or via ambush in face to face Tiger loss.. SONDAICA My post on Matkasur and the female sloth bear he fought apparently resulted in a misunderstanding. In order to get things straight, I decided for this follow-up on tigers and bears in India and southeast Asia (a) and the Russian Far East (b). a - India and southeast Asia There's plenty of information on tigers hunting sloth bears in India. I'm not only referring to countless posts in magazins like the JBNHS, but also to recent observations. I also have reliable reports on sun bears killed by tigers in southeast Asia and Sumatra. In contrast to tigers in the Russian Far East, tigers in India, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam do not seem to hunt Himalayan black bears. I only have one report of a Himalayan black bear killed by a tiger (in Bhutan). That bear was an immature male. b - The Russian Far East In southeastern Russia, bears are an important food item for tigers. In some districts and seasons, bears as important as wild boars. Tigers hunt both Himalayan black bears (including adult males) and brown bears (including adult females). Most bears are hunted by bear 'specialists', but 2-3 year old males and adult females also hunt bears occasionally. c - The interaction between Matkasur and the female sloth bear Although vital information is missing, the videos said the incident happened on a hot day near a waterhole. Matkasur was cooling down when the sloth bear and her large cub arrived. Some posters thought Matkasur acted to secure the waterhole for his cubs, but I'm not sure. Maybe he wanted the waterhole for himself. Anyhow. When an adult male tiger approaches a female sloth bear less than half his weight in order to convey a message, the bear usually moves away. The female sloth bear did not. At least, not quick enough. When Matkasur persisted and got too close to the bears, the female faced him in order to protect her cub. Matkasur, clearly surprised, retreated. Only to start again. And again. My guess is his persistence was perceived as an attempt to get to the cub. In the end, the attempt to 'guide' the bears away from the waterhole turned into a confrontation. At the start, the tiger, to a degree, seemed to enjoy the interaction. To the female sloth bear, however, his persistence was threatening. This is the reason she acted aggressively right from the start. As time progressed, the interaction developed into a confrontation with a serious character. Mutkasar, slowly but surely, was dragged into a bout he most probably wanted to avoid. When the female sloth bear, after some exchanges, initiated full contact, the tiger, not willing to give in, was forced to act in a similar way. Although some posters thought the fight never was very serious, it's clear the tiger tried to kill the female sloth bear at some stage. The female seemed doomed, but the tiger apparently didn't know how to use his advantage. My guess is Matkasur had no experience with sloth bears. When he, during the fight, got to a similar conclusion, the female sloth bear, to a degree, was able to turn the tables. In the end, both, and Matkasur in particular, retreated. Although he was able to hold on to the waterhole, the tiger, clearly exhausted, concluded the time to read his book on bears one more time had arrived. The courageous female sloth bear underlined sloth bears are no joke, but it's very likely she was wounded. d - Before you post When you see a video about an interaction between a tiger and a bear you don't quite understand, watch it again. Read comments of posters and people in the know. Then watch the video again. When you decide to use a comment of one poster only, make sure you understand what was said. If you don't, chances are you'll get to interpretations and unfounded conclusions. In this way, the poster whose comment was used is more or less forced to respond. In general, remember there is a big difference between a hunt and something else. Tigers and sloth bears often meet in some parts of India. In most cases, they disperse. Every now and then, however, the result is a fight. When the tiger is determined, the bear, can be severely wounded or killed. Not every bear killed in a fight, however, is eaten. What I'm saying is a fight is different from a hunt. Tigers who learned to hunt bears are not out for a fight. Their intention is to kill their intended victim as quickly as possible. This is the main reason tigers involved in bears nearly always target smaller bears. In India, fights between tigers and sloth bears are not a result of disputes over food, but something else. In the Russian Far East, both Himalayan black bears and brown bears often visit tiger kills. Disputes near these kill sites not seldom result in serious fights. The information I have says adult male tigers and adult male brown bears are involved as well. Doesn't happen often, but it happens. Adult tigers have been killed in fights with brown bears. My guess is most of them were females, but there are three reliable reports about male tigers killed in fights with male brown bears. Two of them were young adults (3-4 years of age). I also have four reports about male bears killed in fights with male tigers, but these were not accepted by all authorities. Anyhow. The point is there is a difference between a hunt and a fight. Tigers hunting bears nearly always select smaller bears. Bears opposing a tiger in a fight, however, can be as large or larger (heavier). Authorities think male brown bears win most of these fights 'on points', but Krechmar, also an authority on tigers and bears in the Russian Far East, thinks not one dominates the other in a fysical fight. Bears often have weight advantage, but the difference between adult males of both species seems to be limited. It depends, that is. Individual variation in bears, however, is more pronounced than in tigers. Some male bears easily exceed 800 pounds. My guess is bears of that size will displace any tiger, but there's not much information. If anything, these giants seem to select tigresses with cubs.  (03-16-2020, 11:55 PM)Pckts Wrote:(03-16-2020, 11:39 PM)GuateGojira Wrote:(03-16-2020, 11:33 PM)Pckts Wrote: The weights claimed are estimates and Gaur predation wasn't witnessed, only scat and carcasses observed. Let's clarify a couple of points here: 1 - Weight of kills: You say that you "doubt" and that you "assume" things about the study of Dr Karanth and Dr Sunquist, so here you have a problem because if the people that actually made the study are telling you that they have done something that you "think" that they did not, then you are almost calling them "liars" in an indirect form, don't you think? Let me show you this information first. In the document of 1995 (Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forest) they say this:  *This image is copyright of its original author In this case we can say that they estimated the weight, but is that correct? Obviously not with the correct interpretation, now let's check this from the book "The Way of the Tiger" of Dr Karanth:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here he explain that the kills were actually weighed and we can see than after that they figure it out how much the tiger eat, so in that moment is when they make the estimation of the "true" weight of the kill "before" the tiger/leopard/dhole ate. So they actually weighed the animals and Dr Sunquist confirmed that some bulls weighed about 1 ton, he also wrote that in his book "Wild Cats of the World":  *This image is copyright of its original author So, there is no reason to doubt about what they clearly stated and we must not assume things that are not real. Now and again, if even with this evidence you still doutb about they study, then there is no reason to debate anymore as it will be futile. 2 - Sizes: The status of "alpha" or "standard" is very subjective and is not a clasiffication used by any scientists in the field. There is certainly a difference between an "average sized male" and a "maximum sized male", the first one been more common. However what is the average size of a bull? Karanth (2001) estimated a range between 500 to 1,000 kg for an adult gaur (no sex stated) and from a sample of 12 males I calculated an average of 831 kg (range: 588 - 1,106 kg). Certainly the gaur is a magnificent animal and very huge, but the tiger is not a dwarf too. Extrapolating the image of the "average sized Bengal tiger" to my old image of the average sized gaur, we can see that tiger is smaller but certainly still capable of killing the huge bull:  *This image is copyright of its original author For comparison check this lion attacking the bull African buffalo:  *This image is copyright of its original author If a lion can do it, why a tiger can't? So, the size comparison by personal perception of size is not reliable, as any person can get they own conclutions, and like I said before, if tigers killed adult rhinos, there is no reason why a tiger can't kill and adult gaur. Interestingly, tiger do hunt gaurs without the element of surprise but in face-to-face conflicts. This was observed by Dr Karanth when he mention that tigers almost never attack gaurs in thick cover (Karanth, 2001, page 56) and also Perry (1965, page 104) quotes to Mr Powell about a record of an instance of "a tiger that deliverately exposed himself, from behind one tree after another, luring the gaur to charge the trees several times, injuring itself severely in so doing. If the gaur tired of charging, the tiger would come out in to open, inciting it to charge again; and after three or four hours of these softening-up tactics finally hamstrung the gaur". So tigers can use several techniques to hunt gaur of any size. 3 - Physical status of the gaur: Karanth & Sunquist (1995) in table 5 showed that the proportion of gaur kills are: Adult male - 14.6; Adult female - 22.6; Yearling male - 2.0; Yearling female - 2.0; Young - 58.8; average size of gaur killed 287 kg. This make sence as tigers will target the smaller and weaker specimens like any other predator, however in Table 9 they provided the proportion (%) of adult prey animals in different age categories killed by predatros and for gaurs the proportion of "Young" is 48.2, for "Prime" is 42.9 and for "Old" is 8.9. This means that almoust half of the adults were in prime conditions and certainly tigers are not biased toward old sick bull/cow of gaur. Even more, in table 10 they show the proportion (%) of prey animals in differnt physical contition categories killed by predators and for gaur the proportions are: "Good" - 65; "Fair" - 24; "Poor" - 11. This means that most of the gaur killed was in "Good" condition, included the bulls of 1000 kg. Also check this:  *This image is copyright of its original author So, based in this evidence, it is clear that in Nagarahole NP tigers prey on adult gaur bulls in good conditions and that size alone is not the best defence. Check that the two Dr said "heavy tiger predation" over the gaurs of 500 - 1,000 kg. With this information we can safely say that your assumption that the gaurs attacked were "*injured, old, already deceased* etc." is not correct at all. Evidence provided by the Dr Karanth and Dr Sunqusit shows otherwise. Interestingly, one of the biggest bull gaurs, based in horns size, that Dr Schaller found in Kanha NP was killed by a tiger.  *This image is copyright of its original author 4 - The pic: In regards to the Gaur image:  *This image is copyright of its original author * Do you know the weight claimed and how much of it was actually consumed? - No, it doesn't say but check the size of the head, it is huge! * Also is there a witness to the kill or just a carcass found? - Again, it doesn't say. Now, is this actualy relevant? No, because the objective of this image is to show you that the carcasses found were actually weighed like Dr Karanth said and that there is no doubt about that. The weight of the animals is irrelevant as we do know that Dr Karanth and Dr Sunquist did stated that bulls of about 1,000 kg were weighed too. If only the carcass was found, is still posible to reconstruct the event based in the injures. This was even done with the famous "Blue Babe", a Pleistocene bison found in the permafrost of Alaska.
Guategojira
I'll respond account by account Your first account mentions scat samples which of course dont tell the whole tale. It also mentions estimates of body weight and any carcass found was after death had already occurred. 2nd account Maybe he did weigh them but they're still estimated based off meat already eaten. I'd also want to read the entire study to see actual kill data and means of obtaining it. Regardless again, kills are not witnessed here. They also give a range of 500-1000kg for Gaur, again showing a major difference between a Bull and what I call an Alpha Bull. You can see Bulls which are similar in size to Cows and you can see others which look surreal, they're so large. In regards to horn length, the old bulls will have the largest horn length but that certainly doesn't mean they're in their prime. Odin for instance, the old Bull Gaur that fought a Tiger all night long and lived to tell the tale would most likely have a massive horn length since it'll continue to grow over it's long life. Finally I'll say this, I agree Tigers and Lions have killed Bulls of either species and my criteria for what an Alpha Bull is will be hard to explain to most. It's just one of those things you have to see to get the gist I guess. I'll leave it at this, if I'm a betting man and you put a Lion or Tiger in a ring with a massive alpha Bull, my money would be one the Bull all things being even. But as we know, the wild doesn't play by those rules and I fully acknowledge that anything I think is unlikely can easily be possible with the right conditions. (03-22-2020, 04:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: Guategojira Ok, that is your opinion and I know that no information here is going to change your mind, just like the case of the "tigresses killing tigers" and the "white tigers that can live and reproduce in the wild". However, my advice is allways have an open mind, because just like the two previous topics, at the end we proved right about them. Good look. (03-22-2020, 05:22 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:(03-22-2020, 04:47 AM)Pckts Wrote: Guategojira I've acknowledged white Tigers existing in the wild, long ago. I've seen nothing of a Tigress killing a male though. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |