WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Jaguar
Modern Weights and Measurements of Jaguars
Modern Weights and Measurements of Jaguars
|
Modern Weights and Measurements of Jaguars
|
@Dark Jaguar regarding Xango's weight, we should try to contact NEX to get a confirmation for the weight change as they themselves published the previous measurement. That way we can have a concrete value and avoid going back and forth with the editing of the table.
@Balam
NEX the Institution is not gonna respond anything, the info I got is 100 % accurate since Brasília é o Bicho passed me the personal contact of The biologist Marina Carvalho herself that I am in contact with, she works at NEX and was part of all Xangô's captures process and procedures. She is now the one and only source of info I got for cerrado jaguars, since Leandro Silveira won't share anything of his datas. About the tables adjustments back and fourth thats how it works, if needed it'll always have to be adjusted in order to get the most accurate datas as possible and by that process erasing the prior ones, these changes happens. Also in cases when you're busy and not available I would like to get the passwords to change and modify both tables myself so I won't need to be tagging you all the time to ask for updates. But in case you got enough time to switch it all on yourself, I will have to tag you as many times as it takes. All these changes are for the good of the tables to be the best as possible, Marina already saw the Cerrado jags table and corrected Xangô's weight herself. Marina at NEX Sanctuary with Puma cub.  *This image is copyright of its original author Marina with Xangô Cerrado male on his 5th capture.  *This image is copyright of its original author
@Dark Jaguar that's ok, I just needed to be assured she was a reliable source and happens to be an amazing one. I'll share the Cerrado table with you later today through PM and I'll keep the Pantanal one, that way we can split time in editing. Do you know if she's aware of any other capture that we can add to the table?
(10-01-2020, 08:06 PM)Balam Wrote: @Dark Jaguar that's ok, I just needed to be assured she was a reliable source and happens to be an amazing one. I'll share the Cerrado table with you later today through PM and I'll keep the Pantanal one, that way we can split time in editing. Do you know if she's aware of any other capture that we can add to the table? Back in 2017 There was another cerrado jaguar they planned to capture you already know him, I posted on the Jaguars of Brazil thread, the dark jaguar didn't step on the loops traps they left and the project had terminated without his capture sadly. Fábio Soares told me when they get more resources there should be more captures. But now NEX is very busy with the bruised and injured jaguars coming all the way from Pantanal to be treated and these plans shall be pushed to the future and also with more resources. I will ask her if she knows some of the cerrado jaguars sizes down south captured by IOP, she probably doesn't know but I will ask anyway.
UPDATED CERRADO MALE JAGUARS TABLE.
 *This image is copyright of its original author 13 individuals and the year of Macharrão male's capture that was recently published by IOP.
@Pckts I was trying to avoid getting involved with this individual but seeing as though he keeps mentioning us from the Carnivora forum and discrediting our table, I'm gonna get involved.
To the mods reading, I'm only bringing this here because this person has a habit of throwing unfounded accusations and temper tantrums in other places, and those whom he has attacked deserve a chance to respond as well. @chui_ let's go over your multiple claims on here as you seem to be an expert in throwing baseless accusations to the easily impressionable crowd of adolescents and fellow leopard fanatics from Carnivora. Quote:You are also justified in questioning the mean weights being claimed for Pantanal jaguars. This whole idea that these jaguars are now bigger than a couple of decades ago is BS. And those aren’t my words, that’s what I’ve been told by a top authority on the subject from the field (see your PM). Quote:The figures for Pantanal jaguars published in the paper, Body Mass and Skull measurements in four jaguars populations 1996, are still considered perfectly valid by experts but of course aren’t good enough for the fanboys. And it’s also clear that researchers from the field are fed up with these guys constantly contacting them about the size of big jaguars for their fantasy tables (again see your PM). Quote:The reason why PCTs and his wildfact crew are calculating a higher mean than that published in proper scientific papers is simple – a lack of understanding of basic statistics and lack of objectiveness. In order for a mean weight to be representative of the population the sample has to be randomly selected, meaning all individuals whether small/big/mediocre should have an equal chance of being included The weights and measurements that have been collected ALL belong to scientific sources and published papers, with the exception of one source which came from a governmental institution, they include jaguars from ALL areas of the Pantanal, meaning the sample cannot be more random. The jaguars in the table have been posted without discrimination, they include every single weight provided by said studies in recent years, or come as a direct source from the mouths of the vets and biologists who gathered the weights themselves. The purpose of the table from the beginning was not to calculate a new average different from the one quoted from Almeida, but to provide a collection of weights to study the changes jaguars have experienced and determine their biology in recent times. The average that comes from it is an indirect result of the collection of data, and it just so happens that is higher than the one provided by Almeida. Quote:But of course, these guys eagerly incorporate weights of jaguars which have specifically been pointed out for their large size. Similarly, when you rely on Instagram posts for most of your data, the sample will likely be biased towards bigger individuals as big impressive individuals tend to be highlighted on social media. A huge 120kg jaguar which is captured occasionally is much more likely to get a post than the typical 100kg males which are captured regularly, and certainly more than any smallish sub 90kg male. No we haven't, as said before every single weight that appears on the table comes from the sources that have publicized it, and not a single one was excluded. The fact that you think we are purposely including the largest individual shows how much of a difference the proper environmental control has had on the morphology on these jaguars in contrast to the state in which they lived during the mid 20th century when they were massively poached and the prey densities where much lower, thanks for proving our point. The jaguars that are posted by organizations such as Oncas do Rio Negro are posted as they are captured, there is little reason to believe that these organizations are selectively choosing to post the largest ones in lieu of creating hype around them. These are scientific organizations with a reputation to uphold, and their purpose isn't to obtain clout out of the jaguars they capture. Your attempt at discrediting their selection of posts is nothing short of intellectual laziness. Quote:Similarly, they know the weight of 131kg for the big male Shaka was recorded when he was gorged and that on a subsequent capture he weighed 117kg, but of course the higher weight is still used. The funniest one was Brutus who was weighed as a fully grown adult (8 years old) at 115kg but despite that, a casual estimate of 130kg stated in the comment section of an instagram post was used instead because apparently Brutus was still growing. They’ve now changed it to 120kg, still adding 5kg to his recorded weight for some reason because hey why not. In regards to the weights provided by Oncafari, the decision was made to post only the publicized weights that appear on their webpage. For a different jaguar, they track named Felino, one of Oncafari's biologists stated once that his weight was 138 kg and was the heaviest they had capture, I later contacted Edu to ask more about him and why there was such a big discrepancy in the alleged weight and the one posted on their page, he told me this:  *This image is copyright of its original author Since in theory the weight of 138 kg for Felino was registered, but through reasoning the likelihood of it being accurate was low, they opted for publicizing the second one of 102,3 kg. In other words, whatever these biologists choose to put as the official weight is what we've decided to use for the table, and in the case of Shaka it has yet to come out of the mouths from any of the biologists at Oncafri that he was "gorged", as you love to accuse of any jaguar that happens to weight more than what you wish they weighed. When pckts asked Edu if the difference in weight was due to stomach content, his answer was "yeah", suggesting that stomach content could've been a determinant but not reiterating that it was the direct cause for the weight difference. A better-formulated question would've been to ask for the reason as to why there was such a discrepancy in both captures and allow Edu to elaborate on it. Since the second weight of 118 was captured following the initial one of 130 kg, it is not unreasonable to think that aging and the further decaying of the jaguar's body played a role in the lower value. But of course, you will take any opportunity you can get to downsize jaguars as much as you can in an attempt to put them beside leopards, so noone of us is surprised. Quote:Then there’s also the fact that the 148kg and 142kg individuals are the same – so they’ve included the biggest most exceptional individual twice. Not to mention, we only know about this individual because he was highlighted for his huge size so there goes random selection. It should be no wonder how higher a mean than that in published sources is derived with such poor science. This has been the only semi-valid post you were able to formulate in your mindless rant, yes we made a mistake by duplicating Lopez weight including two different figures, this was due to the fact that we didn't have the knowledge that the capture shown on the infamous video was the same as the one published by Hoogesteijn as he was not part of said video. Nonetheless, some time ago the repeated weight was removed, and even then it didn't end up affecting the average, it remained at 111 kg. Quote:Here is the published data on the weights of Pantanal jaguars captured by scientists in the last 2 decades (including what you posted). A total of 21 adult males average 100.1kg, with the majority of the males weighing in the 95 to 105kg range. The largest male weighed 130kg and the next 2 biggest both weighed 115kg. This is a pretty good sized and unbiased sample which is perfectly adequate to tell us about the size of these jaguars. The weights for the males in two out of those three tables had already been included in the table, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you got them from Dark Jaguar's post as you clearly are a professional lurker on here. Regardless, it goes to show how clueless and pathetic you are to try to dismiss the table under the disguise of lacking official sources to then take weights from sources that have already been included in the table to formulate your own average, despite the sample being much smaller to what we've been able to gather. Quote:In addition to the published papers, we can also include weights from the Oncafari website which has profiles of the jaguars being tracked, with the weights of some individuals listed ( https://oncafari.org/en/especie_fauna/jaguar/#oncas ). Shaka was captured at age 8 and recorded at 131kg (although according to PCTS himself he weighed 117kg when not gorged). Apache weighed 107kg at age 7, Pirata 106.3kg at age 9, Felino 102.3kg at age 4, Zico 110kg at age 9, Sombra 120kg at age 11. Brutus was weighed at 115kg at 8 but he is actually already included in the last paper above. If you take all of the weights from Oncafari the average you get is actually 114.4, and none of the males on their database is below 100 kg in weight. Again, all of these weights are already factored into the table, and since the mean is much greater our average would be more accurate than the mess you tried to calculate by doing the same thing you tried to accuse us of: cherry-picking data. Also, the accurate weight from Brutus comes directly from the biologist Gediendson in collaboration with Oncas do Rio Negro, in his latest capture with them he weighed 120 kg, and as his most recent capture said weight was included in the table. Quote:The difference occurs when you start conflating the data with social media posts and start asking the experts about specific individuals which stand out. Your attempts at character assassinations are so poor and desperate it's hard to read them with a straight face. The "social media posts" are valid because they come directly from the source that had direct contact with said jaguars, not any random photography page (from when you and your crew decided to claim the weight of 97 kg of Vin Diesel, speaking of cherry-picking from unreliable sources). Not only that, but any person who has common sense can look at the table and see that most of the weights gathered come from scientific papers and are official in their nature. And your last insinuation that we only reached to the experts to know about specific individuals continues to highlight your ignorance, we've asked about Lopez weight to get reassurance on his stomach content, all other weights gathered directly from them come from animals much lighter in weight and are given at the discretion of the biologists and vets. Quote:In fact, Dr. Hoogesteijn thinks your whole idea that the Pantanal jaguars are now bigger is BS! When asked about the size of Pantanal jaguars and the possibility the current average weight is higher, he guided me to his 1996 paper (Body Mass and Skull Measurements in Four Jaguar Populations) which gives an average weight of 99.5kg for adult males in the Pantanal. The paper which you are using to put words in the mouth of Hoogesteijn contradicts his own words concerning the recent research he and the rest of the team of Panthera have performed. Not too long ago Hoogesteijn participated in a live conference with the US embassy in Colombia to discuss developments in the protection of jaguars in the country, Francisco Santos, the US ambassador, asked Rafael about the differences or similarities between la Aurora (Llanos) and Pantanal jaguars, and he said: "It's the same jaguar, there is partially no difference, the Pantanal jaguars from the analyses we have done are slightly larger, slightly heavier, but in the Casanare Llanos (Colombia) and the Llanos of Apure (Venezuela) you will also get some very heavy males, as heavy as the ones on Pantanal". He has reiterated multiple times by now that today Pantanal jaguars are on average larger than Llanos jaguars, which contradicts the averages publicized on his paper which put the Llanos population above it. Of course, this is not his fault, the data from his paper is accurate to what was able to be gathered at the time it was gathered, since the environmental conditions in which these two populations have changed (i.e. prey density), and the hunting pressure that Llanos jaguars experience in comparison to the well-protected Pantanal ones is more marked, it's no secret the latter is producing larger individuals, as he himself has reiterated. Quote:Dude this is so pathetic, it's embarrassing. In Hoogesteijn's original email to that person in Spanish there is nothing about a 115kg average weight. That was added in by one of the Wildfact goofs themselves when they posted the English translation. Look at the image of the original Spanish text you posted yourself. In fact, there is, let me help you since your compression level and willingness to misinterpret what's put forward to you appears to be challenging for you:  *This image is copyright of its original author I mentioned in my initial post that I showed the table with weights to Dr. Hoogesteijn and then, as the underlined text shows, asked him what he thought of our current average at the time barring the newer data we had received and without counting larger males that have not been weighed and therefore not included in the table, and how they compared with the data from Almedia. His answer was the one published before, he agreed that from the recent research Panthera has done in the northern Pantanal the jaguars do express the potential shown on the table, highlighting how with the absence of hunting and proper preservation of its natural prey the jaguars have been able to increase in size in comparison to the 20th century when their genetic pool was depleted thanks to overhunting and their prey base was much lower. So as a result you end up looking like the huge fool that you are, do us all a favor, and come here next time you want to debate these things and mention us directly. Stop relying on the worship of the same three leopard fanatics that run to like your posts because they can't come up with proper rebuttals and need your overly wordy and misleading posts to live vicariously through. Finally, we're going to continue to post the data that we receive here, which so far has been appreciated by the knowledgeable posters and readers who come to get updated on recent developments with these jaguars. You can throw all the tantrum you want and quote Almeida to the point of insanity, the numbers and data don't lie, and as Ben Shapiro would say, facts don't care about your feelings. Edited due to spelling errors.
I have some updates regarding the captures in the Llanos performed by Panthera that are very exciting.
I was in contact with a biologist who is indirectly involved in the collaring project (he tracks anteaters but knows the developments with the jaguar projects). As expected he told me that the organization was not giving out information concerning the captures at La Aurora, this is because a paper regarding these developments will eventually be released. He didn't specify to me what kind of paper it will be, but it's very likely that weights and measurements of this understudied population will be included. He told me that we will be getting new camera trap footage not only from La Aurora but from Hato Barley and the Encanto de Guanapalo by the end of year, as stated before in a different thread here. Which means that we will be able to get glimpse of Llanos populations in different reserves. It's important to keep in mind that while the jaguar from the Venezuela Llanos are under extreme hunting pressure (not all the poaching incidents are reported to the police and only the few ones that go viral on social media end up in prosecution), the ones in the Colombian side have started to flourish. The government is involved in upholding regulations to create corridors through the country to facilitate the genetic flow of different populations, and many ranch owners have changed their attitudes towards big cats, now there is a push to preserve them in their hatos in order to build tourism into the area. The work that Panthera is doing has allowed for all of these developments in jaguar conservation to take place. The anti depredatory measures taken in place have allowed ranchers to keep their lifestock away from danger, and strong anti-poaching laws have allowed certain areas to start to regain large volume of prey items (deer, peccary, etc.). There are still issues in the Llanos region involving contamination of water thanks to fracking and petroleum extraction, so there's still work to do to ensure that the health of the biome is preserved, but so far the future for this population looks bright and I will be looking forward to reading with more depth about them in the upcoming papers that will be released by Panthera. It's important to highlight that the great work performed by Hoogesteijn in the Llanos involved exclusively the Venezuelan side, and while it was extensive it didn't cover the entire biome (that is larger by a decent margin than the Pantanal). So there's still a lot to learn from this area, especially now that we know that the environmental factors that played a role in the morphology of jaguars of the past are different from the ones of the present, as can be seen in the Pantanal.
I have some exciting new data to share here @Dark Jaguar @peter @Pckts @GuateGojira @epaiva @Lycaon and all other readers.
I have been in contact for a while with the team at Oncafari, like many other biologists the likes of Hoggesteijn, Tortado, Crashaw etc. They became aware of our compilation table, the biologist Edu Fragoso was kind enough to formulate a chart with all the weights from the jaguar they have captured at Caiman Ecological Refuge in the south of the Pantanal. He sent me the table with al the correct information, including some unpublished weights for a couple of jaguars, the table created by Oncafari and thus coming directly as a first-hand source from a scientific institution is here, this is a WildFact exclusive:  *This image is copyright of its original author All the weights were inputted into our own table with the exception of Ipe, the reason being that he was a sub-adult of 1,3 years old when captured, as can be seen in their chart. Edu told me that "Brutus" (115 kg) is not the same jaguar as "Brutos" (120 kg), who was captured by biologist Gediendson in collaboration with Oncas do Rio Negro. This had previously caused confusion among us here, but we have been given a clear answer directly from the biologists themselves. A new male named Robusto (Robust) was provided with an outstanding weight of 137 kg, I was clueless about the existence of this male as they had not shared him on their page before. This also contradicts certain accusations that we have received by a couple of users at a different forum entailing that these organizations only posted the heaviest jaguars captured for amusement purposes, clearly these organizations are among the most prestige and they abide by very tight standards, the biologists who work for them have one single goal and that is to study these jaguars and collect as much data as possible in order to advance their conservation. The table above also gives us a glimpse into the data for the females in the area, which will be essential for our next table involving the female jaguars from the Pantanal. I do want to highlight the impressive weights coming from them, with several in the 90s and Troncha in the 100s kg of weight, which we knew of already. Edu told me that currently, Oncafari is attempting to capture jaguars at Da Ilha refuge, as I stated here before, but unfortunately, the team has not been successful so far. They still have 4 more nights on fieldwork so the chances of a jaguar being baited remain a possibility. In regards to the weight for Shaka, their own table (a scientific document) clearly solidified his weight as 131 kg. The claim Edu made before of him weighing 118 kg at a different capture is relevant, but as I said before this drop in weight could be the result of the deteriorating of the body of the animal as a result of aging, no stomach content has been quoted by Oncafari to jump to conclusions that he was "gorged" during his initial capture. As the weight they provided is 131 kg, that is the weight we will retain. Lastly, I have included their estimation for Joker's weight in our table under a comment. It's safe to say that they are being conservative with their estimation of its weight as they've clearly specified that he most likely weighed more than 140 kg, and seeing as though they already captured a jaguar at nearly that size (Robusto), it's clear that they notice a size difference between him and Joker that warranted said estimate. It's also important to highlight that other massive jaguars such as Ghost and Houdini who did not fall into the baiting traps could never be captured by the team, but looking at all this data it's safe to say that the average for male jaguars is higher than 100 kg, at least in designated areas, as none of the adult males captures by Oncafari was under 100 kg in weight. As a result, the table has been updated and can be accessed here, our sample includes 61 jaguars with an average of 112.05 kg of weight. Please keep in mind that I'm still waiting for the Jaguar ID to provide for me weights for males captured by Panthera at Porto Jofre, due to the fire situations the vets and the entire team have been extremely busy. Be on the lookout for more jaguar weights from the Pantanal, as well as for the future papers from Panthera involving Colombian Llanos jaguars that were confirmed to me recently as well. Kind regards! 
BALAM (AND DARK JAGUAR)
Excellent work. It shows serious work always results in something of value in the end. As a result of your efforts, this forum now offers good information about the life and size of jaguars in different regions. Today, those interested in jaguars can read for hours in the threads you and Dark Jaguar created. My advice is to be proud of what you achieved. And to continue no matter what. You now know for sure it's appreciated my those running this forum as well as jaguar biologists. And many others. As to the debates regarding the information both of you. I noticed you in particular seem a bit irritated every now and then. My advice is to accept criticism and animosity as part of the deal. The moment you start posting on a public forum, other members will respond. Some will appreciate your contributions, whereas others will try to dismiss them. You have to learn to handle criticism in the proper way, meaning you have to use it in a way that produces a result. At times criticism is a result of (hidden) preference, but this is not always the case. When well-spoken members with access to good information (and the ability to select what they need in a subtle way) doubt the info you posted (or your deductions), you're more or less forced to go over it again. More often than not, this will result in more reliable conclusions. If those involved in criticism add a bit of pepper, you can go for the pepper or decide for a different approach. My advice is to go for the last option. Will take some time, but you will profit in the end in some way. It can, for instance, result in a bit of insight in (the background, motives and goals) those opposing you. Example. As you're interested in big cats, you no doubt know I was involved in plenty of debates in which tigers and bears featured. Over the years, I noticed members interested in one species often compared to each other. As I knew a bit about captive animals, I was able to get to some conclusions. One of them was specialists (members interested in one species only), characterwise, often seem to compare to most individuals of the species they preferred. All trainers I interviewed agreed on that one, but all added individuality was as important, if not more so. I also learned responses loaded with pepper often more or less confirmed I was on the right track. If insult was added, I was sure. After a number of years. the result was a number of interesting threads. When we started Wildfact in 2014, I decided for a different approach. I read all recent peer-reviewed documents produced by those involved in the Siberian Tiger Project and posted extensively about them in the tiger thread. The conclusion was things didn't quite add up, meaning more research is needed. I also concluded some of the observations of biologists seemed to be incomplete, if not inaccurate. Example. I posted about a few incidents in which tigers, bears and wild boars featured. In all cases, I disagreed with the conclusions of those who had seen the animals involved themselves. I was proven right in all cases later. This doesn't mean the biologists involved in the STP were wrong (they know ten times more than all of us combined), but it did confirm getting to conclusions isn't always easy when circumstances are unclear and time is limited. At the moment, I'm reading everything I have on two Amur tigresses allegedly killed by bears about a decade ago. This was in the period some Amur tigers had been affected by a disease and others had been wounded trying to get out of Aldridge footsnares. The disease and the attempts to get out of the footsnares had serious consequences in a number of cases. In some time, I will start a debate in the tiger thread. I do not doubt my posts will attract (new) members who disagree. The aim of the debate is to get to sound conclusions on what really happened. This to say a debate can be productive if you have an open mind and a clear goal in mind. If the goal is good information, chances are a debate will produce a decent result sooner or later. This is the aim of those running the forum. I hope you and Dark Jaguar will continue to develop the jaguar threads. Thanks again on behalf of all interested in jaguars.  Quote:BALAM (AND DARK JAGUAR) Totally agree. Great effort.  (10-22-2020, 03:25 AM)Balam Wrote: I have some exciting new data to share here @Dark Jaguar @peter @Pckts @GuateGojira @epaiva @Lycaon and all other readers.@Balam Thanks a lot for sharing your valuable information to the Forum Keep your great work
Juju is a 10 months old jaguaress that weighed 50.7 kg
Fénix is an 1 years and a half jaguaress that weighed 45.5 kg That's funny.  (10-22-2020, 03:25 AM)Balam Wrote: I have some exciting new data to share here @Dark Jaguar @peter @Pckts @GuateGojira @epaiva @Lycaon and all other readers. Congratulations! You had made an excelent work and your tables are the first ones about jaguars in the web as far I know. I am glad that new people is following the dream that Wildfact represents, the search of true information about the wild world. I have been working with tigers and lions, now your are taking care of jaguars and I really appreaciate that. Certainly you will be the source for jaguars in the size department. I will follow your progress, I am very happy with your work. Greetings my friends!  
84 kg Amazonian male from Morro de Mendanha in Brazil, empty belly.
 *This image is copyright of its original author This was posted by biologist Herbert O, in the caption he explains that the jaguar was captured by IOP (Leandro Silveira's organized) and IBAMA. This area of the Amazon is well protected and rich in prey for jaguars, as a result it produces decent sized Amazon specimens. (10-27-2020, 03:17 AM)Balam Wrote: 84 kg Amazonian male from Morro de Mendanha in Brazil, empty belly.Huge Amazonian Jaguar |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |