WildFact
›
Premier Section
›
Edge of Extinction
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
I agree that tigers or any big cats for that matter should be placed in age groups. Tigers and lions both continue to grow vertically and horizontally up until the age of 9-10. At least from what I have seen, but tbh I haven't paid especially great attention to ages of tigers and lions compared to their length. It is something I notice from time to time, but I will start to pay closer attention to that now.
 Pckts\ dateline='\'1423847157' Wrote: I agree that tigers or any big cats for that matter should be placed in age groups. Tigers and lions both continue to grow vertically and horizontally up until the age of 9-10. At least from what I have seen, but tbh I haven't paid especially great attention to ages of tigers and lions compared to their length. It is something I notice from time to time, but I will start to pay closer attention to that now. I would encourage it, as age classes are more important than many think. From experience, I can say there's no question there's a strong relation between age and skull development. Same for status (wild or captive/healthy or unhealthy) and skull development. The reason is bones reflect background (upbringing and general conditions) way better than many assume. In most tables on big cats, researchers do not distinguish between the variables mentioned in my previous post. For this reason, they often are confusing to a degree. One reason researchers keep it simple is a lack of data. It takes a lot of time to get to a sample large enough to get to reliable statements. Researchers often just do not have the time needed. They need to produce something at regular intervals, because science, most unfortunately, has been affected by rules typical for commercial markets. 
Peter, question for you.
what's the record number of cubs that a single tigress gave birth to in one season? are you familiar with any tigresses from the past that gave birth to more than 5 cubs? I'd be interested if you have anything regarding this particular subject. if not, I think this might be a new record. Patna: The dwindling population of tigers in Bihar got a shot in the arm when a tigress gave birth to six cubs in Valmiki Tiger Reserve (VTR) in west Champaran district of Bihar. A tigress generally gives birth to two or three cubs Experts say that it certainly is a rare phenomenon when a tigress gives birth to a big litter of six cubs. The tiger reserve authoriites were delighted to see a tigress having given birth to six cubs in Madanpur Forest Range of VTR. Adding to their joy was the fact that all the cubs are quite healthy and doing well. Here it may be mentioned that a tigress generally gives birth to two or three cubs but in this case it is quite remarkable that six cubs were born and all are hale and hearty. During the last census undertaken in 2013, a total of 22 tigers were recorded in this Project Tiger area. The Valmiki Tiger Reserve is spread over 880 sq. km. and has the distinction of having the biggest grassland among all the Project Tiger areas of the country. It encompasses an area of more than 800 hectares and forms an ideal natural habitat for the tiger population. This area teems with herbivores like chital, wild boar, wild buffaloes and others which are all prey species of tiger. Probably this is the reason why tigers are attracted in this grassland, said an expert. http://www.indileak.com/tigress-gives-bi...i-reserve/ Previously, the record (not official) was held by a Central Indian Tigress from Pench tiger reserve (Collarwali) that gave birth to 5 cubs  *This image is copyright of its original author 5 cubs of Collar Wali in 2011, if you want to see them as grown ups (link is below) http://www.panthera.org/node/1651 [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img]  (02-12-2015, 09:01 PM)'peter' Wrote: BOOKSPeter, you do it again!!!! You are going to buy the book of Smythies, that is incredible man!!! I am going to ask you a favor. In order to corroborate my hypothesis (you probably will remember which) , when you have this book, could you please post all available data about the famous record tiger of 705 lb from Nepal? If there is a picture, it will be great too. Believe me, that tiger is very important for me. [img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] 
Some interesting fact that I have discussed before on AVA with peter.
Here is the observation of the lion canine and tiger canine. In comparison with the living specimens, the lion canine seems indeed having some kind of nervous system within.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
Even the fossil lions have the exact same feature.
Maybe this trait that was developed by the steppe big cats since million years ago?  *This image is copyright of its original author
(02-14-2015, 05:45 AM)'peter' Wrote:(02-13-2015, 10:05 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: I agree that tigers or any big cats for that matter should be placed in age groups. Tigers and lions both continue to grow vertically and horizontally up until the age of 9-10. At least from what I have seen, but tbh I haven't paid especially great attention to ages of tigers and lions compared to their length. It is something I notice from time to time, but I will start to pay closer attention to that now. AGE CLASSES IN BIG CATS - ZULULAND LEOPARDS Here's a bit more on big cats and age classes. The table was first posted by Chui in the Carnivora forum. It clearly shows the differences between adolescents (2-3 years of age), young adults (4-6 years of age) and mature males (7 years and over):  *This image is copyright of its original author This is a Natal male leopard:  *This image is copyright of its original author The difference between the three age-classes is considerable. It could be surprising to some that the differences between young adults and mature males is quite pronounced. Mature males are longer, bigger and bulkier, resulting in more weight. Based on what I saw in the skulls I measured, my conclusion is the differences between age-classes in lions and tigers, both larger and longer-lived than leopards, are similar. In brown bears, again larger and longer-lived than big cats, the differences are even more outspoken. I never saw a table on big cats that compares to this one. This is how it should be done. Roflcopters\ dateline='\'1423882411' Wrote: Peter, question for you. I just finished 'UDJUNG KULON' - The land of the last rhinoceros' (A. Hoogerwerf, Leiden, 1970). Hoogerwerf wrote " ... In Sumatra one litter of two and four litters of four were found as embryos in killed tigresses, but litters of six and even seven were found in the body of one tigress ... " (pp. 270). As for India. I remember a remark about a tigress with six embryos, but forgot in which book it was. I don't know if tigresses living in good conditions are more likely to produce large litters, but the information I have points in that direction. A litter of six in India today is very remarkable. Good find. (02-15-2015, 08:58 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote:(02-12-2015, 09:01 PM)'peter' Wrote: BOOKSPeter, you do it again!!!! You are going to buy the book of Smythies, that is incredible man!!! I am just as interested as you. I expect the book to arrive this week. I will report on everything of interest for sure. GrizzlyClaws\ dateline='\'1424033135' Wrote: Even the fossil lions have the exact same feature. ON CANINES AND SKULL CONSTRUCTION I remember our discussion in AVA, but have to add I never paid attention to the structure of canines when I measured them. Here's what I know about canines and big cat skulls. 1 - There's no question tigers have longer and thicker canines than lions. I know some think tiger canines are a bit more slender, but that isn't true. I measured the diameter at the insertion and concluded tigers, both absolutely as well as relatively, have thicker canines. The impression regarding 'slender' is a result of the length, I think. 2 - Teeth are made of living tissue. Like all other teeth, canines need to be nourished. For this reason, they have a canal for blood vessels and nerves in the centre. In the old days, canines in big cat skulls were at times sawn off or cut in half in order to prevent injuries. I saw it more than once and concluded the canal wasn't always visible in tiger canines. It could be the construction in tiger canines is a bit different. They seemed more ossified and, generally, denser, but I could be wrong. 3 - In tiger skulls, the upper canines are projected more downward than in lion skulls. As a result of a more vaulted upper skull, the angle often is very acute. For this reason, the upper canines function as daggers. More so than in lion skulls, they are weapons made to puncture deeply and cause lethal damage as quickly as possible. In lion skulls, the maxillary bone (or snout) usually is longer and much more horizontal in shape. The angle of the upper canines is much less acute. In my opinion, they serve as tools to grab foremost. For this reason, perhaps, they often are a bit sharper at the tip. The difference in diameter between the tip and the most massive part of the upper canines is more outspoken in lions. Tiger canines show less difference in diameter at both ends. 4 - Longer canines need more room. As the upper skull in tigers is usually more vaulted, the upper canines also are more vaulted. Tiger skulls, in my opinion, were constructed to serve as anchors for the canines and the muscles needed to move the jaw. Lion skulls are a bit more massive in the centre in order to be able to withstand damage from struggling prey animals or blows from competitors). In tiger skulls, potential damage is limited as a result of the steep angle (a principle also used in tanks). Thickness or angle to protect, that is the question. 5 - Tiger skulls are very functional in that they have a vault needed for both penetration and protection; long and strong canines to overcome resistance as soon as possible; a wide rostrum for accomodate and support the strong canines and a robust sagittal crest in order to accomodate the muscles needed to move the jaws and strike with utmost force at the tips of the canines. Lions skulls also are very functional. They seem constructed to impress, hold and limit damage, not by a clever construction, but by more mass in those regions most often targeted. In this respect, they are closer to bear skulls. Tiger skulls are more rounded and catlike, meaning they are as functional and light as they come. The reason is a hunter has no need for heavy all-weather constructions: too costly. 6 - One could argue lions, for the reasons mentioned above, didn't evolve as typical cats (hunters) and be right: the bones say lions sacrificed some of the typical features of cats in order to be able to occupy more open terrain (relatively or absolutely longer and stronger limb bones) and compete with other lions (which means they needed a relatively large, impressive and reinforced skull). Hunting, following this theory, would come second. And it does. For male lions. But females also developed flat and long skulls and they do most of the hunting. Meaning we have problem. My guess is both big cats, in spite of all similarities, are slightly different animals. Always were. I don't know if tigers, jaguars and leopards are different from lions or if tigers are different from the other three. I would opt for the last possibility, but there's very little to support that choice. PHOTOGRAPHS OF PANTHERA LEO, PANTHERA SUMATRAE AND PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA a - Wild male lion One of the longest (greatest total length 384,55 mm., zygomatic width 259,90 mm.) and heaviest (1.840 kg.) I saw. He also had the longest canines (63,30 and 62,80 mm.):  *This image is copyright of its original author b- Wild male Sumatran tiger Way smaller, but, at 321,72 mm. in greatest total length and 224,80 mm. in zygomatic width, large for Sumatra and also quite heavy (1,500 kg.). Upper canines 65,30 and 65,70 mm.:  *This image is copyright of its original author c - Captive male Amur tiger Greatest total length 368,60 mm. and zygomatic width 243,52 mm. Weight 2,120 kg. and upper canines 71,90 and 70,80 mm.:  *This image is copyright of its original author All 3 skulls were in good condition. It is about the difference in structure. Everything written above, I think, was borne out by the photographs, but it could be you see something very different. If so, don't hesitate to post about it. I once witnessed a vet removing a molar affected by an inflammation in a male tiger thought to be more or less Sumatran. At just about 8 feet in total length and 120-130 kg., he was the size of a large wild male Pantanal jaguar. The molar removed was immense in size and it took a lot of work. The vet had to abandon the attempt to get it out in one piece. The brothers of the male tiger suffering from the inflammation watched the entire operation with a lot of interest. Same for me and others watching. One of these was so busy assisting the vet, he didn't notice he was pushed away from the bars by one of the brothers watching. It was done in a gentle way. He thought I did it and turned aroung to smile. I said it wasn't me and also smiled. My guess is he didn't believe me.
Indeed, the lion canine in fact is also very stout built for fighting.
By see the way they were designed; tiger's angular/sharper canine is made for hunting, while lion's slightly blunter canine is made for fighting. I think right now everybody will not mistake a lion canine with a tiger canine anymore.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  (02-16-2015, 10:45 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Indeed, the lion canine in fact is also very stout built for fighting. Id say rather its due to different hunting strategy
Yeah, since tiger is a loner, so it must make a quickest kill as possible.
For lion, they rely on number, so they can afford to suffocate their prey with a slower kill. (02-17-2015, 01:20 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Yeah, since tiger is a loner, so it must make a quickest kill as possible. You would have to know what broken canine % was for either species to try and determine one would be for "fighting or hunting" You would also have to compare tigress to lioness since both are the main hunters of the species. A tigers tooth doesn't break any easier than a lions tooth so its obvious that the idea of one being for "fighting or hunting" probably doesn't make sense. (02-17-2015, 03:24 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:(02-17-2015, 01:20 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Yeah, since tiger is a loner, so it must make a quickest kill as possible. BTW, have you weighed your tiger canine so far? |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 32 Guest(s) |