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)
|
 (05-27-2022, 05:36 PM)Apex Titan Wrote: I did post the link to the article. Look above the picture of the tiger killing the brown bear, the link is right there. Ok, I did not noticed it, but thanks to @Pckts for put it again. This is the only picture of tiger "Dale/Dima/M20/T-20" that I have found, in two pieces:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author It seems that the original full picture was bigger and as you can see none of the two pictures here shows all the details, so I prefer to put both. As you probably know, T-20 with 205 kg was the heaviest tiger that the Siberian Tiger Project managed to weigh. The measurements at Kerley et al. (2005) are not the final size but the average of several measurements at several captures, just like the weight of 193 kg reported in that same document. So, while we know his last weight (205 kg) we will probably not know his true last body size, which certainly was no less than 200 cm in head-body.  (05-28-2022, 05:56 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:(05-27-2022, 05:36 PM)Apex Titan Wrote: I did post the link to the article. Look above the picture of the tiger killing the brown bear, the link is right there. Thanks for posting it. I've already seen this picture some years ago, it was posted on the old AVA forums, but I didn't know this tiger was 'Dima'. The large adult female brown bears killed by 'Dima' were described to be nearly his own size/weight, and by Goodrich, a "valuable prize" to a hunter, which indicates that those must have been some huge sow bears he killed. Especially when you look at the size of 'Dima' in this picture.
Here's a recent video (2020) of biologist Alexander Batalov stating that the tiger 'Ochkarik' killed the huge male brown bear 'Chlamida', who was harassing the tigress 'Rashel' and her cubs, to steal her kills.
This gives people (especially the bear posters) no excuse to ignorantly accuse the Russian journalists of twisting Batalov's words and "making up stories" for a "fanciful" article. Its important to note, that only Batalov is the expert authority on this case, as he is the only Russian biologist that studies the habits and behaviour of the tiger 'Ochkarik' and documented/reported the case of the big male brown bear 'Chlamida' robbing the tigress's kills. Contacting Seryodkin was a desperate attempt to try and "debunk" this account. Seryodkin is completely irrelevant in this regard, as he doesn't study Amur tigers in the Durmin reserve in the Khabarovsk region like Batalov does. Seryodkin studies tigers in the Primorye region in the Sikhote-Alin areas. - A totally different region and area from where the tiger 'Ochkarik' resides. So Seryodkin knows absolutely nothing about the tiger 'Ochkarik', the tigress 'Rashel' or the big male brown bear 'Chlamida'.... period. Also note, Seryodkin never once said this case never happened. I got Batalov's statement accurately translated by a Russian poster. Here you go, straight from the horses mouth on video! .... Batalov: Here we have a tigress Rachel, that's her name, she lost two tiger cubs because a brown bear harassed her. He... Interviewer: Well... it's at least natural, that is, the essence of nature. Batalov: Absolutely! Absolutely! Yes, he was just pursuing her to take away the loot (food). Well, in the end, two tiger cubs disappeared somewhere, but the male who came, this famous one, our Ochkarik who, after all, well, saved them from this trouble, most likely he liquidated (destroyed) this bear. Here's the interview; Go to the 16:22 mark: (Use English subtitles) Batalov in at least 2-3 different interviews with Russian journalists reported this case: "The bespectacled tiger somehow killed and ate a brown bear, which was chasing Rashel the tigress with a tiger cub. After that, he was so inflated that Batalov could not at first understand what had happened. But then I found bear meat in tiger excrement." https://takiedela.ru/2021/02/zoloto-tigrov/  *This image is copyright of its original author https://habinfo.ru/aleksandr-batalov/  *This image is copyright of its original author https://infourok.ru/rasskaz-o-vsemirno-i...29910.html Chlamida, an exceptionally large male brown bear suddenly vanished, when the male tiger 'Ochkarik', a bear specialist, appeared and came to help the tigress. Around this time, Batalov also found the remains of a large brown bear that was killed and eaten by 'Ochkarik' in his excrements. The huge male bear 'Chlamida' was gone, never to be seen again. Batalov in the video, nor in any of his interviews with journalists ever mentioned anything about hunters playing a part in the bears disappearance. He is adamant, that Ochkarik killed and ate this particular bear out of revenge. And this coming from one of Russia's greatest experts & authorities on Amur tigers and bears. In fact, even Krechmar (bear biologist) recently stated that Alexander Batalov is Russia's largest bear specialist. Its a well known fact, that tigers ruthlessly destroy their competition and potential threats. Its also a well documented fact, that tigers are very vengeful and vindictive predators, that can hold a grudge and have carried out premeditated revenge killings in numerous cases (Vaillant, Batalov, Fomenko, Kesri Singh etc). Ochkarik, a moderate-sized tiger at around 180 kg, was able to slaughter a massive male brown bear about twice his own weight. But remember, the tiger 'Ochkarik' is a habitual bear-killer. He, like most male Amur tigers, knows how to skillfully kill bears. Amur tigers have the size, skill, strength, power and lethal weaponry needed to attack, subdue and kill even a significantly larger bear than themselves. Add to this, being a natural born killer, a phenomenal killing machine that has a strong vindictive nature and is specifically built for hunting, subduing and killing large dangerous animals up to 7 times its own weight, then you can see why the tiger 'Ochkarik' was able to kill such a huge bear. The male tiger 'Dima' (also a bear specialist), with only 3 canines was able to easily dispatch a large, similar-sized adult brown bear sow in an instant. This confirms that tigers have the skill, weaponry and power to take out a large bear with ease. Nature has proven over and over again, countless times, that size doesn't always matter. We see this in human fighters as well. There are countless examples of smaller guys dominating and knocking out fighters significantly larger and stronger than they are. Why? because the smaller fighter was more skilled, experienced, faster, powerful and more agile. Despite Chlamida's immense size, being a bear, he was a true omnivore by nature, who's diet consists predominantly of plants, berries, acorns and pine nuts. Whereas the tiger 'Ochkarik' being a hyper-carnivorous apex predator, only lives off the flesh of bears and other animals he hunts and slaughters (i.e. a far superior, better-armed and accustomed killer). Hence why most Russian experts, naturalists and biologists favour the male tiger in a fight against even a very large male brown bear. The huge male brown bear 'Chlamida' :  *This image is copyright of its original author And his killer 'Ochkarik' :  *This image is copyright of its original author
Some people consider the Ussuri brown bear to be larger than the Amur tiger. But recent camera trap photos of male tigers and male brown bears marking the same trees, show the tiger to be the larger animal. Here are some examples:
Wildlife photographer Sergey Gorshkov managed to capture on camera a tiger and brown bear on the same tree. The tiger looks massive, bigger than this bear, even though the bear is stood closer to the camera:  *This image is copyright of its original author "I managed to shoot a Siberian tiger and a brown bear near an old birch, and I myself tried to get to the tiger's marks. Let's compare who is bigger - the Siberian tiger, the brown bear. The tiger and the brown bear are worthy and equal rivals! It's hard to say who will win, I will definitely lose! What is your opinion, who is stronger?" https://www.instagram.com/p/CeI5xFrqlRi/ Here's a male tiger and male brown bear size comparison, photo from Durmin Game Reserve, April 2022. (Photo: Alexander Batalov) The tiger appears to be the slightly larger animal. If the tiger was stood closer to the tree like the bear is, the tiger would be taller:  *This image is copyright of its original author https://www.facebook.com/amurtigercenter...56/?type=3 Then there's this well known photograph of the huge male tiger 'Beast' and a huge male brown bear on the same tree. Although the big bear stands closer to the tree, the tiger is still taller. If the tiger was to stand closer to the tree like the bear is, the tiger would be clearly taller. Also note, the brown bears thicker and shaggier fur coat gives off an illusion that it's bigger or more robust than it really is:  *This image is copyright of its original author Russian specialist Alexey Gotvansky states: This big bear has been living here for a long time. You can’t confuse him with anyone because of his height and power. And the tiger, which has already become a celebrity, is the Beast, - Alexey Gotvansky notes. - Comparing photos, you can also understand how close the bear is to the gigantic size of a tiger." https://hab.mk.ru/social/2021/07/23/foto...vedem.html Although this male brown bear was described to be a "giant bear/huge brown bear/big bear", Alexey Gotvansky's statement about the bear being "close" to the gigantic size of the tiger, implies that he thinks the tiger 'Beast' is the slightly larger animal. In general, male tigers and male brown bears are of similar size, but there's also no doubt that some adult male tigers are bigger than some adult male brown bears.
@GuateGojira @peter
Here's a video initially posted by a Chinese poster, in which biologist & field researcher Dr. Feng Limin confirms that he's seen a scientifically measured wild male Amur tiger weighing 270 kg. Some netizens asked Feng Limin about the 270 kg Amur tiger, and Feng Limin answered this question in the video. Feng Limin said: "Here, I will give you an accurate answer. I have personally seen a scientifically measured Amur tiger weighing 270 kg." The 270 kg wild Amur tiger is confirmed. 
TIGERS IN NORTHEASTERN CHINA
a - The heaviest male Amur tiger actually weighed Our member 'Betty', able in Chinese, sent me a PM in which she referred to the video 'Apex' posted in this thread (see the previous post). Dr. Feng Limin confirmed he had personally seen a wild male Amur tiger of 270 kg (596 pounds). The male was weighed and Feng Limin stated the weight is accurate. According to 'Betty', Dr. Feng Limin is preparing a paper in which the tiger will be mentioned. I don't think it's superfluous to add Feng Limin, in a post on a Chinese forum not so long ago (I saw a copy), stated more than one male in northeastern China exceeded 250 kg. b - The young male Amur tiger that attacked a car a year ago A little over a year ago, a young male Amur tiger made headlines in northeastern China. He 'attacked' a field worker and a car. Videos were posted and his weight (225 kg or 497 pounds) was discussed. Here's an article that was published 30-05-2022: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-05-30/Li...index.html According to the article, the tiger really was a young male. I doubt if he, as was suggested, even was 2-3 years of age when he was captured. In the video in the article (see above), it was stated the young tiger moved from young roe deer to adult wild boars in the period he was monitored. This 'upgrade' in prey selection isn't typical for a 3-year old male, but for a younger animal. The Russians, as you may remember, captured a number of youngsters a few years ago. After rehab, they were released into the wild and monitored for quite some time. Their progress was described (referring to articles published on the site of the Amur Tiger Center). The conclusion was young males and females (18-24 months of age) hunted young bears, wolves, adult deer and adult male wild boars. Most young males ranging between 18-36 months are 140-180 kg (310-398 pounds), but some are heavier. The young male captured in northeastern China was weighed. He really was 225 kg (497 pounds). c - The weight of adult wild male Amur tigers in northeastern China The weight of wild Amur tigers has been discussed by many for quite some time. Nearly all debates were based on a table published in 2005. That table, discussed in this thread more than once, says adult wild male Amur tigers today (referring to males weighed in the Bikin Valley in the period 1992-2004) average 176,4 kg (389 pounds). The problem is the table has a number of young adult males. As there are significant differences between young adult males and mature males (6-12 year of age), the question is if they should have been included. Information about captive male Amur tigers suggests they grow until they are 7-8 years of age. This is confirmed by skull measurements. As a general rule, skulls of mature males are a bit larger and heavier. My guess is it isn't different in wild male Amur tigers. The sample (referring to the table mentioned above) also included a male that, as a result of his bad condition, had to be 'euthanized' later. What I'm saying is the sample isn't representative for the population. If a table is based on a small sample, outliers have a significant effect on the average. Reliable information about the size of wild Amur tigers published after 2005 suggests adult males, like Miquelle said, average about 195 kg (430 pounds), maybe a bit more. Until now, the heaviest male actually weighed was a young adult of 212 kg (469 pounds), but researchers found prints of larger males. This is important, as the correlation between heel width and weight in wild male Amur tigers seems to be quite strong. Most males range between 10,0-12,5 cm. Prints with a heel width of 13,0-13,5 cm or more have been found more than once in Sichote-Alin. In northeastern China, a print with a heel width of 14,0 cm was recently found. The information about the weight of some large males in northeastern China provided by Feng Limin is important, as it confirms wild males, as historic records suggest, can reach, and even exceed, 250 kg (552 pounds) in good conditions. As far as is known today, adult wild male Amur tigers range between 140-270 kg (310-596 pounds). Both weights (referring to the old male 'Tikhon' and the male recently weighed in northeastern China) have been confirmed. d - About captive and wild male Amur tigers Reliable information says wild male tigers are larger and heavier than their captive relatives. This is the case in Sumatran tigers (Panthera tigris sumatrae), Indo-Chinese tigers (Panthera tigris corbetti), Indian tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) and Chinese tigers (Panthera tigris amoyensis). It's unlikely it's any different in Amur tigers. The average weight of captive adult males ranges between 172,7 kg (380 pounds, Hengdaohezi) and 224,2 kg (496 pounds, my sample). The average of both averages is 198,45 kg (438 pounds), but the averages in two Chinese papers recently discussed in this thread suggest the average could be 200-210 kg (442-464 pounds). Wild males, as was stated above, are a bit heavier than their captive relatives (about 5%). This means mature wild male Amur tigers (6-12 years of age) most probably average 210-222 kg (464-490 pounds) in good conditions. If young adults (4-5 years of age) and males over 12 years of age would be included, the average for all would be close to 190 kg (420 pounds), meaby a bit more. This is apart from conditions and individual variation. Using the table I posted some time ago (in this thread), one could conclude individual variation in captive male Amur tigers is pronounced. The range in weight I found (142,9-320 kg) was significant. The additional information suggests disease and age have a significant effect. Same for wild male Amur tigers. Example. One male, known for his preference for (adult female brown) bears, was captured three times. The first time, he was 206 kg (455 pounds) on what seemed (referring to the photograph below) to be an empty stomach. The second time, he was 170 kg (375 pounds). This, mind you, was on a full stomach. Without the roe deer he had eaten, he would have been closer to 150 kg (331 pounds). The last time he was captured, he was 202 kg (446 pounds). He entered the table discussed above (see paragraph -c-) at 192 kg (424 pounds), but the range (150-206 kg) was considerable. The first time he was captured, he was the heaviest they had weighed. The photograph below (including L. Kerley), however, shows a male of average size. This was confirmed by the measurements (referring to the table mentioned above). Although quite lean, his legs were long and powerful:  *This image is copyright of its original author I don't know if the male below compared for length, but he seems more robust in just about every department:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's one of the largest males I know of. This tiger, known as 'The Beast', has a heel width of 13,5 cm:  *This image is copyright of its original author I'm not suggesting tiger 'Dale' (also known as 'Dima') was a smallish tiger (far from it), but photographs and videos suggest some males well exceed his (maximum) weight (206 kg or 455 pounds). This impression, albeit in an indirect way (the tigers above, as far as I know, were not weighed and measured), was confirmed by Feng Limin. Returning to the conditions wild Amur tigers face in wild Russia. In the Russian Far East, winters can be long (up to 6 months). Although tigers frozen to death have been found ('Der Tiger', V. Mazak, 1983), healthy tigers do not seem to be affected by the cold. Their main problem, if anything, is food. If wild herbivores are decimated as a result of a crop failure or a disease, tigers will be affected. This, many think, is one of the reasons they learned to hunt bears. As a result of a lack of reliable information, it's impossible to say if wild Amur tigers, as many seem to think, increased in size in the last 3 decades. Maybe only few tigers were captured and measured in the period 1992-2004 and maybe more tigers are monitored today. Also remember the tigers in the table published in 2005 were captured in or close to one region only (the Bikin Valley). In that period (1992-2004), in that region, there were problems with Aldrich footsnares. According to those who know (referring to an article discussed in this thread), these had an effect on male tigers in particular. The authors, without a shadow of doubt, proved that males able to escape the footsnares did so at a cost. The damage to their teeth was substantial. It no doubt affected their health. One could even say Aldrich footsnares had an effect on the table published in 2005 and be close. e - Are Amur tigers in northeastern China larger (heavier) than Amur tigers in Russia? Historical records suggest tigers shot in Manchuria (northeastern China) were larger than tigers shot in Russia, but the information I have (referring to, for instance, 'Notes on the Siberian long-haired tiger, Panthera tigris altaica (Temminck, 1844), with a remark on Temminck's Mammal Volume of the 'Fauna Japonica', V. Mazak, 1967; 'Der Tiger', V. Mazak, 1983 and 'Die Säugetiere der Sowjetunion', Band III, V.G. Heptner and A.A. Sludskij, German translation, 1980), suggests this, most probably, wasn't the case at the level of averages. As to today's Amur tigers. Based on what I know (referring to books, papers, documentaries, videos, articles, interviews and photographs), it seems that tigers in the northern part of Sichote-Alin in particular (Khabarowski Krai), compared to their relatives in northeastern China, aren't lacking in the size department. Information about tigers shot in Korea suggests they might have been at bit smaller than those shot in Russia and Manchuria, but the heaviest male Amur tiger accepted by biologists, at 254 kg (560 pounds), was shot near the Korean border and it wasn't the only large male shot in that period in that region. It is, however, likely there were, and are, regional differences in size. Based on the information provided by Feng Limin, tigers in northeastern China seem to be as large as those in the Khabarowsk region. Northeastern China (recent information) has 50-60 tigers only. This includes cubs, subadults, young adults, mature adults and old tigers. There's no information about the number of males in northeastern China, but it's clear the number is limited. In spite of that, at least 3 males, one of them a subadult, reached or exceeded 225 kg (497 pounds). Of these, one is 270 kg (596 pounds). That's still without tiger T26. He entered northeastern China from the north in 2015 and never left. Those who know think this male is even heavier than the 270 kg tiger (...). If you visit the thread 'Amur Tigers', you can find a bit more about this male. A new member from China recently posted about this tiger (post 905). I wonder if this is the male who left the print with a heel width of 14,0 cm. If T26, blind in one eye, is as large as they think he is, northeastern China has 4 male tigers reaching or exceeding 225 kg. There's no information about the size of tigers in the Khabarowsk region, but those who know think this region produces large individuals. The lack of accurate information, to be sure, isn't a result of a lack of opportunities, but of a decision: the Russians don't want to capture healthy adult males because of the risks involved. Some of these were descibed by S. Kolchin and P. Maystrenko ('The snare for tiger', 2013). I'm not sure, but it is possible the Chinese use a different method to capture a wild tiger. f - Videos f1 - The Northeast Tiger and Leopard National Park (NTLNP) In this video (May 2020), you'll find a bit more about the new 14,600 square km Northeast Tiger and Leopard National Park (NTLNP). In this park, infrared cameras as used. Although short (4:40), the video has footage of a few Amur tigers and an Amur leopard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQTgfW-exXY f2 - Russia and China This video (Nov. 2020) offers information about the cooperation between Russia and China in the department of Amur tiger protection. Although quite long (16:42), it's interesting. It also has footage of wild Amur tigers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEPgF9xjcIA f3 - The Korean perspective Here's a shortish (05:02) video about Amur tigers from the Korean perspective. The Korean perspective in a post about tigers in northeastern China? Yes, Amurtigerwise there is a connection between southeastern Russia, northeastern China and Korea. The video (Jan. 2021) also offers a bit more about the movie about a very large Amur tiger discussed some time ago ('An old hunter's tale'): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHhf1AKnW94 In the thread 'Amur Tigers' (post 905), our new member from China posted a picture in which the old male from the movie and T26 (see -f4-) are compared. I hope our new member doesn't mind me using the result of his work:  *This image is copyright of its original author f4 - Tiger T26 The tiger in this video (Feb. 2022) could be the large male tiger T26 discussed above (see -e-). Although the video is very short (00:12), it shows the tiger is blind in one eye: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OU1kZPFLJDU The video below (April 2022) shows the same male: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrj4nNUwuao f5 - Massive male tigers Here's a very recent (Apr. 2022) and short (00:13) video showing a massive male: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hJqsxmrkbg Compared to the tiger in the video above, the male in the video below (Apr. 2022) doesn't seems as robust: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5qw9n7iy0k Same for the tiger in this video (May 2022): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axrKaU86voA One more (May 2022): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SquBJUGZy4w And the last one (may 2022). It offers a very nice view of a healthy adult male Amur tiger. Interesting for painters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFKKL0MrILI f6 - The young male arrested for jumping a field worker and attacking a car Last year (2021), a young male tiger was accused of disturbing the domestic peace in a village somewhere in northeastern China. He denied all charges, but accepted a deal after seeing the video (Apr. 2021): https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=OwqygpyQnb8 After doing time in rehab (45 days), he promised to work on his attitude and accepted a collar to make sure he would: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=798VCBd6LRg Here's a bit more about the situation in May 2022: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-05-30/Li...index.html Another video (May 2022): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwwSbJ4_sd0 His name, by the way, is Wandashan No. 1. Every now and then, a video about his life in the forests of northeastern China will be posted. 
Here is the largest pugmark measured by Dr. Feng: 16.5 - 17 cm wide and 15 cm long.
Most likely belonged to T-26???  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
(04-06-2022, 12:38 AM)tigerluver Wrote:(04-06-2022, 12:29 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:(04-02-2022, 07:54 PM)GreenGrolar Wrote: here is another interesting account: Sorry for the late reply, so preoccupied in the last several months. As @tigerluver is not back yet, kindly request @peter to share his expert observation about those newly discovered tiger fossils of the late Pleistocene from the Southwest region of China which was considered as the cradle of the tiger species after the biotic crisis of the Toba eruption. Probably discovered from some caverns, that's why these fossils were not black colored like those discovered in the muddy peatland. Here is two P4 premolars, and the larger one is 42 mm.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Here is a fragment of the canine crown, and the AP diameter is already 32 mm, and could likely attain 50 mm in the skull insertion part.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author In summary, the late Pleistocene tigers from China were depicted with super massive dentition as expected, and certainly the progenitor for the modern tiger subspecies in the Asian mainland. Those giant Pleistocene tigers started to re-colonize the rest of Asia millennia after the Toba eruption when the ecosystem in Asia started to recover from that biotic crisis. However, only the modern Amur tiger looks like an exact replica of their forefather; because they had the similar adaptation in a similar landmass of East Asia. The Bengal tiger is just as their biological offspring as the Amur tiger, but they coped themselves in a different landmass of South Asia; therefore they became morphologically more shifted from their late Pleistocene ancestors. The giant Bornean tiger was technically a giant Malayan/Sumatran tiger, and morphologically they were indistinguishable from the modern southern tiger subspecies. The modern Sumatran tiger is now confirmed to be a Mainland/Sunda tiger hybrid. So in case for the giant Bornean tiger, they were result of the re-expansion of the Mainland tiger population after the Toba eruption and hybridized themselves with some remaining population of the Ngandong tiger. The modern Javan/Bali tigers were belonged to the same Sunda tiger lineage of the Ngandong tiger. So this proves that the Ngandong tiger didn't get completely wiped out during the Toba eruption, and their remaining population mostly got absorbed during the re-expansion of the giant tigers from the Mainland Asia, while some others got isolated and evolved into the smaller Javan/Bali tigers. From the 1000 pounds giant Bornean tiger to the 250 pounds modern Sumatran tiger, and this only shows how resourceful tiger as a whole species which can strongly cope themselves in different adaptation that ranging from Cave lion-sized to almost leopard-sized.  (09-06-2022, 02:40 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: The giant Bornean tiger was technically a giant Malayan/Sumatran tiger, and morphologically they were indistinguishable from the modern southern tiger subspecies. The modern Sumatran tiger is now confirmed to be a Mainland/Sunda tiger hybrid. So in case for the giant Bornean tiger, they were result of the re-expansion of the Mainland tiger population after the Toba eruption and hybridized themselves with some remaining population of the Ngandong tiger. I would like to read about this tiger that inhabited Borneo. If possible, provide reading material. Thanks! (09-06-2022, 11:33 PM)Matias Wrote:(09-06-2022, 02:40 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: The giant Bornean tiger was technically a giant Malayan/Sumatran tiger, and morphologically they were indistinguishable from the modern southern tiger subspecies. The modern Sumatran tiger is now confirmed to be a Mainland/Sunda tiger hybrid. So in case for the giant Bornean tiger, they were result of the re-expansion of the Mainland tiger population after the Toba eruption and hybridized themselves with some remaining population of the Ngandong tiger. Here is one. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1...19.1625348 Also wait for the return of @tigerluver, see if he got something new in store for us. During the late Pleistocene era, the Cave lions had dominated the Eurasian steppe belt, whereas the Pleistocene tigers had dominated a particular vicinity next door AKA the Manchuria. There were individuals from both side to seldomly wander into the domain of its adversarial species, but all ended up being isolated.
Pending, USD 55.00 to read...
 It is an interesting question that a large tiger occupies Borneo in MIS 2. The ecological conditions of this time are very different compared to the warming that we have had since the Holocene. The island now has only small cats (the absence of the Panthera Pardus in Borneo and also in Sumatra) is a point where some ambivalence of motives must be found. This specimen may have occupied the island only while it was connected to the mainland - a cyclical/periodic, non-constant and stable occupation movement. I find it extremely unlikely that tigers occupied Borneu in the last millennia of our era. I'm talking about natural occupation, excluding anthropogenic introductions, whether intentional or not, during the millennia that peoples from the tiger range began to occupy this island. Being a large-bodied specimen, his adaptation to the insular environment was too much for him. Why the tiger and the leopard when they arrived in Borneo, through land bridges, did not remain as residents is the question that I think is most interesting. The animals that prey on the mainland are almost all present in Borneo. Contrary to what the author of the article suggests: "A mixture of ecological and anthropological factors is probably the cause of the disappearance of the Borneo tiger"; I would bet 100% on the ecological issue, more precisely on the physiological inability, due to the wet and humid environment, which notoriously has to do with other environmental considerations which made it difficult to position itself in the ecological niche of this large island.
The glacial period was rather short that lasted for about couple of thousand years.
So this Bornean giant was rather a temporary visitor or a short term resident? Guess by the end of glacial period, most giant tigers might have been retreated back to the Asian mainland.
GRIZZLY
Thanks for the info. I've measured about 400 big cat skulls, but never saw a pm4 reaching 40 mm, let alone 42 mm. The large molars no doubt were an adaption to the animals they hunted. Indian tigers, and those living on the alluvial plains in the northeastern part in particular, still hunt large herbivores. I never measured the skull of a male tiger from, say, Kaziranga, but it even seems to show in skulls of captive Indian tigers. Compared to those of captive Amur tigers, they are a bit more massive (relatively heavier). The length and width of the upper canines in Amur tiger skulls, however, is unsurpassed. Amur tiger skulls also are longer. As to the evolution of tigers. Guate wrote a few posts (this thread), but that was a long time ago. My guess is our readers would appreciate a bit more about the difference between Late Pleistocene tigers and those populating Asia today. They know tigers nearly vanished after the Toba eruption about 75,000 years ago and repopulated parts of southern, western and northern Asia in different waves, but that's about it. How were tigers able to recover and why do you think Amur tigers are more closely related to Late Pleistocene tigers than other subspecies? Some years ago, in this thread, I discussed a document of Baryshnikov about the bones found in a number of caves in southeastern Russia. The skulls suggest Late Pleistocene lions, although smaller than those from eastern Europe and the western part of Russia, were still larger than those of the tigers inhabiting the same caves some time later. The tiger bones suggest they, sizewise, more or less compared to today's Amur tigers. After the lions disappeared, tigers, most probably, increased in size in the Late Pleistocene and early Holocene. The owner of the skull below was a very large male. I've never seen anything come close in the natural history museums I visited:  *This image is copyright of its original author Could it be the skull of Late Pleistocene tigers was an adaption to hunting powerful animals like wild boars? Ussuri wild boars are the largest in the world by a margin. I don't know if the skull below is from an Ussuri wild boar, but the owner allegedly was 354 kg. It's massive in all respects. The other skull is from an adult wolf:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's another photograph (ventral view) of a skull of an Ussuri wild boar (top) and the skull of a Sardinian wild boar in order to show the size of the Ussuri wild boar skull. This photograph was also posted at Carnivora some years ago. I got both photographs from a former member of Wildfact:  *This image is copyright of its original author Indian tigers, like I said above, still hunt large herbivores. Although some males living in the northeastern part are massive and big-skulled, they still do not come close to their relatives from the Late Pleistocene and early Holocene. Why is that? Unfortunately, I can't join the discussion at the moment. The reason is I'm trying to contact the authors of a paper discussed some years ago (in this thread). One of the captive Amur tigers they discussed (a male shot in the Koln Zoo in 2012) was one of the largest I know of. In spite of his age (the tiger was only 4 years old when it was shot), he was long (HB 240 cm, tail 96,5 cm and total length 336,5 cm) and massive. The photographs of the skull, even allowing for the angle, suggest it was longer than the skull of the adult wild male Amur tiger V. Mazak measured in the Berlin natural history museum some decades ago (383 mm). My aim is to measure and photograph the skull this year. Here's a photograph of the skull. Watch the scale at the bottom:  *This image is copyright of its original author This, for comparison, is the skull of a wild adult male Caspian tiger shot in 1959:  *This image is copyright of its original author Recent research says Panthera tigris virgata and Panthera tigris altaica are closely related, but the skulls I saw point in another direction. The profile of the upper skull of nearly all captive Amur tigers I saw is flatter than in all other subspecies. The upper skull of Caspian tigers (referring to photographs, drawings and descriptions), on the other hand, is as vaulted as those of tigers in southeastern Asia. The skull below is from a different male, but the profile seems (also referring to the description of Panthera tigris virgata in 'Der Tiger', v. Mazak, 1983) to be typical for Caspian tigers:  *This image is copyright of its original author There are more structural differences. Mandibulas of Amur tigers are nearly always straight, whereas those of Caspian tigers often seem to be more concave. As a general rule, skulls of (captive) Amur tigers are longer and the upper canines are both longer and heavier. As a result of the larger upper canines, rostrums of Amur tigers are (absolutely and relatively) wider and stronger. It's almost a different animal. Anyhow. See what you can do.
Frozen Planet II - Tigers hunting Bears
Yesterday on BBC One, I watched the first part (of 6 parts) of David Attenborough's new series: Frozen Planet 2. In the program, filmmakers captured footage of a Siberian tigress hunting for bears in a cave. After hearing reports of tigers hunting bears in Russia, and how tigers even enter bear caves to kill hibernating bears, the filmmakers placed camera's outside and inside a bear cave, hoping to capture for the first time ever on camera, a Siberian tiger hunting and killing a bear. The filmmakers also captured interesting footage of a tiger licking the bark of a tree, which some time earlier, had a brown bear rub against it. The tiger was licking the tree as if it was craving and dreaming of eating the brown bear: "And then there’s the beautiful, dangerous, near-extinct Siberian tiger, which appears to lament the presence of a (brown) bear by a tree. The tiger proceeds to lick the bark, as if dreaming of the meat that once stood there." https://www.culturewhisper.com/r/tv/froz...ough/17144 Here's the tigress coming out of the bears cave, after failing to catch the bear. The Himalayan bear (months earlier) had retreated to the farthest part of the cave, and the tigress was simply too big to get through, so she had no choice but to leave:  *This image is copyright of its original author Siberian tiger v bear: even David Attenborough ‘wowed’ by Frozen Planet II The tension in the air was palpable as the group of television producers waited with bated breath to see what would happen as the Siberian tiger crept into the bear’s cave. This was a groundbreaking moment in the making of wildlife documentaries, and one that will be seen by millions who tune into Frozen Planet II. It took three years of persistence and trial-and-error filming in Russian forests using remote cameras to get the footage of the tigers entering bears’ caves, said Elizabeth White – who worked on the original Frozen Planet and produced the award-winning “iguanas vs snakes” episode of Planet Earth II. The tiger footage captured such a unique moment, it even took David Attenborough by surprise. White told the Observer that, after hearing reports that tigers sometimes caught hibernating bears, catching this on film was “a labour of love” and “seemed like finding needles in a haystack”. “We completely failed the first year, so we shifted our location in season two and got some lovely shots – but no real substance. Then a local photographer said to us that our cameras were too big – the tigers are seeing them. We looked at the technology he was using, and sure enough the tigers were detecting the larger cameras.” By then, “technology had moved on”, said White “and we were able to get a smaller camera that was high enough resolution, and we managed to get footage of tigers entering the caves.” https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/s...c-wildlife “We also filmed a Siberian tiger looking for bears in Russia, which was incredible,” says the episode’s producer Alex Lanchester. https://www.whattowatch.com/watching-gui...ed-to-know Tigress hunting for bears:  *This image is copyright of its original author All in all, this program and footage confirms that even tigresses actively hunt bears in Russia. Many people think that mostly male tigers actively hunt bears, but more and more recent evidence (2020-2022) strongly indicates that even female tigers are quite active bear hunters. Add to this, that there are numerous accounts from both scientific literature and recent news reports from Russian specialists and biologists, of tigresses, even juvenile tigresses, hunting and killing bears. Bears are common prey for tigers and are a basic part of the Amur tigers diet (Sergey Kolchin). To capture footage of wild Amur tigers killing bears or any animal in summer and autumn, is almost impossible, so the best way is to place small cameras outside of bear caves to capture such an event. Chris Morgan, a bear ecologist, wildlife researcher and conservationist, also learned that Amur tigers regularly prey on bears (both black and brown bears) and that some tigers actually kill and eat bears for a living. This was from his expedition and trip to the Russian Far East with Korean Siberian tiger expert and naturalist - Sooyong Park. Go to 8:54 in this video: Chris Morgan states: "Some of these cats (tigers) eat bears for a living. Pretty darn impressive carnivores." They also eat some surprising animals - like brown bears! In one study, one male tiger ate more brown bears than anything else! Now thats one tough carnivore! I've worked with bears for many years, so this fact really stuck with me." https://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/siberian...lbum/7907/ Filmmakers (Frozen Planet 2) also captured footage of a huge, very robust and very powerfully built male Amur tiger. The tiger had a massive skull, a large, thick neck, huge shoulders and forelimbs. A very impressive specimen. In fact, this male tiger looked larger, more powerful and more impressive than any of the male tigers that featured in Franz Hafner's recent documentary (Amur Tiger - Master of the Taiga, 2021) of tigers in the Bikin River Valley. (09-10-2022, 06:38 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: The glacial period was rather short that lasted for about couple of thousand years.Everything should start by reading the article Dr. Shaheer Sherani, and the key point would be the dating of the mandibular fossil. The Ngandong tiger (no further depth) has its fossils dated to approximately 190,000 years ago on the island of Java, which places it very far from the MIS 2 time period. Recall that the last glacial maximum occurred between 24,000 and 18,000 years ago – period when the Malay mainland and other islands were connected to Borneo (Sundaland). So, any prospect of the presence of this tiger in Borneo in MIS 2 is based on the veracity of the material collected and its undisputed dating. Moving forward, has anyone read the article? In the general case of felines, the insular environment directs the movement in body reduction. Exceptions are possible and the range of competing prey and predators and other ecological forces may have driven evolution towards gigantism. It is not necessary to have “periodic glacial maximums” to have a landscape of these islands very different from what they are today, since the constant glacial period moved the tidal cycle largely throughout the Pleistocene, bringing reductions in sea level by several tens of meters compared to what we currently have, presenting corridors/passages, as well as the territorial extension of the islands were much larger. However, Borneo only emerged from geographic isolation when this greater connection took place. So, it is not a mistake to consider that the movement of animal life, including early humans (Erectus, Floresiensis and even Denisovans) was done with some regularity. As we know practically nothing of its time scale (arrival, stay, departure), it is not possible to distinguish whether Ngandong Tiger was a visitor occasioned by the wide swath of land (Sundaland) or a resident of multiple generations after Borneo's return to geographic isolation ( island environment). We have been in the Pleistocene ice age for 2,600,000, with some periods of glaciation lasting up to hundreds of thousands of years, interspersed with tens of thousands of years of warming (interglaciation). This change is a constant and its slowness is what provides animals with their adaptation. Simply put, I suggest that Ngandong tiger was the product of a time when its catchment area was not geographically isolated for long. Consequently, he was a long-term resident of the other islands and an occasional visitor to Borneo. Excluding this large island, does it appear that there is no fossil record of it in MIS 2 on the other islands of Sunda? Could this specimen found in Borneo also be a continental Pleistocene tiger? Are there morphological differences between the continental Pleistocene tiger and Ngandong? Wouldn't it be the same tiger surviving in different environments? |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 73 Guest(s) |