Smilodon populator

[GuateGojira]

(05-18-2022, 01:50 AM)jrocks Wrote: i think when i was looking for the sources for the comment guate asked me on earlier, there was some study that said that the christiansen and harris 2005 formula did something that underestimated the smilodon specimens they estimated i think because of the bone width although im not sure, if i find the link to that study il edit it in here

Actually they did took in count the bone width in they study, the thing is that in order to use the formulas we need to be carefull, as they do not provide a straight value, but a series of processes. For example they separate the formulas "over all" and the formulas "excluding the lynx", as the value may change because of the lynx morphology. Second, we need to differentiate between the "unweighted" and the "weighted" values, and sadly many of the figures quoted in recent years, where the authors are "apparently" using they formulas, ignore that part.

Finaly, like I said to LonePredator, Christiansen & Harris (2005) propose a series of formulas for a set of measurements and latter, they average those figures to get the final weight of that particular specimen. Using only the "lenght" or the "wide" alone it produce incorrect values. For example, if we use the "total length" value "alone" for the largest femur of Panthera atrox and the Ngadong tiger, they produce incredible low weights of only about 270 - 295 kg, which is certainly incorrect.

Using Christiansen & Harris (2005) formulas is not easy, so we need to be carefull to use it and if an author says that they use them, check what formulas or methods they use, and if they include the full set of measurements, which probably is not the case. Reply