The Cave Lion (Panthera spelaea and Panthera fossilis)

[peter]

(11-05-2018, 11:25 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:

(11-05-2018, 11:21 AM)Wolverine Wrote:

(11-05-2018, 11:10 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote:

(11-05-2018, 11:07 AM)Wolverine Wrote: @tigerluver , @GuateGojira probably you have heard about the famous liger Hercules, having shoulder height "only" 49 inches (125 cm) it weighted 418 kg, we could imagine what will be a weight of liger 135-140 cm tall. According other version this liger was 132 cm tall. Of course Hercules as a domestic animal was a bit overweight. 

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/herc..._n_3920158

*This image is copyright of its original author

Most male ligers' skull seems to attain 16-17 inches, do you think Hercules' skull could be even more exceptional?

Its written that Hercules head was 457 mm long (18 inches):
http://www.liger-hercules.com/liger-hercules-head-size-

So that record P. fossilis had a skull 485 mm... I'm quite sure that it weight was half ton.

The head length is actually smaller than the skull length.

There was a renowned captive Amur tiger with a 500 mm head, but his skull was definitely less than that.

According to Dr. Gewalt, the Duisburg zoo tiger was 210 cm. in head and body (and 320 cm. in total length measured in a straight line). His head had a length of 50 cm. The captive male measured by V. Mazak in the Prague zoo had a head and body length of 220 cm. in a straight line. His head had a length of 45 cm. The skull of that male was 371 mm. in greatest total length. It's likely the Duisburg zoo tiger had a longer skull, but it was never measured.

Assuming the skull of the captive male tiger shot in the Koln zoo some years ago really was at least 410 mm. in greatest total length, it can't be excluded that exceptional captive male Amur tigers can reach a greatest skull length of 400-420 mm.

An average Late Pleistocene European male lion might have compared to the largest captive male Amur tigers today. The male found close to Siegburg (Germany) had an estimated head and body length of 210 cm. In greatest total skull length, he compared to a very large wild male Amur tiger shot in Manchuria. The skull of that tiger was measured by V. Mazak in Berlin some decades ago. Based on the skull length of some Late Pleistocene European lions, it's very likely that large males well exceeded 210 cm. in head and body length measured in a straight line.

Baryshnikov measured skulls of Amur tigers and Late Pleistocene lions found in a number of caves in the Russian Far East in the sixties and seventies of the last century. Sizewise, the tigers back then (40 000 - 50 000 years ago) more or less compared to those of today. Although not small by any means, they were outsized in all departments. This although the lions in eastern Russia were smaller than those in Europe. 

Lions started losing size in the Early and Middle Pleistocene. In central and eastern parts of Russia, as well as Berengia, this process was accelerated. The most likely reason is they needed more energy to find smaller (and more agile) herbivores. Skulls of male lions found in caves in eastern Russia showed a number of 'tigerlike' treats. Could have been a result of a more solitary way of life. In the end, however, they didn't make it. Amur tigers, smaller and still more solitary, did.

After the Pleistocene lions disappeared, tigers added some inches and pounds, but my guess is they never reached the size of Pleistocene lions. In the Holocene, largely as a result of the rise of humans, tigers adapted once more. Although exceptional individuals were seen every now and then until recently, the conditions to get to their potential are gone. In southeastern Russia and northeastern China, that is. When they get more room in that region, chances are we might see a few exceptional individuals in the near future. At the moment, northern India and Nepal produce the largest wild big cats. The reason is quite a bit of room, protection and plenty of large herbivores. In Africa, for the same reasons, lions in Kruger are larger than in other regions (averages).

Although they used the same caves, it isn't known if lions and tigers co-existed in southeastern Russia 50 000 years ago. My guess is they could have. I don't think there would have been a lot of competition, if at all. Both cats most probably used different areas in a different way. Furthermore, Amur tigers were smaller than Late Pleistocene lions. My guess is they would have avoided them. Today, Amur tigers co-exist with brown bears. Although adult male tigers in particular hunt bears up to the size of adult females every now and then, male brown bears are not hunted. Male brown bears displace tigresses every now and then, but not adult male tigers. Although conflicts are not uncommon, adult males are not often involved. What we have, suggests that young adults (tigers) and desperate individuals (bears) are most likely to enter an all-out. 

But bears are cleptocrats often visiting tiger kills, which will result in an increased chance to meet the owner of the kill. Pleistocene lions were hunters, meaning they most probably seldom visited kills of Amur tigers. Big cats eliminate scavengers to preserve energy. Hunting smaller competitors to protect their offspring only happens when they live in close proximity. In southeastern Russia, few leopards perish in the jaws of a tiger, but in northern India and Nepal, they live in close proximity.

Just before they disappeared Pleistocene lions might have been involved in competition with Amur tigers, but incidents most probably were few and far between. Baryshnikov didn't find anything pointing towards competition between both cats, but some bones showed that both cats might have competed with hyenas and wolves. Reply