There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---
WildFact YouTube Channel, You can share your video via WildFact YouTube Channel, Click here to read Details

  • 1 Vote(s) - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Closed 
Tigers and Brown bears - who are really stronger.

India Panther Offline
Regular Member
***
#46

(01-01-2019, 01:07 AM)brotherbear Wrote: The reason that the brown bear is stronger, as stated in the scientific posts I presented, is his build. Greater girth of limbs, neck, and torso. More massive bones for greater muscle attachment. Look at how narrow a build this muscular tiger has.

Dimensions doesn't change true strength. What I mean, it doesn't mean you're strong just because you're being bulkier than a muscular person. 

Brown bears got very thuck fur coat, with a large amount of fat covering it's whole body. So, no matter how thick it was. That has nothing to do with what the actual strength!
1 user Likes Panther's post

India brotherbear Offline
Grizzly Enthusiast
*****
#47

I gave you information from biologists. You spam about fur and fat. Go ahead and post the last word Panther. That'l make you right about everything.  Dislike
 Grizzly  - Boss of the Woods.
        
  
             

India Panther Offline
Regular Member
***
#48
( This post was last modified: 01-01-2019, 02:14 AM by Panther )

(01-01-2019, 01:34 AM)brotherbear Wrote: I gave you information from biologists. You spam about fur and fat. Go ahead and post the last word Panther. That'l make you right about everything.  Dislike

Opinion of a biologist. However I showed the otherwise from former russian biologist SP kuncherenko.

Don't call me spamming, when you're the one who spamming here about opinions .

Discussing about fur and fat is not spam. I wonder if you know what "spam" is!

India Panther Offline
Regular Member
***
#49
( This post was last modified: 01-01-2019, 02:03 AM by Panther )

Muscle Fiber Characteristics of Competitive Power Lifters

"MHC I being the slowest to contract and MHC IIb being the fastest. With this being the case, it is sometimes suggested that type IIB fibers are desirable for strength and power. However, current literature suggests that these fibers convert to type IIA regardless of what type of physical activity they are
engaged in (4, 10, 14, 38, 39, 40).

Previous investigations of competitive lifters (i.e.,
power lifters and Olympic-style weightlifters) have determined that 53–60% of the muscle fibers in the vastus lateralis are type II, which are sometimes referred to as fast twitch (18–20). Among untrained men, fiber-type percentages are not always related to physical performances (26, 28), which is not unreasonable since many physical performance tasks require contribu-
tions from a large number of physiological systems
and are not dependent on just fiber-type percentages.
On the other hand, isokinetic strength has been suc-
cessfully used as a predictor of fast- and slow-twitch
fiber percentages (45). What may be more important
are the actual cross-sectional areas of each of the major
fiber types. In men, type II fibers typically comprise a
larger cross-sectional area (38). When competitive lifters have been studied, the areas of type II fibers are approximately 8,000 mm2, whereas type I fibers are approximately 5,000 mm2 (10, 42–44). It has been suggested that competitive strength performances may be positively affected when the cross-sectional areas of type II fibers equals 60–90% (25). This investigation
will determine if such a relationship is present. It is
hypothesized that the unique training characteristics
of power lifters will produce distinct differences in the physiological characteristics of skeletal muscle when compared with not only untrained subjects, but also
to strength athletes in other sports."

"The PL exhibited a greater percentage of MHC IIa compared with CON, although the percentage of MHC IIb was not significantly different. The PL exhibited a similar percentage of MHC IIa as that of
weightlifters but a much larger percentage of MHC IIb (male weightlifters, X¯ 6 SE; MHC IIa 5 64.0 6 2.3%; MHC IIb 5 1.4 6 1.4%; 14). Such differences could be due to the functional requirements of the respective sports, or due to the training status of the subjects at the time of the biopsy. "

Source: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=w...6287925998

India Rishi Offline
Moderator
*****
Moderators
#50
( This post was last modified: 01-01-2019, 06:43 AM by Rishi )

@Spalea Stop.

@Panther Just report them... Don't keep replying.

Thread closed till it's 2nd January at Hawii Isles. Cool your heads.
"Everything not saved will be lost."







Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB