Who is the "king" of tigers? - Bengal or Amur

[BorneanTiger]

(12-27-2018, 07:09 PM)johnny rex Wrote: I see. We shouldn't depending too much on official record of skull sizes though as there are always larger skulls out there. For example, according to the official scientific records the largest lion skull is 406 mm long and around 279-280 mm wide but then there is the Lionzilla skull which exceeded those dimensions. I think same goes to tigers.

Anyway, I think the average difference between greatest skull length and head length is not that different. Take a look at the pictures below. Most X-rays of big cats too show there is no big difference between skull length and head length.

EDIT : The first picture I think shows an apparent difference between head length and skull length though

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Generally, though there can be noticeable differences between subspecies or populations of lions and tigers, the skulls of tigers and lions (especially Asiatic lions) are so similar, barring some differences like in the frontal regions, that Heptner and Sludskiy (pages 86–87: https://archive.org/stream/mammalsofsov2...6/mode/2up, pages 106–107: https://archive.org/stream/mammalsofsov2...6/mode/2up) asserted that the lion and tiger are each other's closest relative, denying for instance that the leopard and jaguar are the former's closest relatives! They also mention that for this reason, some zoologists placed the origin of both species in southwest Asia (Iran, Iraq etc., which had Asiatic lions and Caspian tigers). Reply