Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Barbary Lion v Siberian Tiger
Topic Started: Oct 20 2014, 08:25 PM (31,712 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Barbary Lion - Panthera leo leo
The Barbary lion, sometimes referred to as the Atlas lion, is an African lion population that is considered extinct in the wild and is among the biggest lion subspecies. It is believed that the last Barbary lion was shot in the western Maghreb during the year 1942 near Tizi n'Tichka. The Barbary lion was first described by the Austrian zoologist Johann Nepomuk Meyer under the trinomen Felis leo barbaricus on the basis of a type specimen from Barbary. The Barbary lion was long considered one of the biggest lion subspecies. Museum specimens of male Barbary lion were described as having very dark and long-haired manes that extended over the shoulder and to the belly. Head-to-tail length of stuffed males varies from 2.35 to 2.8 m (7 ft 9 in to 9 ft 2 in), and females measure around 2.5 m (8 ft 2 in). A 19th century hunter described a large male allegedly measuring 3.25 m (10.7 ft) including a 75 cm (30 in) long tail. In some historic accounts the weight of wild males was indicated as very heavy and reaching 270 to 300 kilograms (600 to 660 lb). But the accuracy of the measurements may be questionable, and the sample size of captive Barbary lions were too small to conclude they were the biggest lion subspecies.

Posted Image

Siberian Tiger - Panthera tigris altaica
The Siberian tiger (Panthera tigris altaica), also known as the Amur tiger, is a tiger subspecies inhabiting mainly the Sikhote Alin mountain region with a small subpopulation in southwest Primorye province in the Russian Far East. In 2005, there were 331–393 adult-subadult Amur tigers in this region, with a breeding adult population of about 250 individuals. The Siberian tiger is reddish-rusty or rusty-yellow in colour, with narrow black transverse stripes. Measurements taken by scientists of the Siberian Tiger Project in Sikhote-Alin range from 178 to 208 cm (70 to 82 in) in head and body length measured in straight line, with an average of 195 cm (77 in) for males; and for females ranging from 167 to 182 cm (66 to 72 in) with an average of 174 cm (69 in). The average tail measures 99 cm (39 in) in males and 91 cm (36 in) in females. The longest male “Maurice” measured 309 cm (122 in) in total length (tail of 101 cm (40 in)) and had a chest girth of 127 cm (50 in). The longest female “Maria Ivanna” measured 270 cm (110 in) in total length (tail of 88 cm (35 in)) and had a chest girth of 108 cm (43 in). These measurements show that the present Amur tiger is longer than the Bengal tiger and the African lion. According to modern research of wild Siberian tigers in Sikhote-Alin, an average adult male of more than 35 months of age weighs 176.4 kg (389 lb), the average asymptotic limit being 222.3 kg (490 lb); an adult tigress weighs 117.9 kg (260 lb). The mean weight of historical Siberian tigers is supposed to be higher: 215.3 kg (475 lb) for male tigers and 137.5 kg (303 lb) for females. In May 2011, a male called “Banzai” weighing 207 kg (460 lb) was radio-collared. This individual is heavier but smaller in size than a previously radio-collared male. The largest male, with largely assured references, measured 350 cm (140 in) "over curves", equivalent to 330 cm (130 in) between pegs. The tail length in fully grown males is about 1 m (39 in). Weights of up to 318 kg (700 lb) have been recorded and exceptionally large males weighing up to 384 kg (850 lb) are mentioned in the literature but, according to Mazák, none of these cases can be confirmed via reliable sources.

Posted Image




Batman
Oct 20 2014, 04:52 AM
Barbary Lion vs Siberian Tiger.
Edited by Taipan, Dec 23 2016, 11:03 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Batman
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Nice match!

I think the Barbary Lion wins though, there are many reports of Barbary Lions killing Tigers because not only does the Tiger have a non-existent size advantage over the Barbary, but the Barbary had a massive mane (literally, huge) to protect itself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
7574
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
tiger win more aggressive more powerful bite
lion weight
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Like in the most account with tiger vs. lion on similar weight, tiger wins easily.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Batman
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
hawkkeye
Oct 21 2014, 12:50 AM
Like in the most account with tiger vs. lion on similar weight, tiger wins easily.
Where did you get that misinformation from?

Barbary Lions were documented to kill Tigers; on average they were larger than Tigers.

Here is a link, it has 65 accounts of Lions killing Tigers.

Lions killing Tigers --- 65 accounts

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Amur
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
The mane isn't a big as a factor as most people think.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Batman
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
KayoP
Oct 21 2014, 02:09 AM
The mane isn't a big as a factor as most people think.
Not the case with the Barbary Lion.

The Barbary Lion was the largest sub-species of Lion. It's mane was humongous.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Amur
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Batman
Oct 21 2014, 02:11 AM
KayoP
Oct 21 2014, 02:09 AM
The mane isn't a big as a factor as most people think.
Not the case with the Barbary Lion.

The Barbary Lion was the largest sub-species of Lion. It's mane was humongous.
The barbary lion is not bigger than most of the other lion subspecies. Where are you getting this nonsense from?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Batman
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
KayoP
Oct 21 2014, 02:22 AM
Batman
Oct 21 2014, 02:11 AM
KayoP
Oct 21 2014, 02:09 AM
The mane isn't a big as a factor as most people think.
Not the case with the Barbary Lion.

The Barbary Lion was the largest sub-species of Lion. It's mane was humongous.
The barbary lion is not bigger than most of the other lion subspecies. Where are you getting this nonsense from?

They were the largest sub-species, and I do not count pre-historic versions

Barbary Lion info --- the largest Lions
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Amur
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Batman
Oct 21 2014, 02:26 AM
KayoP
Oct 21 2014, 02:22 AM
Batman
Oct 21 2014, 02:11 AM
KayoP
Oct 21 2014, 02:09 AM
The mane isn't a big as a factor as most people think.
Not the case with the Barbary Lion.

The Barbary Lion was the largest sub-species of Lion. It's mane was humongous.
The barbary lion is not bigger than most of the other lion subspecies. Where are you getting this nonsense from?

They were the largest sub-species, and I do not count pre-historic versions

Barbary Lion info --- the largest Lions
http://animalbattle.yuku.com/topic/55/The-size-of-the-Barbary-lion#.VEU-Ahaxyhx

Here's some data weight and size info on the atlas lion. Those exaggerated weights were unconfirmed or hybrid captive males


Quote:
 
Using the little reliable information available, the Barbary lion (female and male) had a head-body length of 160-190 cm, a shoulder height of 80-100 cm and a greatest skull length with an average of 372.3 mm in males and 318.3 mm in females. These sizes are about the same than those of Indian and West Africa, with the exception of the relative larger skulls.



With the weight issue, judging by its body size and skull dimensions, Barbary lions probably weighed up to 200 kg (and much less in average, probably between 160-170 kg) although there is the possibility of some exceptional specimens of probably up to 230 kg like the East African lions, or even 250 kg like the Southern African lions, but this last figure will be probably just an exaggeration in the northern areas of Africa. There is only a single report of Gérard of males up to 270-300 kg, but these are simple estimations and are completely unreliable, even Yamaguchi accept this. smiley: laugh



The idea of its large size came from the large mane, but there are several captive Indian lions with heavy manes that weight less than 160 kg. There are several large lions with heavy manes in private facilities available in the web and the hard-core-lion-fans proclaim without any evidence that they are “Barbary”, but the truth is that none of them is pure Barbary or from any other population. Besides, any captive lion in cold climate can develop a large mane, so the mane is the worst factor to detect a Barbary lion. smiley: sick
Edited by Amur, Oct 21 2014, 02:33 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Batman
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
I've read that website. It's reports stem from those who did not measure the size and that does not really answer the question of size. They are essentially saying ''We haven't measured the size, so, it's not as large as you think''

Here is a reliable source listing it as the largest sub-species: http://www.tigerhomes.org/animal/barbary-lion.cfm

And here is a reliable, unbias source which confirms a Siberian Tiger is only really the same size as a Bengal: http://www.tigerhomes.org/animal/barbary-lion.cfm
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
hawkkeye
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
Just read the Lion vs Tiger thread. Even at roman games, tigers (caspian subspecies, genetically indifferent from siberian tigers) was highly favorized over barbary lions. And in zoo, when animals met, tigers usually kills lions easily.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Batman
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
hawkkeye
Oct 21 2014, 03:11 AM
Just read the Lion vs Tiger thread. Even at roman games, tigers (caspian subspecies, genetically indifferent from siberian tigers) was highly favorized over barbary lions. And in zoo, when animals met, tigers usually kills lions easily.
It seems you ignored my link.

There are 65 in-depth accounts of Lions killing Tigers, with Korean pit fighters saying the Lion always won, ancient-text saying the bigger mane Lion won (Barbary) and Indian pit-fighters citing the Lion won.

Don't let the bias accounts sway you - the WikiPedia page is guilty of it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Amur
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Batman
Oct 21 2014, 02:40 AM
I've read that website. It's reports stem from those who did not measure the size and that does not really answer the question of size. They are essentially saying ''We haven't measured the size, so, it's not as large as you think''

Here is a reliable source listing it as the largest sub-species: http://www.tigerhomes.org/animal/barbary-lion.cfm

And here is a reliable, unbias source which confirms a Siberian Tiger is only really the same size as a Bengal: http://www.tigerhomes.org/animal/barbary-lion.cfm
Quote:
 
2. Nobuyuki Yamaguchi



Yamaguchi & Haddane (2002) made a good investigation about this lion, check it:



“How big was a Barbary lion? The famous French zoologist Cuvier measured a six-year-old captive-reared male Barbary lion, which had head and body length of 5 pieds 2 pouces (= c. 1.58 m), tail length c. 66.1 cm, height of forequarters c. 83.6 cm and of hindquarters c. 83.6 cm (Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire and Cuvier, 1824). This lion was caught in eastern Algeria in 1795 at about one year old and died at ten years old in the Jardin des Plantes, Paris. Although the live lion may not have given Cuvier accurate measurements, the animal seems to have been very small for a male lion. It is, however, doubtful whether captive Barbary lions, usually captured as cubs and kept in menageries during the 18th or 19th centuries, attained the full body size. Cuvier himself referred to undesirable captive conditions at the menagerie (Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire and Cuvier, 1824). Cornish (1899) reported that big cats only lived, on an average, for two years in London Zoo in the mid-1800s. Gérard (1856) also expressed his concern about the captive condition of lions at the Jardin des Plantes. On the other hand, he described a big wild Barbary lion he shot with the comment `This lion, compared to the finest of those which are exhibited in our menageries, or at the Jardin des Plantes, was what a horse is to a donkey. . .' There is, however, no credible record of body measurements of wild Barbary lions. Gérard (1856) described the size of wild male Barbary lions as c. 2.3 m from the tip of the nose to the root of the tail, which measured c. 90 cm, and their weight as c. 270–300 kg. If this had been true, Barbary lions would indeed have been big amongst lions. However, the methods of obtaining these measurements (e.g. straight or along the curve) were not specified, and the accuracy of the measurements themselves may be questionable, as Gérard made them in the field. Although Pease (1899, 1915) suggested that North African lions might have become very heavy because they fed on mutton so much, regarding the body length he seems not to have believed what he himself quoted – an Algerian lion whose head and body length was c. 2.5 m and the tail length 75 cm.”



“The largest Barbary lion skull so far measured, which is partly broken, has an estimated greatest length of c. 360 mm (Mazák, 1970; Yamaguchi, unpublished). Although 360 mm is not small, big skulls of sub-Saharan lions easily reach a maximum length of over 380 mm, and some even over 400 mm (Hemmer, 1974; Best, 1981; Yamaguchi, unpublished). Does this mean Barbary lions were not particularly big? Due to such a small sample size, we have to wait until more specimens may become available. The big lion Gérard shot in Algeria was presented to the Duchess of Orléans (Gérard, 1856), but the current whereabouts of this specimen and other wild-shot Barbary lions which decorated Gérard's Paris residence are not known.”

Source: http://www.izn.org.uk/Archive/321/Izn-321.htm#lion


This is from the king of Lion fans. There is no available data to give the thought that Barbary lions are the biggest sub species. The theory that Barbary lions are the biggest derived from having a large mane.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maker
Member Avatar
Apex Predator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Historic Barbary lion vs historic Siberian tiger, tiger wins.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply