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
Leopard - Panthera pardus
Topic Started: Jan 7 2012, 08:52 PM (43,039 Views)
chui
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Canidae
Feb 13 2013, 12:59 AM
Highly impressive! ^ What an enterprising cat.

Leopard weights and measurements from India, from 'The Leopard in India : A Natural History' by J.C Daniels;

From H.E Moss
"The Weight of a good male panther in Gujurat is something over 100 pounds.
...
One in Danta, measuring 6 feet 10.5 inches weighed 114 pounds
...
the second, a Kathiawar panther 7 feet 1 inch in length, weighed 123 pounds
...
Both we in good condition
."

"Pythian Adams gives the weight of a 6'4" female shot in the Nilgiris as 78 lbs and R C Morris gives the weight of a 6'10" male shot in the North Coimbatore forests as 118 lbs."

Skull sizes;
Basal Length - 11.25"
Breadth - 7.9"
Weight - 2 lbs. 4 0z.

From Rowland Ward's "Records of Big Game"
Length - 11.25"
Breadth - 7.125"
Weight - 1 lb. 12 oz.

Largest Indian Leopards skulls from A M Markham, Lt Col L L Fenton, Sir Edmund Loder, Bart.
Length - 10 1/4"
Breadth - 6 5/8"
Area - Bijnor, U.P

Length - 10 3/6"
Breadth - 6 1/4"
Area - Gir Forest

Length - 10 inches
Breadth - 6 1/2"
Area - Belgaum

Largest Specimen in the Society's collection measures 8.3" in basal length and is 5.9" wide acros the zygomata. This animal taped 7"3".
Hey Canidae, great info thanks for sharing. However, some points should be borne in mind when looking at weights from early sources. You’ll notice that a lot of weights reported by reliable early 20th century naturalists/hunters tend to be on the low end, not just for leopards but also lions and tigers. I think there are two possible reasons for this, one is that in those days hunters didn’t always have the means to weigh the animal soon after death which would have resulted in the carcass being weighed after decomposition had set in or many hunters simply did not differentiate between sub adult and adult animals. Note that in the excerpts you’ve posted from your book in none of the accounts is it specified whether the leopard was an adult it simply says male or female. The same also applies to modern sources which may not take these different factors into consideration. For this reason it’s not always possible to make a direct comparison with weights obtained by modern researchers from properly aged sedated animals. This doesn’t apply to all early hunters of course, many of them were well aware of such issues and provided very reliable data. And then obviously there were also many hunters who grossly exaggerated the size of their trophies but usually I think you can tell from reading their work which hunters were honest and reliable and these are the ones I’m concerned with.

The point I’m making may be best illustrated when looking at South African lowveld leopards which we are most familiar with. Based on abundant descriptions, photographs, and most importantly recorded measurements we have a pretty good idea of how big and impressive these leopards are, a typical adult male will be around 60-65kg (140lbs) and the very biggest around 80kg (180lbs). But if all we had to go on was scanty data from early sources their size decreases dramatically probably due to the reasons I gave above. For example, James Stevenson-Hamilton in his book “Wildlife in South Africa” gives the weight of one “average full grown” male leopard from the Sabi Sands as 103lbs (47kg). And according to Piener (1969) male leopards in Kruger “seldom exceed 130lbs (60kg)”. With a lot more data now available it’s safe to say this isn’t quite the case but until just 20 years ago it seems this was pretty much all that was published on the weight of leopards in the region. For this reason I would avoid putting too much value on weights alone unless the condition and age of the animals are specified. Otherwise, skull measurements are usually more reliable and should be given precedence.

Excerpt from Stevenson-Hamilton’s book, "Wildlife in South Africa" 1947. It’s too bad he didn’t provide skull measurements of these leopards as he did for lions.

Posted Image

The best available info on the weight of Indian leopards comes from the Waghoba Project which has captured and collared leopards in Maharashtra, central India. The average weight of 5 adult males is 63.4kg (140lbs), pretty much the same as that recorded for South Africa by modern researchers.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Some decent info from particularly reliable hunters from the colonial era is also available and appears fairly consistent with the above. Dunbar Brandar who hunted in central India gave the weight of two male leopards he shot as 110lbs and 152lbs, the former being from the village outskirts and the latter from the deep jungle, both he described as average for their kind. The Maharaja of Cooch Bihar recorded weights for 3 male leopards he shot in the Assam region (north east India), the average of the 3 being 65kg (143lbs).

Leopards shot by the Maharaja of Cooch Bihar.

Posted Image

The Maharaja provided very detailed measurements of the tigers he shot (head, arm, chest girth etc.), it’s too bad he didn’t do the same for his leopards. This is a common trend I’ve seen , many colonial hunters took all sorts of measurements of tigers but usually only provided the body length for leopards which on its own is pretty useless IMO.

Nonetheless, here are the body measurements of a big 160lb leopard shot in the GIr Forest, Gujarat (western India). This is the same specimen from which the big 10 3/16” (259mm) skull listed in your post came from.

Posted Image

For comparison, here are the measurements of two male leopards shot by Vaighan Kirby in South Eastern Africa (the Kruger region). The larger of the two was probably around 70kg (155lbs) or so judging from the measurements. It had a skull measuring 251mm in length.

Posted Image

Both these excerpts are from the 1903 Rowland Wards and should give some perspective as to how big a leopard with 250-260mm skull is. I’ll also elaborate a little on the skull data you posted with some information which I think others will find quite interesting.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kurtz
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The biggest CAPE Lepard ever recorded an impressive 50 kilograms
Posted Image


Massive male leopard collared in the Gouritz area


Oom Pep (or GM1 to the scientists) was the first leopard to be photographed by the Cape Leopard Trust’s camera traps in the Gouritz region. He was initially photographed on the Tierkloof hiking trail at Gamkaberg Nature Reserve in late 2007, and made regular trips down the trail over the following few years. We decided to name him after a former CapeNature ranger who once saw a leopard in Tierkloof, and tells the story of the encounter with great excitement and verve to this day!


Oom Pep holds the distinction of being the most photographed leopard in the Gouritz area, and has been photographed at six different camera stations. In the past year he appears to have been evicted from the Tierkloof area by another male (who continues to share hiking trails with visitors to the reserve). Nevertheless, Oom Pep has remained a regular visitor to our camera stations and has also been photographed being followed by a female in recent months.

Not surprisingly, a leopard as wily as Oom Pep proved difficult to capture, but after several months we finally succeeded in capturing and collaring him on Groenefontein Nature Reserve. This is now the second leopard collared for Gareth’s PHD project. While we expected him to be a big, dominant male, he surpassed our expectations, weighing in excess of 50kg! Oom Pep is thus of a similar size to leopards in the northern bushveld areas of South Africa, which was totally unexpected in an area where the biggest leopards were thought to weigh around 40kg.

It remains to be seen whether Oom Pep is simply an unusually large male, or whether all males in the Gouritz area grow to be considerably larger than their counterparts in the Cederberg Mountains. Either way, it’s safe to say that this titan of the Little Karoo has many more surprises in store for us!
Aneri Vlok

Gouritz Project
The Cape Leopard Trust
http://capeleopard.org.za/news-and-media/news/story/172/massive-male-leopard-collared-in-the-gouritz-area
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canidae
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Chui
 
Hey Canidae, great info thanks for sharing. However, some points should be borne in mind when looking at weights from early sources. You’ll notice that a lot of weights reported by reliable early 20th century naturalists/hunters tend to be on the low end, not just for leopards but also lions and tigers. I think there are two possible reasons for this, one is that in those days hunters didn’t always have the means to weigh the animal soon after death which would have resulted in the carcass being weighed after decomposition had set in or many hunters simply did not differentiate between sub adult and adult animals. Note that in the excerpts you’ve posted from your book in none of the accounts is it specified whether the leopard was an adult it simply says male or female. The same also applies to modern sources which may not take these different factors into consideration. For this reason it’s not always possible to make a direct comparison with weights obtained by modern researchers from properly aged sedated animals. This doesn’t apply to all early hunters of course, many of them were well aware of such issues and provided very reliable data. And then obviously there were also many hunters who grossly exaggerated the size of their trophies but usually I think you can tell from reading their work which hunters were honest and reliable and these are the ones I’m concerned with.

Both good, valid points Chui.
I also think a less likely but still quite possible explanation may be 'un-natural selection', where hunting pressure especially for big individuals may cause more smaller individuals. Schaller in his book 'The Deer and the Tiger' writes of the devastation through unchecked hunting in the 19th / 20th century and it could have had severe affects on the wildlife.

Chui
 
The point I’m making may be best illustrated when looking at South African lowveld leopards which we are most familiar with. Based on abundant descriptions, photographs, and most importantly recorded measurements we have a pretty good idea of how big and impressive these leopards are, a typical adult male will be around 60-65kg (140lbs) and the very biggest around 80kg (180lbs). But if all we had to go on was scanty data from early sources their size decreases dramatically probably due to the reasons I gave above. For example, James Stevenson-Hamilton in his book “Wildlife in South Africa” gives the weight of one “average full grown” male leopard from the Sabi Sands as 103lbs (47kg). And according to Piener (1969) male leopards in Kruger “seldom exceed 130lbs (60kg)”. With a lot more data now available it’s safe to say this isn’t quite the case but until just 20 years ago it seems this was pretty much all that was published on the weight of leopards in the region. For this reason I would avoid putting too much value on weights alone unless the condition and age of the animals are specified. Otherwise, skull measurements are usually more reliable and should be given precedence.

Again, I would agree with you and good points.
Though, something interesting to consider was Stevenson-Hamilton (and I think it was mentioned again in Bailey's book) believed there to be 2 sub-species of Leopard around Kruger. A smaller lowland variety and a larger, bulkier hill leopard. However, as you said earlier, a likely explanation is the smaller ones were simply not fully grown despite being solitary adults and under 4 or 5 years and so had not fully matured and 'filled out'.

I also agree RE: hunters. Not all from earlier periods are nonsense and some can have valid accounts but obviously exaggerated accounts of giant animals and such things as epic tiger / dhole battles I would dismiss.

Look forward to your further posts - though, may I also know, from the 'Lions vs. Leopards' thread, where the data on the weights of equatorial lions came from?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chui
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Canidae
Apr 6 2013, 12:44 AM
Though, something interesting to consider was Stevenson-Hamilton (and I think it was mentioned again in Bailey's book) believed there to be 2 sub-species of Leopard around Kruger. A smaller lowland variety and a larger, bulkier hill leopard. However, as you said earlier, a likely explanation is the smaller ones were simply not fully grown despite being solitary adults and under 4 or 5 years and so had not fully matured and 'filled out'.

I also agree RE: hunters. Not all from earlier periods are nonsense and some can have valid accounts but obviously exaggerated accounts of giant animals and such things as epic tiger / dhole battles I would dismiss.

Look forward to your further posts - though, may I also know, from the 'Lions vs. Leopards' thread, where the data on the weights of equatorial lions came from?
Yeah, I remember reading in Stevenson-Hamilton’s book about the two varieties of leopards in South Africa, the hill and lowland leopard. Vaugan Kirby, another reliable source who hunted in South Africa also made the same distinction. But from what I recall both these hunters stated that lowland leopards tend to be of greater length and height while the hill leopards tend to be short bodied but stockier. They also noted (quite sensibly IMO) that there are of course intermediate forms and that the two varieties are simply morphs of the very same species adapted to different environments. I can’t really say how true this generalization is but it would seem logical for leopards living in hilly regions to develop more muscular bodies to traverse through more rugged terrain. Kruger NP of course lies entirely in the lowveld of South Africa, the hill country Stevenson-Hamilton and Kirby talked about would be the escarpment to the west of Kruger.

Finally, regarding the info you posted on skulls from your book on Indian leopards. It seems the info is from the paper, “Record Panther Skull” published in the 1921 edition of “The Journal of The Bombay Natural History Society” which describes what the author believed to be the record sized skull of a leopard, measuring 287mm long and 200.7mm wide. This particular animal was killed in southern India but it wasn’t 100% certain whether it was a leopard or a small tiger because after it was shot it ran off into the forest and its remains were discovered some days after when little of the skin was left. The author of this paper however felt quite confident in identifying it as indeed a leopard.

I first heard about this skull quite a while back on the old AVA board from cojimar but sort of lost interest when I saw that Pocock having read this paper dismissed it as a skull of tiger in one of his papers, though he never studied the skull himself. However, looking into it again the main basis for Pocock’s dismissal of this skull was that its length of 11.3” (287mm) is listed as the basal length which would be too extreme for a leopard and within the range recorded for adult male Bengal tigers! But IMO this is clearly not the case, 11.3 inches was most probably the skull’s total length and the term “basal length” was simply misused by the author. It seems some early sources did refer to total length as basal length for some reason and even Pocock himself notes in the excerpt below that the 11.25” length of the big Gabon skull he himself measured was incorrectly listed as the basal length in one edition of the Rowland Wards. Furthermore, if this really was a tiger skull with a 287mm basal length that means its total length would have been around 345mm which is completely inconsistent with the width of 7.9” (200.7mm). And perhaps most importantly, a total length of around 345mm would be nearly average for an adult male Bengal tiger skull and thus it’s highly unlikely that anyone with knowledge of big cat skulls would get such a big skull confused for a leopard skull. As can be seen in the photograph from this paper, the skull in question though quite big was still considerably smaller than a typical male tiger or lion skull. Also note that the length of the tiger skull in the photo which at 14.5” (368mm) is most certainly total length is also incorrectly stated as the “basal length”.

Though I still can’t say with 100% certainty, I think it’s likely this skull did come from a leopard. And if so that would make it possibly the biggest leopard skull reliably recorded at 287mm long and 200.7mm wide (or a total score of 19.2 inches). The measurements are very impressive but not extreme to the point where they are unbelievable as other reliably recorded leopard skulls come close to this. In fact, there appears to be another leopard skull which at least in length was probably equal to this one or possibly even bigger! I’ve posted it at the end of this post.

You can view the paper, “Record Panther Skull” 1921 here: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/95740#page/7/mode/1up

Some particularly interesting excerpts from the paper. Apparently, this leopard before it was shot was noted for having a very impressive physique with not only a massive head but also very powerfully built forequarters.

Posted Image

Measurements of this skull compared with those of big skulls listed in Rowland Wards. The skull from Gabon, the largest listed in Rowland Ward at the time is the same as that studied by Pocock which I have posted about before.

Posted Image

Photograph showing the “record skull” with a tiger, lion, and another leopard skull.

Posted Image

This is what Pocock wrote on this skull in his paper, “Tigers” 1929.

Posted Image

And this was the response of E. Limouzin, the hunter who shot the “record panther” published in the Journal of The Bombay Natural History Society in 1929.

Posted Image

Posted Image

As per the other huge leopard skull. In Per Christiansen’s latest paper, “Variation in Craniomandibular Morphology and Sexual Dimorphism in Pantherines and the Sabercat Smilodon fatalis” 2012, the largest leopard skull studied had a condylobasal length in the range of 250-260mm. Which is quite extraordinary considering the very biggest leopard skulls recorded by Pocock measured 240-246mm in condylobasal length. The total length of Christiansen’s leopard skull should be around 285-295mm! It would be very interesting to see more details on this skull but unfortunately I’ve been unable to get in contact with Dr. Christiansen.

Graph showing the condylobasal length distribution of adult pantherine and smilodon skulls. Note that the largest leopard skulls overlap in size with adult lioness and tigress skulls.

Posted Image

Clearly, the skulls of leopards can reach quite impressive size, well beyond what I think most people realize. Much larger than those from the similar sized cougar and virtually matching the dimensions of skulls belonging to large 100kg jaguars. And since most seem to better appreciate and comprehend measurements/weights of the whole body I should point out that a skull measuring 270mm+ in length probably correlates to a leopard weighing 80kg or more.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kurtz
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Chui,
where exactly were from the leopard weighed 170 pounds(2 pounds of stomach content) by Peter Turnbull Kemp in south africa?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chui
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
Peter TurnBull-Kemp didn't specify where the 170lb leopard he weighed was from. It could have been from anywhere in Africa since he hunted all over the continent though he seems to have spent most of his career in Zimbabwe and South Africa. However, the very biggest leopard he ever saw was an enormous specimen (but wasn't weighed) shot in Cameroon where he also saw a "very fine example" of a black leopard. Not surprisingly then TurnBull-Kemp was of the opinion that the forest leopards of the Congo Basin are particularly large and impressive, which I agree with.

And Canidae, regarding the weight data on equatorial lions, one of the tables was from the paper, "The effect of moon phase and season on livestock depredation and lion activity in Waza National Park" 2009 by Muller. But I'm having trouble locating the article for the second table I posted in that thread. Sorry, I have been getting sloppy with my citations.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kurtz
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
thank you Chui ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ManEater
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Hi Chui, very good datas, it was very interesting, if i am not wrong, there was a 288mm persian leopard skull but the ICS said it was a 281.35mm, so i don't understand, the 288m was fake?
So what is the biggest skull of leopard? (except this 287mm indian panther)
When i see all datas on Indian leopard, impressive skulls, impressive average weight in some areas, the big Balaji etc, I have the feeling the indian leopard have got huge potential and is very underrated.
Could it be the biggest subspecie?
Edited by ManEater, Apr 8 2013, 02:11 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vivec
Canid and snake enthusiast.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Man-eating leopard in Nepal kills 15 villagers in just over a year: 10 of the victims are young children
Sole leopard believed to have killed and eaten 15 people in remote Nepal

10 of the victims are under 10-years-old
Armed police and hunters are stalking the murderous beast
By SAM WEBB
PUBLISHED: 15:44, 3 November 2012 | UPDATED: 17:05, 7 November 2012
Comments (98)
Share

A ferocious leopard may have killed 15 people in Nepal over the last 15 months and now authorities have vowed to kill the ferocious beast.
The severed head of the latest victim, a 4-year-old boy, was found in the forest a kilometre from his home this morning, said Kamal Prasad Kharel, the police chief of the Baitadi district, an area 373 miles west of Kathmandu.
CNN reported that the creature dragged the child away into the jungle to eat, the 15th victim since the attacks began last year.

Posted Image

A leopard has killed at least 15 people in a remote region of Nepal.
The police chief suspects that a single leopard, at most two, with a taste for human flesh is responsible for the deaths.
Maheshwor Dhakal, an ecologist at the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation in Kathmandu, agreed that a group of the animals, which are common in the low mountain areas of Nepal, would cause even more bloodshed.

More...
Anger as dog owner is reunited with pet he threw 15ft into the sea to teach his dog to swim
The hunter becomes the hunted: 'Dead' bear shot with a rifle springs up and attacks its would-be killer
And this is only the surfboard! Surfer, 25, lucky to be alive after he's attacked by shark off the coast of California – the SECOND attack in a month
He said: 'Since human blood has more salt than animal blood, once wild animals get the taste of salty blood they do not like other animals like deer'.
He added that the actual death toll could be higher than 15, because there have been other animal attacks in Uttarkhand state in northern India, which borders Baitadi district.
Of the 15 victims in Nepal so far, two-thirds are children below the age of 10 and all are from small villages in the remote region. The others are older children and a 29-year-old woman who had gone to collect fodder for domestic animals in the nearby forest.
'No adult male has been killed,' Kharel said.
After killing its victim, the leopard drags the body away into the forest to eat.

Posted Image

Leopards are common in Nepal, but most hunt wild and domestic animals
'In the case of the children it just leaves behind the head, eating everything, but some parts of the adult body are left behind because it cannot finish it,' Kharel added.
The local administration has sought to raise public awareness of the dangers of going alone into nearby forests and has mobilised armed police force and local people who have licensed guns to hunt for the leopard and has announced a $300 reward to anyone who captures or kills it.
It is it is illegal to kill wild animals in the region but the chief district administrator has granted a special dispensation for this leopard to be killed.
Dhakal added:'There is no alternative but to kill the leopard.'


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vince
Member Avatar
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary,west-central Thailand
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kurtz
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Scythian
Apr 8 2013, 02:13 AM
Man-eating leopard in Nepal kills 15 villagers in just over a year: 10 of the victims are young children
Sole leopard believed to have killed and eaten 15 people in remote Nepal

10 of the victims are under 10-years-old
Armed police and hunters are stalking the murderous beast
By SAM WEBB
PUBLISHED: 15:44, 3 November 2012 | UPDATED: 17:05, 7 November 2012
Comments (98)
Share

A ferocious leopard may have killed 15 people in Nepal over the last 15 months and now authorities have vowed to kill the ferocious beast.
The severed head of the latest victim, a 4-year-old boy, was found in the forest a kilometre from his home this morning, said Kamal Prasad Kharel, the police chief of the Baitadi district, an area 373 miles west of Kathmandu.
CNN reported that the creature dragged the child away into the jungle to eat, the 15th victim since the attacks began last year.

Posted Image

A leopard has killed at least 15 people in a remote region of Nepal.
The police chief suspects that a single leopard, at most two, with a taste for human flesh is responsible for the deaths.
Maheshwor Dhakal, an ecologist at the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation in Kathmandu, agreed that a group of the animals, which are common in the low mountain areas of Nepal, would cause even more bloodshed.

More...
Anger as dog owner is reunited with pet he threw 15ft into the sea to teach his dog to swim
The hunter becomes the hunted: 'Dead' bear shot with a rifle springs up and attacks its would-be killer
And this is only the surfboard! Surfer, 25, lucky to be alive after he's attacked by shark off the coast of California – the SECOND attack in a month
He said: 'Since human blood has more salt than animal blood, once wild animals get the taste of salty blood they do not like other animals like deer'.
He added that the actual death toll could be higher than 15, because there have been other animal attacks in Uttarkhand state in northern India, which borders Baitadi district.
Of the 15 victims in Nepal so far, two-thirds are children below the age of 10 and all are from small villages in the remote region. The others are older children and a 29-year-old woman who had gone to collect fodder for domestic animals in the nearby forest.
'No adult male has been killed,' Kharel said.
After killing its victim, the leopard drags the body away into the forest to eat.

Posted Image

Leopards are common in Nepal, but most hunt wild and domestic animals
'In the case of the children it just leaves behind the head, eating everything, but some parts of the adult body are left behind because it cannot finish it,' Kharel added.
The local administration has sought to raise public awareness of the dangers of going alone into nearby forests and has mobilised armed police force and local people who have licensed guns to hunt for the leopard and has announced a $300 reward to anyone who captures or kills it.
It is it is illegal to kill wild animals in the region but the chief district administrator has granted a special dispensation for this leopard to be killed.
Dhakal added:'There is no alternative but to kill the leopard.'


There is an account for this
http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9745735/2/#new
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Canidae
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
@ Chui - Thanks very much for posting that - great information and indeed a big, impressively proportioned cat. I remember in the discussion on O.C of Persian Leopards and then head / paw measurements compared to other pantherines and the leopard is very largely proportioned.
Thanks for the cite on equatorial lions - and no worries on losing the other one! :)

@ Vince - Very interesting, and good to have weights on Thai Leopards. Whilst very small, they appear quite stocky I believe. Could you supply the original article or it's title too?

Here also is what I believe to be the account of the 211 lb Namibian Leopard. Not sure if it was posted before, or if it is a seperate incident but this is from C.K Brain's book 'The Hunters or the Hunted?: An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy'. It contains interesting info on leopards and the three bone-crusher hyaena species from what was available on Google Books (Pg. 91)
This was around the Hakos mountains near the Namibian Plain, also contains a suggestions of the leopards may get to large sizes :
Posted Image
Edited by Canidae, Apr 8 2013, 03:33 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vince
Member Avatar
Unicellular Organism
[ * ]
Canidae
Apr 8 2013, 03:33 AM

@ Vince - Very interesting, and good to have weights on Thai Leopards. Whilst very small, they appear quite stocky I believe. Could you supply the original article or it's title too?
"ecology of the leopard in huai kha khaeng wildlife sanctuarty" by Mr.Saksit Simcharoen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chui
Heterotrophic Organism
[ *  *  * ]
ManEater
Apr 8 2013, 02:07 AM
Hi Chui, very good datas, it was very interesting, if i am not wrong, there was a 288mm persian leopard skull but the ICS said it was a 281.35mm, so i don't understand, the 288m was fake?
So what is the biggest skull of leopard? (except this 287mm indian panther)
When i see all datas on Indian leopard, impressive skulls, impressive average weight in some areas, the big Balaji etc, I have the feeling the indian leopard have got huge potential and is very underrated.
Could it be the biggest subspecie?
It’s normal for there to be some minor differences in measurements of the same skull recorded by different sources depending on the method or equipment used. Also skulls tend to shrink slightly in the first couple of years after death which could partly explain the difference in this case. Nevertheless, skull measurements are still among the most reliable measures of size for large carnivores.

And as I said in my previous post, apart from the “record panther skull” the huge skull measured by Per Christiansen is probably the biggest I’m aware of outside hunting records, it had a condylobasal length between 250-260mm. It’s from a graph so I don’t know the exact figure but at a minimum of 250mm it is bigger than any I was previously aware of, the largest of which had a condylobasal length of 246mm and total length of 282mm (from DR Congo). I don’t have any other details (origin, other measurements etc.) at the moment but condylobasal length is widely considered a very good measure of overall skull size and is proportional to total length. In terms of overall size (total length+width) as usually recorded by hunters, the largest I’m aware of are the skull from Gabon measured by Pocock (463mm or 18.23”), the skull from Iran measured very precisely by ICS (460.3mm or 18.12”) and another skull from Iran measured by Sinae (461mm or 18.15”). There are a number of other skulls from both the Congo Basin region and Iran exceeding 17” which is generally considered the benchmark for a truly massive leopard skull by hunters. And of course there are bigger skulls recorded in the hunting records but I’m hesitant to lump them with data from zoological sources. For African leopard skulls I consider Rowland Wards relatively reliable but the SCI records seem fishy.

Keep in mind I can only speak of skulls I know of, there might be bigger skulls in some museum or private collections somewhere in the world.

Regarding Indian leopards being the biggest. Assuming the huge skull is genuine it would be IMO an exceptional or even freakish specimen for India since it is clearly beyond the normal size range recorded for skulls from the region. My opinion is that the biggest leopards are those from the Congo Basin and West Asia because based on the available data the skulls from these regions are consistently very big. If they were as well documented as Indian or East/southern African leopards we could expect even more impressive specimens to be recorded from these regions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kurtz
Kleptoparasite
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I suspect that leopards in India are variable in size like in south africa.
India is an immense territory.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Feline · Next Topic »
Add Reply