Post by Lion Boss on Nov 17, 2008 11:57:03 GMT -5
Commonly it is stated that the tiger is the largest cat in the world. But that statement is vague in incomplete. There is certainly a great deal of factors to consider. So let's see if the tiger really is the largest of the cats. First of all, it should be noted that the lion is longer and taller than the tiger. As such, the only measurement in question is weight.
Tiger Species
There are 6 tiger species, one of which is nearly extinct. Unlike lions who average about the same size (African or Asiatic), the tigers vary GREATLY in weight.
Bengal & Siberian Tigers: 180 - 220 kg
Indochinese & South Chinese Tigers: 150 - 190 kg
Malayan & Sumatran Tigers: 100 - 140 kg
By comparison the African and Asiatic lions have been averaged 180 - 200 kg.
Overall Weight ranges for the two species:
LION: 150 - 250 kg
TIGEr: 100 - 300 kg
Conclusion 1: The lion is larger than 4 out of the 6 speices of tiger. As a species average, the lion is the largest of the cats.
But what about the Bengal and the Siberian tigers? On average they seem to have about 20 kg on the lion. Well, there is also a matter of stomach content when measuring these cats. Lions and tigers can eat up to 30 kg (66 lbs) of food in a sitting. That certainly would make a difference. A tiger is harder to find and measure. The best bet is to tranq it after it is sluggish from eating or is occupied while eating it's catch. So the measured tigers are more then likely to have been weighed on a full stomach. Lions are easier to find and are measured in far greater numbers. And since they feed in groups, lions are harder to get on a full stomach given how possessive the pride would be over the kill. As such, lions are likely to be measured on an empty stomach. So, that food contend does influence the measurements.
Conclusion 2: The weight difference between the Bengal/Siberian Tiger and an African/Asiatic Lion may simply boil down to the stomach content when measured.
Overal Conclusion
The lion is longer. The lion is taller. The lion outweighs 4 out of the 6 tiger species. The stomach content issue possibly evens out the weight of lions compared to the Bengal and Siberian tigers. However, the record sizes in the wild and in captivity have been achieved by tigers. Yes, the "largest" tigers have about 50 kg on the largest lions. But the smallest lions have about 50 kg on the smallest tigers. That DOES matter when you compare species, not just individuals. And you know what, if size is your determining factor, look at the math. 550 lb lion vs a 660 lb tiger gives a 16.7% advantage to the tiger. A 330 lb lion vs a 220 lb tiger gives a 33.4% advantage to the lion. Remember, that 50 kg effectiveness diminishes the bigger the two animals are.
It seems to me that while we can't give the lion the "Biggest Cat" crown just yet, the issue is certainly vague enough to debate.
Tiger Species
There are 6 tiger species, one of which is nearly extinct. Unlike lions who average about the same size (African or Asiatic), the tigers vary GREATLY in weight.
Bengal & Siberian Tigers: 180 - 220 kg
Indochinese & South Chinese Tigers: 150 - 190 kg
Malayan & Sumatran Tigers: 100 - 140 kg
By comparison the African and Asiatic lions have been averaged 180 - 200 kg.
Overall Weight ranges for the two species:
LION: 150 - 250 kg
TIGEr: 100 - 300 kg
Conclusion 1: The lion is larger than 4 out of the 6 speices of tiger. As a species average, the lion is the largest of the cats.
But what about the Bengal and the Siberian tigers? On average they seem to have about 20 kg on the lion. Well, there is also a matter of stomach content when measuring these cats. Lions and tigers can eat up to 30 kg (66 lbs) of food in a sitting. That certainly would make a difference. A tiger is harder to find and measure. The best bet is to tranq it after it is sluggish from eating or is occupied while eating it's catch. So the measured tigers are more then likely to have been weighed on a full stomach. Lions are easier to find and are measured in far greater numbers. And since they feed in groups, lions are harder to get on a full stomach given how possessive the pride would be over the kill. As such, lions are likely to be measured on an empty stomach. So, that food contend does influence the measurements.
Conclusion 2: The weight difference between the Bengal/Siberian Tiger and an African/Asiatic Lion may simply boil down to the stomach content when measured.
Overal Conclusion
The lion is longer. The lion is taller. The lion outweighs 4 out of the 6 tiger species. The stomach content issue possibly evens out the weight of lions compared to the Bengal and Siberian tigers. However, the record sizes in the wild and in captivity have been achieved by tigers. Yes, the "largest" tigers have about 50 kg on the largest lions. But the smallest lions have about 50 kg on the smallest tigers. That DOES matter when you compare species, not just individuals. And you know what, if size is your determining factor, look at the math. 550 lb lion vs a 660 lb tiger gives a 16.7% advantage to the tiger. A 330 lb lion vs a 220 lb tiger gives a 33.4% advantage to the lion. Remember, that 50 kg effectiveness diminishes the bigger the two animals are.
It seems to me that while we can't give the lion the "Biggest Cat" crown just yet, the issue is certainly vague enough to debate.
