Tags : :
These are taken directly from Premier topic from there respective posters (Peter, Kingtheropod, Guate, Chui, etc)
Apr 17 13 11:06 PM
Here is the weight of an indian leopard shot by Burke in Gorakpur.
I don't think this animal was gorged, as the goat he refers to was still alive at the time. Big leopard regardless.
Apr 18 13 1:58 AM
Well, your list is very large, no doubt, but I think you are the one confused here.
First, you say that my list is incomplete. The point of my list was not showing ALL the top record in existence (that's not possible as new records will arise any day), but only those admitted in the scientific literature (check the title of my list). In this case, also check that although some of the specimens were hunted, they are officially quoted by scientists, not only hunting literature. So, the records that you show here are important (obviously) and I really appreciate them, but some of them (not all, ok?) are not mentioned in any scientific source that I know, which is the reason why I don’t know about them. Besides, most of the records are the SAME than those posted by me! I recognize that some of the weights posted by you are new to me, but I will like to see the reference of these figures (those not quoted by my before) and where is the scientific acceptation of them.
Second, you say that my figures are confusing, which is a nonsense. I separate the records in regions, which is better to understand the variations, something that you have not made. The lower figures are NOT random figures, in fact, if you take the time to read the sources, you will see that this are the highest weights recorded for that particular areas, at least those accepted by scientific sources. For example, leopards from Soutpansberg are not the same than those from Phinda-Mkhuze complex, even when both are from South Africa, so it is necessary to show the two different populations. You must learn to classify populations, after all, intraespecific variation exist even in a same country. India (tigers) and Tanzania (lions) are examples of these intern size variations.
Third, you say that I only showed random weights not representative of particularly large size and that some of them are from hunting records, but this is another mistake from you. First, I am not trying to prove that leopards are larger, smaller of whatever you think. I only put all the scientific data available to me at this moment, about this great cat, showing the great variation in size that they have, that's all. Second, like I mention before, I obviously know that some of this figures came from hunting sources, but the point is that they are accepted by scientist sources, instead of some of your lists.
Finally, I am not trying to prove that I am a leopard expert, for the contrary, check my previous post and you will see that I am telling that you know more and that you were the expert in this cat, but judging by your present words, apparently, humility and respect are not part of your behavior.
I really hope that this will be not the beginning of another futile battle about “who is right”. If this will be the case, I will not participate in such a foolish debate and I prefer to go out of this. The Premier League is made to show data with its backup, not to say that this or that poster knows less than me.
Edited 1 time by GuateGojira Apr 18 13 2:38 AM.
Apr 18 13 2:31 AM
Large 172 lb (78 kg) leopard...
|GuateGojira||A proposition to Chui||#14||[url]|
Apr 18 13 2:35 AM
I always search ways to establish peace, especially in order to obtain more data (which is the objective of the Premiere League), I will like to see the sources (images or documents) of these particular specimens that you post in your list (the other ones I already have it). Also, if you want confirmation of any of my records, please feel free to ask them.
2) 93kg – Kenya – Tony France 1969 via James Mellon 1995, The African Hunter, the skull of this leopard is also recorded in Rowland Wards (18.38 inches).
5) 85kg – Zimbabwe – (empty stomach) – W. Grant 2007, Into the Thorns.
11) 76kg – Botswana – (probably gorged) – Tuli Predator Project.
14) 74.5kg – South Africa – C.R. Owen 2006, Reproductive Biology and Population Ecology of Leopards (Panthera Pardus) on Karongwe.
Central Asia (2):
3) 91kg – Iran – Iranian Cheetah Society 2010. (This one is very interesting).
4) 86kg – Iran – (probably gorged [why?]) – B.H. Kiabi 2002, Population status of the Persian leopard in Iran.
I labeled this like this because its location is unknown. Maybe some description of the hunt of the area could give a light of they location.
9) 77kg – location N/A – (empty stomach) – Peter Turnbull-Kemp 1967, The Leopard
15) 74kg – location N/A – (empty stomach) – Peter Turnbull-Kemp 1967, The Leopard.
17) 73kg – India – L.L. Fenton via Rowland Wards 1903 (I don’t include this one, because there were heavier Indian leopards. I also excluded the record leopard from Cooch Behar for the same reason, a mistake for what I can see).
Finally, the number 12 is also in the sample of the Phinda-Mkhuze complex. A question, where do you get the data to state that his old male of 75 kg (No. 12) was empty belly but the prime male of 79 kg (No. 8 in your list) was gorged?
At the end, only 8 specimens are not known to me (I already knew the Indian one). Maybe, like a form of help, you could create a table with all the heaviest leopards, from all the know regions, those from me and those from you, just like peter and I have done with the tiger populations.
What do you say?
Apr 18 13 2:58 AM
Weights and measurements of large leopards hunted in cooch behar
|GuateGojira||Record of leopards in Cooch Behar|
Apr 18 13 3:26 AM
Good post KingT. The Maharaja published some of his records in the final tables of his book of 1908, but he also published other ones inside the book.
In order to see all the records in the book, I made the table for leopards of Cooch Behar, males and females on they own sides:
I have all the other mammals from Cooch Behar, but I will publish them in the topic of Elephant-Rhino sizes.
|sanjay||Villagers burn alive captured leopard near Corbett Tiger Reserve||#17||[url]|
Apr 18 13 3:53 AM
Dehra Dun: In a shocking incident, villagers in Uttarakhand burned alive a leopard as forest officials watched.
The leopard, who villagers say injured 10 people, was first captured and locked up in a cowshed.
It was beaten up there and after that it was locked in a cage. Kerosene was poured upon the animal and it was set on fire. The creature could not escape and people just watched the brutal killing of it.
Among the onlookers were several forest officials who did nothing to save the animal.
Here is the source link
Apr 18 13 12:47 PM
I meant no offence GauteGojira but I think the lists you’re making may be a bit misleading (applies to the one you posted on jaguars as well). The main problem is that you’re not taking into account the fact that there is huge disparity in the amount of data available on weights from different regions. For many of the regions the “max weights” you’ve given are from very tiny samples so it doesn’t make much sense making comparisons. And you can be sure male leopards in Gabon are whole lot bigger than 41kg, I doubt that weight was from a healthy adult male. I’d say the same about the 37kg male jaguar you’ve listed in the other thread.
Simply being mentioned by a scientific source doesn’t determine whether second hand data is credible, what matters is whether the source citing the record can be considered an authority on the subject (their experience etc.) and of course the credibility of the first hand source that actually provided the measurement. There are few wildlife scientists who actually take a thorough interest in the size of animals, most will simply reiterate whatever’s been published before and move on to more important topics related to their respective research. Also, Tony Almeida is not a scientific source, he’s definitely a reliable source who provided excellent data but he wasn’t a scientist, he was a professional hunter so I’m not sure why you’ve included him in your list.
Whenever possible it’s best to look at first hand data whether from field researchers or reliable hunters. Even “scientific sources” will often make errors when citing data from others, especially when it comes to things such as size/measurements which usually aren’t of much concern. For example, in the table of measurements you posted from his book, Sunquist incorrectly lists the average weight for the 8 adult males from Kruger as 60.6kg. Originally this data was provided in Ted Bailey’s book as 63.1kg for 5 old adult males and 58.2kg for 3 prime adult males, with the overall average for the 8 being 61.3kg [(63.3kg*5 + 58.8kg*3)/8]. Sunquist lazily just averaged the means for the 2 age groups, not a huge error but was nevertheless bad science. Similarly, Nowell and Jackson who you’ve cited a few times are also wrong about some info they provide in their book. They state that male leopards of over 91kg have been recorded in Kruger NP, citing TurnBull-Kemp’s 1967 book as the source. This is incorrect, I’ve read TurnBull Kemp’s book and nowhere does he say that any of the 200lb leopards he heard about were from Kruger. Again this would be sloppy science and an example of why it’s best to go straight to the original source.
A side note, I personally find it much more useful to look at skull data rather than weight usually because there are too many variables with the latter (stomach content, health/condition etc.). For leopards especially due to the lack of proper data on weights from most regions, skulls provide a much better picture of the size variation across their range. I’ll post the details you requested about those weights shortly and I’ll also share what I have on skulls soon.
Apr 18 13 3:59 PM
Hi chui, about the list, my intention was not been misleading, but specifically to show the top figures recorded at this moment in those areas. I am very well aware about the disparity in sample sizes, but this is a common problem in all the great cats and we most face it. So, even if a sample is small, we can’t ignore it. It doesn’t matter if there are only two or three specimens; if there are samples, we most quote them. In this case, comparisons have much sense, after all, that’s the point in showing a list. About jaguars, the male of 37 kg is reliable and is the heaviest male recorded at this day, in that particular area. So, it must be quoted. About the Gabon leopards, maybe the skull data suggest larger specimens, like you mention and this is probably true, but until someone will be able to go and record a higher weight, the figure of 41 kg stand.
About the scientific sources, these have priority on the reliability, so that’s why I quote them first. But, it is obvious to me that some hunting sources are also reliable. However, books like those of Sunquist & Sunquist (2002) and Nowell & Jackson (1996) are authoritative and for that, they have some priority (but they are not perfect, of course). Books like that of De Almeida have a hunting “touch”, but are normally quoted in the scientific literature, and his level of reliability and accuracy make it a scientific source of information, so it must be quoted. And that’s the problem itself, the determination of what sources are “hunting” and which are “scientific”. Many figures in scientific documents came from hunting literature and it seems that in the particular case of the leopards and jaguars, this is the main case. Lions have a little of this problem but tigers don’t, as there is very well marked the difference between “scientific” sources and “hunting” sources. Maybe leopards-jaguars can’t be treated in the same way that I have managed tiger and lion records.
About the mistakes in scientific documents, believe me that I am very very well aware of this. About the leopard weight in Sunquist & Sunquist (2002), in the case of Bailey and the South African leopards, I believe I was the first in showing that the figures on the males are mixed (I put it in a in a blog about tigers, as far I remember), but at the end, I think that the average of the averages is more or less reliable and can be accepted. The problem is that he don’t quoted the range of the weights (70 kg empty been the maximum, as far I remember). In Nowell & Jackson (1996), there are many mistakes, like the 272 kg lion of Kenya that at the end it was unconfirmed but now it is quoted in many sources, also they provide incorrect conversion of weights for the Indian leopards and quote vague reports of leopard of 90 kg in Central Asia (now, this last figure is confirmed, but just until now, in 1996 there were not scientific studies in Iran). About the 90 kg leopards in South Africa, I have a source that confirm the existence of at least one, here it is:
So, there were (are?) 90 kg leopards in South Africa to, but like Sunquist & Sunquist (2002) mentioned, there is still doubt if some of these animals were empty belly or if they were full of beef. Maybe, the same must be applied to the Iran leopards, I think.
About the skull size, the data that you have show in other forums is AWESOME! Now, it is true that skull size is a good size predictor (like De Almeida said), but do you think that there could be some morphological variations in the relation of skull-body size between leopard populations? I mean, it is possible that some leopard populations would have larger skulls in relations to its body size, compared with other populations? I have found these problems in the lions and tigers (I have not studied jaguars in this issue yet).
I will try to make a list of all the weights of Indian leopards in order to create an average figure for the region. In the other areas of Asia, the data is scarce. Now for Africa, I think that the data is very large and it will take time to gather it.
Greetings and cheers
|GuateGojira||New records of the heaviest leopards||#20||[url]|
Apr 18 13 11:37 PM
Following the suggestions of chui, I investigated a little more about some of the records that he posted, specifically those not showed by me before. I found some of them, but not others (No. 5, 9, 11, 14 and 15). In order to create a larger database, in this case, I included some specimens from the reliable hunting records, all from first hand sources except in the case of those in Sunquist & Sunquist (2002) and Nowell & Jackson (1996).
By the way, I have confirmed the reliability of the large 83 kg male captured in India, it was a wild specimen, but it had some stomach content, here is the email from TODAY:
* Here is the document:
* Here is the confirmation:
So, the Indian leopard record is reliable.
Here is the new list, at the suggestion of chui, the final note mention that some samples are very small and the conclusions are only suggestive in those cases. Here we go…
Records of the heaviest leopards (Panthera pardus) from scientific sources and reliable hunting literature:
· Namibia: 96 kg. Valencia, Namibia [heaviest ever recorded in the wild] (Brain, 1981; Taylor et al., 1999).
· East Africa:
o 92.5 kg. Mount Kenya, Kenya [Hunted] (Mellon 1995; Scott & Scott, 2006 [Spanish edition]).
o 79 kg. Loliondo region, Tanzania (De Almeida, 1990).
o 73 kg. Naivasha farm, Kenia (Hamilton, 1981).
o 65.3 kg. East Africa [Hunted] (Meinertzhagen, 1938; Schaller, 1972).
· South Africa:
o 90 kg. Kruger NP [Hunted] (Fourie, 1992).
o 79 kg. Phinda-Mkhuze complex (Balme et al., 2012).
o 78 kg. South Africa [Hunted, empty belly] (Turnbull-Kemp, 1967).
o 70 kg. Kruger NP [two specimens, empty belly] (Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002).
o 64.1 kg. Limpopo province (Skinner & Chimimba, 2005).
o 45 kg. Cape Province (Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002).
o 38 kg. West Soutpansberg (Grey, 2011).
· Zimbabwe: 71.3 kg. Matetsi, Zimbabwe (Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002).
· Zambia: 60 kg. Eastern Zambia (Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002).
· Ivory Coast: 56 kg. Tai NP, Ivory Coast (Nowell & Jackson, 1996).
· Gabon: 41 kg. Northeastern Gabon. (Nowell & Jackson, 1996).
o 91 kg. Iran (Iranian Cheetah Society, 2010).
o 86 kg. Golestan NP (Kiabi et al., 2002).
o 57 kg. Bafgh PA, Yazd Province (Hunter et al. 2007).
· Israel: 29.5 kg. Judean desert. (Simcharoen, 2008; Nowell & Jackson, 1996 [Aprox. to 30 kg.])).
o 83 kg. India [Includes some stomach content] (Athreya & Belsare, 2007; Belsare Pers. Comm., 2013).
o 75 kg. Maharashtra (Belsare & Athreya, 2010).
o 72.6 kg. Gir Forest [Hunted] (Ward, 1914).
o 72.6 kg. Gorakpur division [Hunted, baited] (Burke & Burke, 1935).
o 69 kg. Central India [Hunted] (Pocock, 1939; Nowell & Jackson, 1996 [Aprox. to 70 kg.])
o 68 kg. Cooch Behar [Hunted] (Cooch Behar, 1908).
o 64.4 kg. Mysore [Hunted] (Meinertzhagen, 1938).
· Sri Lanka: 77.1 kg. [Hunted] (Pocock, 1939; Nowell & Jackson, 1996).
o 70 kg. Huai Kha Khaeng WS (Rabinowitz, 1989; Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002).
o 43.5 kg. Huai Kha Khaeng WS (Simcharoen, 2008).
o 40 kg. Kaeng Krachan NP (Grassman, 1999).
· Russian Far East: 61 kg. Primorski Krai, Russia (Miquelle & Goodrich, 2009).
· Nepal: 58 kg. Royal Bardia NP, Nepal (Odden & Wegge, 2005).
· Java: 45 kg. Bogor, Java (Hoogerwerf, 1970).
* Note: Some of the records belong to small samples and offers only suggestive results. Stroganov suggested that the leopards in the Russian Far East could reach up to 75 kg (Heptner & Sludskii, 1992), but the heaviest male captured by scientist at this time was a leopard of 61 kg (Miquelle & Goodrich, 2009). Males of the highlands of Kenya are reported to weight 60-95 kg (Hamilton, 1981), but according with Sunquist & Sunquist (2002), “there are records of African male leopards weighing it at over 90 kilograms, but most of these animals had full stomach, which can add some 20 percent to the cat’s normal body weight”.
Bodymass of African leopards:
Richard Meinertzhagen in the East africa and India: Average africa, 62 kg (n=5)
Sanchez-Arino 12 male leopards Tanzania average 62 kg (n=12).
Six female leopards east africa from Bertram in the Serengeti NP. averaged 32 kg.
Measurements and body weights of south african leopards by ages. Males greater then 7 years weighed the most at 72.25 kg
Last Edited By: Kingtheropod Oct 25 13 1:22 AM. Edited 2 times