Lions and tigers are the two largest cats in existence and are two animals that are often compared.
Lions live mainly in the sub-Saharan African region and in the Gil Forest in Asia, while tigers are distributed in the Forests of Asia, and although India has both wild lions and tigers, it is impossible to meet between the two, because there is no tiger in Gujarat, where the Gill Forest is located.
Perhaps it is precisely because lions and tigers cannot meet, which further adds to the charm of the topic of "lion and tiger fighting", and comprehensive foreign and domestic research data shows that in theory, who is more powerful between lions and tigers?
Comparing animals of the same type, body size is always the most important factor, because the weight difference often represents the difference in strength, when the gap exceeds 30 kg, the larger side is considered to have an advantage, and the gap exceeds 50 kg, which is considered an absolute advantage.
Regarding the weight of lions and tigers, who is the largest cat has always been controversial, such as the Network rumor that the Siberian tiger has 350 kg, and some people believe that some lions in South Africa also have a similar weight.
Since both lions and tigers have multiple subspecies, and the differences between different subspecies are large, we use the numerical values of the largest subspecies to compare.
Siberian tigers were once considered to be the largest tigers, but later due to habitat destruction, decline in prey resources, inbreeding and other factors, resulting in a lot of decline in size.
According to a paper jointly published by some authoritative experts in the industry in 2005, 1970 was a watershed in the change of the body size of the Siberian tiger, and the Siberian tiger after 1970 was generally smaller than before 1970. Among them, the average weight of male tigers is only 176.4 kg, and the limit value is 222.3 kg.
In the 1981 Mammal Species, the weight of male Siberian tigers was described as 180-306 kg, which is the weight of Siberian tigers in the past. And more than ten years have passed, has the size of the Siberian tiger rebounded?
Judging from the Siberian tiger "Wandashan No. 1" that broke into Heilongjiang, there are already 225 kilograms at the age of 2-3, and it is not a problem to reach more than 500 in the prime of life, and I believe that the weight of the Siberian tiger is indeed rising.
In addition, the Bengal tiger is also a larger tiger, and after the decline in the size of the Siberian tiger, they are expected to become the largest tiger subspecies, and the male tiger weighs 175-263 kg.
In the 1970s, seven Bengal tigers were captured in Chitwan National Park and measured and found that the smallest one weighed just 200 kg and the largest one was just 261 kg, with an average of 235 kg.
Lions are also a species in which males are larger than females, but their sexual dichotomy is more pronounced than tigers, and males can even be more than a third larger than females.
Among the existing lions, the African lion is larger than the Asiatic lion, and among the African lion subspecies, the South African lion population is larger than the East African lion, the male weight range is 186.55-225 kg, and the average weight is 194 kg.
Although there is some difference in weight between male lions and male tigers, this gap is small and is greatly affected by individual factors, so as long as it is not compared with the largest individual, the problem is not big.
Both lions and tigers have larger canine teeth that can reach 7 centimeters in length, but the canine teeth must be combined with the bite force to play their maximum role. Therefore, it makes no sense to simply investigate which of the canine teeth of lions and tigers are a few millimeters longer, and the key depends on the bite force.
Since the bite force is affected by many factors such as weight, age, physical condition, etc., it is difficult to compare the bite force between different species, so the concept of "bite force quotient" is often introduced.
Biting force quotient refers to the return of the animal's bite force divided by the quotient of its weight, which is not easy to understand, here we can simply understand it as a unit of biting force, that is, under the same conditions, who bites the force quotient is high, who bites the force is large.
Zoologist Stephen Rowe has studied the bite force of many animals' canine teeth and published the results in the journal Life Sciences, in which the bite force quotient of lions is 112 and the bite quotient of tigers is 127, which means that a lion of nearly 300 kg has the same bite force as a tiger of nearly 200 kg, so the bite force of the tiger's canine teeth is significantly higher than that of lions.
It is worth mentioning that the largest bite force in history comes from the extinct pocket lion, with a bite force quotient of up to 194, while among the extant cats, the highest bite force quotient is jaguar and clouded leopard, both 137.
In general, the higher the IQ of the species, the stronger the cognitive ability and the stronger the ability to process information. How is the IQ of an animal measured?
Many people have designed many experiments, including carnivores, typically using a variety of devices, encapsulating food, and then seeing if the animals can open the device to obtain the food inside.
These similar experiments seem to make sense, but they do not stand up to scrutiny, and the biggest loophole lies in the uncontrollable nature of variables and is greatly affected by sample differences, so the data for such experiments is not mentioned.
Measuring brain volume is a more reliable way to measure animal IQ, because from the existing research, some animals with larger brain volume do show higher IQ.
In a study of big cat skulls led by scientists at oxford university, scientists measured a large number of skull data from felines such as lions, tigers, leopards, etc., and found that although the skulls of lions are on average larger than tigers, their brain volume is not as good as that of tigers.
Tigers have an average brain capacity of about 16% larger than lions, and the small subspecies of the tiger, the Balinese tiger, is similar to the brain volume of large male individuals of southern African lions. From this study, the tiger's IQ seems to be above that of the lion.
Finally, looking at the hunting situation of lions and tigers, it can be described in a simple sentence: lions live in groups mainly large prey, and tigers live alone in medium-sized prey.
Lions are social animals, predators in grassland ecosystems, and there are many large ungulates, so whether it is for prey resources or to meet the needs of lion groups, preying on large ungulates is the most cost-effective.
Due to the characteristics of the prey, lions often cannot be fatal to the prey when hunting, so they pay more attention to injury, so that the prey slows down, weakens, and then locks the throat.
Tigers living alone are more cautious, have less demand for food, and forests cannot carry the presence of large groups of animals, so the tiger's prey is mostly based on various medium-sized animals such as deer and wild boar. Tigers take the form of ambush hunting, using the strong forelimb strength, directly throw the prey down, and then lock the throat, so the tiger's hunting method pays more attention to one-hit kill.
Different habitats and different habits have created differences between lions and tigers in hunting, and which way is more efficient? That's a matter of opinion.
Tigers have a greater advantage in the bite of canine teeth, in terms of body size, it will not be worse than lions, in terms of IQ, perhaps higher, in terms of hunting means, it is difficult to score high, so theoretically, I am more willing to believe that tigers will be more powerful than lions, do you agree?