Yuku free message boards

Apollyon wrote:

---

It's actually a myth that the Lion sleeps more than the Tiger.

Both 'sleep' (actually rest usually) about the same amount. All Cats sleep a lot. The Tiger, like the Lion, is an Apex predator and thus can lie around as long as it wants. Leopards probably sleep less (although I bet not by much - probably sleep in trees where they are safe from Lions or Tigers).

According the Oregon Zoo the Tiger sleeps 18-20 hrs a day (same as a Lion).

http://www.oregonzoo.org/Gallery/tigerphotos.htm

this site asks the question (Do Tigers sleep as much as Lions?) but does not answer it directly: "Like all the big cats (and pet cats!), tigers do spend much of their day lying around resting or dozing."

http://www.lifeforceindia.com/education/

However, since it is apparent that 'sleep' and 'rest' are used interchangeably, we are not given a true picture of the actual amount of sleep that either Tigers or Lions actully require.

This is a detailed study based upon the sleep requirements of mammals including carnivores, omnivores and herbivores. 96 species were measured in 6 orders of magnitude. The results are interesting.

Tigers sleep more than Lions (but neither sleeps 18 hours per day as often indicated - see links above).

Read the study (it's quite detailed and then open up the table of measurements - it opens into an Excel spreadsheet). Tigers sleep 15.8 hours per day; Lions sleep 13.5 hours per day (Jaguars sleep 10.4 hrs per day and Cheetahs 12.1 hours per day).

http://www.pnas.org/content/104/3/1051.full?ck=nck

Point is, an actual study indicates Tigers sleep more than Lions.

Take from it what you will but suffice it to say, the Lion is no more 'lazy' than the Tiger.

Your so-called scientific study is obscure, based on some theory, hypothesis and some predictions. How the table data on Sleeping time of animals calculated ? Wild animals or Captive ? How many animals measured ? No information ! Nothing ! Obscure ! Unreliable. Hardly Conclusive ! Of Course, as a person who believes in unknown emails as scientific data, you will believe in any nonsense and try to pass it off as realiable evidence.

So-called Scientific study is Busted !

Apollyon wrote:

---

Your so-called scientific study is obscure, based on some theory, hypothesis and some predictions. How the table data on Sleeping time of animals calculated ? Wild animals or Captive ? How many animals measured ? No information ! Nothing ! Obscure ! Unreliable. Hardly Conclusive ! Of Course, as a person who believes in unknown emails as scientific data, you will believe in any nonsense and try to pass it off as realiable evidence.

So-called Scientific study is Busted !

Are you a joke? You honestly dismiss this study but post all of your obscure sources that don't provide any supporting evidence?

Let's compare your sources with mine shall we? It's tiring having to educate young barely literate tiger fans.

PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of America.

Published in 2006

• Van M. Savage
• and Geoffrey B. West

Note the work both authors have conducted - click on their names to see more.

Areas of expertise:
Savage:
Biological Sciences - Plant Biology; Physiology; Evolution; Ecology
West:
Social Sciences - Sustainability Science; Biological Sciences - Physiology; Evolution

Note the date the study was published.

As to your comment about 'how was it conducted, etc' you clearly didn't read the study. I suspect, judging by your comments, that you honestly don't understand why this study has far greater relevance than your outdated sources or unsupported claims.

Note this above the Abstract:

Communicated by Murray Gell-Mann, Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM, November 20, 2006 (received for review September 1, 2006)

Did you read the METHODs part? This details HOW THE STUDY WAS CONDUCTED.

"All of the sleep data are from Zepelin (33), and methods are detailed therein. Data for body masses were not given by Zepelin (33), so most values for body mass were taken from Meddis (27), which is an earlier compilation that Zepelin (33) draws from heavily. When sleep measurements listed in Zepelin (33) were not given or did not match sleep data in Meddis (27), we used the masses given in Smith et al. (36), and when masses could not be found there, we used the average of the range of values given in Nowak (37). All of the data and the sources for the body mass values are listed in SI Table 1. Some of the original sources given in Zepelin (33) were consulted to determine which species were used. In a few cases, the logarithmic averages of body masses were calculated for groups of species (e.g., four species of Microtus and five species of Peromyscus). This was done to be consistent with the original sleep data in Zepelin (33). Data for brain mass were taken from Meddis (27), but two values were excluded because the sleep values given did not match those given in Zepelin (33)."

Here are the sources used.

Zepelin H (1989) in Principles and Practice of Sleep Medicine, eds Kryger MH, Roth T, Dement WC (Saunders, Philadelphia), 2nd Ed, pp 30-49.
Meddis R (1983) in Sleep Mechanisms and Functions in Humans and Animals, ed Mayes A (Van Nostrand Reinhold, Cambridge, UK).
Smith FA, Lyons SK, Ernest SKM, Jones KE, Kaufman DM, Dayan T, Marquet PA, Brown JH, Haskell JP (2003) Ecology 84:3403.
Nowak RN (1991) Walker's Mammals of the World (Johns Hopkins Univ Press, Baltimore).

This is very obviously a modern scientific study that is properly referenced and published in a peer reviewed journal.
.

The crux of the matter is how the mammals sleep data was gathered ? You didn't bring the information. Don't list the experts names as if it will somehow help your case of proving lions are not laziest cats. Bring how the actual sleep data was gathered. How the table data on Sleeping time of animals calculated ? Wild animals or Captive ? How many animals measured ? No information ! Nothing ! Obscure ! Unreliable. Hardly Conclusive !

Rest of the socalled is study is based on some hypothesis and predictions. Not real data by using Wild Animals.

At the end, your so-called study is not helpful in proving Lions are not laziest cats. You are just trying to sell unverifiable obscure data in the guise of modern study. That will not work.

Apollyon wrote:

---

Let's look at your sources:

My Sources are just common knowledge and common sense. The authors of the books includes zooligists and scientists like Mark Ridley, Edward Blyth, Charles Partington, Louis Figuie.

More Data,




Moreover, I have Sunquist on my Side,



And, another Tiger Expert Dr.Raghu talks about a territorial Male bengal tiger "He is very busy, walking all day, marking his boundaries intensively, walk 30 Kms per day, Next day does same again". How many Kilometers lions walk each day ? 10 ? 20 ? Tiger expert Valmik thapar book says Chitwan tigers walk more than 30 Kms per day. Siberian tigers walk more, active more.

I have data of lions of crater, serengeti, nairobi NP walk only 2 to 9 Kms per day.

That pretty much ends the debate which is more active.

Apollyon wrote:

---

I do know that Tigers require far more water than the more resilient Lion.

Why not actually read the ONLY STUDY posted here?

And you wonder why i say you guys lack education and experience? It's blatantly obvious that you and the other Tiger fans don't understand the value of proper sources and don't understand why your sources are mostly outdated crap.

Get an education moron.

You are trying to pass off unverifiable data in the guise of modern study, like a snake oil salesman. That will not work moron. Go and bring the information how the sleep data was gathered. It is you who needs to get an education retard.