MadSci Network: General Biology |
Ayden, The reason you are not getting a definite answer is because there isn't one! It is extremely unlikely that such a contest would take place, for the simple reason that the animals live in different parts of the world. Even if they did meet, they would be very unlikely to fight, because of the high risk of severe injury to both. In your hypothetical situation, my money would be on the bear, because its much greater size would allow it to absorb more punishment. That said, the tiger has more lethal weaponry, so the outcome would probably depend on whichever animal inflicted the first serious wound. This could well be the tiger, because it is a true carnivore, which makes its living by attacking other large animals, whereas the bear is just a very large omnivore. In mediaeval times, people used to 'bait' bears with dogs for sport. I don't know whether the dogs ever killed the bear, but if they did then maybe a bear wouldn't stand much chance against a tiger. On the other hand, if there were several dogs they would be able to distract the bear, which would be a smaller species than a grizzly, whereas if there was only one tiger the bear could concentrate on it. Also, in baiting contests, the bear was usually chained and muzzled. I think you are going to have to do the experiment ! [The MadSci Administrator does not recommend doing the experiment!]
Try the links in the MadSci Library for more information on General Biology.