-
Help Support TNDeer:
Tooth age this one?
- Thread starter jmb4wd
- Start date
megalomaniac
Well-Known Member
looks 2.5
fairchaser
Well-Known Member
Agree!
BSK
Well-Known Member
Yup, minimum age is 2 1/2.
Toothwear suggests 2.5, but I would not be overly surprised if he was 3.5.
BSK
Well-Known Member
Toothwear just gives you an accurate minimum age. Hellickson's studies from the King Ranch, where fawns were ear-tagged so an exact birth year was known, found none of the standard techniques of aging deer (Severinghaus toothwear, cementum annuli, etc.) are that accurate. However, at least toothwear gives a very good minimum age. The biggest downside to toothwear is that it tends to under-age deer the older the deer actually is. By the time toothwear indicates 5 1/2, the deer is almost certainly older than that, and could be several years older. Even with toothwear indicating 4 1/2, most deer are actually older than that.
^^^ Tracking BSK, thanks for the detailed explanation and reference for members to read and learn from.
jmb4wd
Well-Known Member
Thanks so much guys, I had no idea on Age but looked at few tutorials on QDMA and I like you thought he was at least 2.5. I was hoping he was older and I only had a second to make a decision on shot. I think I had one cam pic of him about 3 weeks prior to the shot. If deer in photo was him I felt he was mature
Attachments
BSK
Well-Known Member
By the photos, I would have aged him on the hoof at 3 1/2.
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
^^^^ Agreed, 3.5 on hoof. Congrats on your buck.
TN Larry
Well-Known Member
Agree with above. 2.5 minimum, maybe 3.5 by tooth wear and 3.5 on the hoof.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Looking at the photos of the teeth,
I would say 2 1/2 or older.
However, actually examining the teeth in one's hand, it's likely many of us would have said 3 1/2 or older, based on the totality of the wear, not just the visual of the dentine to enamel.
In hand, one can often distinguish between 2 1/2's about as accurately by "feel" as by view. The 2 1/2's often feel sharp enough to cut you hand if you just run your fingers across them.
Birth timing can have a significant effect on whether a particular buck "appears" more as a 2 1/2 or 3 1/2. A late-born 2 1/2 can be difficult to distinguish from an early born 3 1/2, both by tooth wear and by body profile.
I agree the body profile pics indicate this buck was most likely 3 1/2.
But that's not to say he wasn't an early born 2 1/2.
I would say 2 1/2 or older.
However, actually examining the teeth in one's hand, it's likely many of us would have said 3 1/2 or older, based on the totality of the wear, not just the visual of the dentine to enamel.
In hand, one can often distinguish between 2 1/2's about as accurately by "feel" as by view. The 2 1/2's often feel sharp enough to cut you hand if you just run your fingers across them.
Birth timing can have a significant effect on whether a particular buck "appears" more as a 2 1/2 or 3 1/2. A late-born 2 1/2 can be difficult to distinguish from an early born 3 1/2, both by tooth wear and by body profile.
I agree the body profile pics indicate this buck was most likely 3 1/2.
But that's not to say he wasn't an early born 2 1/2.
jmb4wd
Well-Known Member
Thanks for opinions guys!
