ZooTripper365
Well-Known Member
After the success of my elephant thread, I thought I'd make a similar one, just this time featuring giraffes 
Favourite Giraffe Species
- Thread starter ZooTripper365
- Start date
You forgot one 
Bactrian Deer
Well-Known Member
Conveniently my favorite
Anything that looks like a reticulated giraffe pure or hybrid. Okapi is in second place.
ZooTripper365
Well-Known Member
Sorry I'm not able to add Okapi we'll just have to leave it for now sorry guys!
If "avoid mating when kept together" was the only valid way to define a species, of course, the whole problem of introduced Ruddy Ducks interbreeding with endangered White-headed Duck could be dismissed out of hand by classifying them as a single species too
This presumes, of course, that you don't view that as a "silly and unnecessary split"
Done it for you
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
Masai Giraffe - Purely because they're the one pure subspecies that exists in US Zoos.
I don't accept one giraffe species, just silly and unnecessary lumping.
Nile Hippo Expert
Well-Known Member
Masai Giraffes are my favorite subspecies of giraffe, even though there is technically only one species.
You forgot to include the "All of the above" option.
Your statement is incorrect. They are separated by some ecological and/or sexual selection that has kept them apart in nature for a very long time.
But do those selection pressures, and the resulting evolution, reach the level of there being multiple giraffe species? That's a rather subjective question. The one thing I know for certain, though, is that the giraffes don't care if we call them one, four, or eight species. Instead, it's purely a human construct to help us understand the natural world better. Personally, I think the one-species model for giraffes makes the most sense (and in general that taxonomy has been going in the direction of over-splitting as of late), but I can see the arguments people make for more giraffe species and an equally logical argument can be made for there being multiple species.
That said, while subjective, what we determine is or is not a species does have real-world implications, especially in the realm of conservation. Normally, it's at the species level that animals receive legal protections, and while the one-giraffe model is vulnerable according to IUCN, under the four or eight species model there may be populations of much higher conservation concern. It's unfortunate how such a subjective question (what is or isn't a species) has so wide-reaching implications on conservation.
It is not a subjective question. The giraffe populations defined as species are reproductively isolated from each other. They are on different evolutionary trajectories. This has been demonstrated over several scientific studies, including at the level of full genomes.
But does anything other than geography isolate their reproduction? None of the other normal reproductive isolating mechanisms applies to the different giraffe populations. They are capable of reproduction and can produce viable, fertile offspring. While there is certainly a case that can be made they are different species, there are enough similarities and the ability to produce viable, fertile offspring make a valid case for a single species model as well. Just because they are on "different evolutionary trajectories" doesn't mean they qualify as different species yet, even if they may be more distinct in thousands or millions of years.
Yes, it appears that there are some ecological and probably sexual selective forces keeping the giraffes separated. There are not any geographical barriers that really kept the three distinct kinds of giraffes in Kenya apart from each other, so one would expect them to probably interbreed over the hundreds of thousands or millions of years that they have been separated from each other if there were not some other process keeping them apart. In captivity the different types of giraffes produce viable offspring, but that is not what has happened in the wild, even where you would expect it.
This presumes, of course, that you don't view that as a "silly and unnecessary split"
Don't worry. I do!
Lions and tigers can produce fertile offspring. Does that make them the same species, too?
In that case, given how promiscuous Mallard are, and how many species of waterfowl they will interbreed with (the only two dabbling ducks which they don't and can't hybridise with are the pair classified within Aix, Mandarin Duck and Wood Duck) there really isn't much hope for convincing you to see logic and preventing you from lumping every single dabbling duck from Shoveller to Baikal Teal and everything in-between into Anas platyrhynchos