Longleat Safari & Adventure Park Barbary lion

[Paulkarli08]

I'd like to add that, purity of a species is starting to become quite overated. Conservationists seem to be caring more about an animal's genetic purity than it's actual health & well being. Asiatic lions being a prime example, both edinburgh & chester zoos have had a lot of problems breeding their animals, most of you are probably aware of this already. Whereas the old longleat lion Kabir, who wasn't of ''pure'' ancestry managed to sire about a dozen? healthy cubs in the space of 4 years with just 2 females! I would personally much rather see healthy hybrid lions and tigers living and breeding in the wild succesfully, than see genetically ''pure'' lions & tigers who have to mate with their own parents in order to survive becuase there are so few of them.

But zoo's have to keep 'pure' species of lions and tiger for safety populations (not that they would ever be released into the wild) They breed them for conservation and educational reasons. and not all zoo's breed parents to offspring... it has actually been proven that in backcrossing animals one generation in a small population can bring vital genes back (as seen in my background on farming livestock). so although not seen as ethical, sometimes it is necessary.

 

[JonnyS18]

... it has actually been proven that in backcrossing animals one generation in a small population can bring vital genes back (as seen in my background on farming livestock). so although not seen as ethical, sometimes it is necessary.

Well yeah you're right in the case of tigers, there are enough unrelated animals of the same subspecies to maintain a healthy pure population without inbreeding being a problem...unless you include the South China tiger, whose entire population comes from just six pure animals, & because of china's ''need'' to maintain purity, most of that population is falling risk to disease, low fertility rate and physical deformities... these are the main & constant side effects of inbreeding & for what?? If they were to cross breed SC Tigers with a close relative lets say Indo Chinese Tigers, then the offspring would be healthier & the SCT gene would live on in these cubs even though they are not pure...I don't see why it is 'necessary'....

 

[Paulkarli08]

I didn't mean to imply that breeding mum to son (or along that lines) is ethical, but some inbreeding is necessary to put good genes (from a particular line) back into the population, eg: breeding a female to her great grandfather. Although there is inbreeding involved, it is only slight compared to a more close mating

 

[JonnyS18]

I didn't mean to imply that breeding mum to son (or along that lines) is ethical, but some inbreeding is necessary to put good genes (from a particular line) back into the population, eg: breeding a female to her great grandfather. Although there is inbreeding involved, it is only slight compared to a more close mating

Ahh right, yeah i agree with that . Second cousins & great nieces/nephews isn't a bad thing really. Thats the point i was trying to make with white tigers, theres now enough variety of genes within the white/orange bengal tiger population, to start breeding them responsibly...

 

[tetrapod]

Very true that they way most white tigers were bred was disgusting, forcing an animal to breed with a close relative just to look good is appaling. But here we are over 50 years later with many captive white tigers that have been bred so extensively that there is now an expanded gene pool. Although pretty much all tigers share Mohan as an anscestor, its not as if all white tigers are now brothers & sisters anymore, so like what was said earlier, we now have a chance to breed white tigers and lions responsibly without severe inbreeding occuring...

White tigers might well have an expanded gene pool, but only because they are 'generic' captive tigers now. The infamous ancestor of white tigers Mohan (and any other 'wild' examples) was a Bengal tiger. The captive white tiger population has been diluted with Amur genes to make a bigger tiger. I would also argue that there have been plenty of examples of inbreeding in white tigers, firstly just to maintain the recessive white coat, secondly to help perpetuate the pointless stripeless and golden tabby morphs (which I believe haven't been found in the wild) and thirdly individuals with horrible disfigurements and low longevity.

One way of looking at conservation is to say there is a limited amount of money so lets conserve a generic Panthera tigris utilising the whole species as one gene pool. Conceivably the South Chinese tiger could be conserved as a remnant percentage of the overall total. But it could allow Sumatrans and Amurs to be bred together. However we could equally be missing the knowledge as how important the genetic differences are between big Amurs and tidler Sumatrans.

At this stage we have the potential ability to save most of the tiger subspecies by keeping them seperately. The South Chinese tiger is probably not one of them.

 

[tetrapod]

I'd like to add that, purity of a species is starting to become quite overated. Conservationists seem to be caring more about an animal's genetic purity than it's actual health & well being. Asiatic lions being a prime example, both edinburgh & chester zoos have had a lot of problems breeding their animals, most of you are probably aware of this already. Whereas the old longleat lion Kabir, who wasn't of ''pure'' ancestry managed to sire about a dozen? healthy cubs in the space of 4 years with just 2 females! I would personally much rather see healthy hybrid lions and tigers living and breeding in the wild succesfully, than see genetically ''pure'' lions & tigers who have to mate with their own parents in order to survive becuase there are so few of them.

You may be correct, but you are looking at only three examples. Historically lions are just about as easy to breed as rabbits, and thus many zoos refuse to breed lions. Maybe there is a definite difference in reproductive output between the true Asiatic/North African lions and Sub-Saharan animals. Afterall there are bugger all Asiatic lions in Gir forest and obviously no wild Barbaries alive now. It is true that Asiatics live in smaller prides due to the almost desert-like conditions in the Gir, but compare this to Kalahari animals and you get a similar situation. Then again maybe it is due to the size of the exhibit at Longleat compared to the relatively cramped conditions at Chester and Edinburgh.

The captive Asiatic population is desperate for new founding animals and I am sure that this has some bearing on any perceived difficulties of reproduction.

 

[JonnyS18]

I agree with a lot of what you've said & you've made a great point. However if you think about it, if zoo's, safari parks & other facilities don't breed white tigers responsibly, they're going to continue to be bred irresponsibly elswhere. I agree completely that purity of a species is important & should be maintained if possible, i just think the health & well being of the individual animal is more important. Whatever your opinion of the white tiger is, genetic defect, accidental mutation etc: Mohan was born & bred by mother nature in the wild, & survived the first 9 months of his life before humans even found him. For all we know his white coat could have been a delayed adaption to the much colder climates that the tiger originated from. I just find it hard to believe that white tigers are genetic ''accidents''.

 

[tetrapod]

I agree with a lot of what you've said & you've made a great point. However if you think about it, if zoo's, safari parks & other facilities don't breed white tigers responsibly, they're going to continue to be bred irresponsibly elswhere. I agree completely that purity of a species is important & should be maintained if possible, i just think the health & well being of the individual animal is more important. Whatever your opinion of the white tiger is, genetic defect, accidental mutation etc: Mohan was born & bred by mother nature in the wild, & survived the first 9 months of his life before humans even found him. For all we know his white coat could have been a delayed adaption to the much colder climates that the tiger originated from. I just find it hard to believe that white tigers are genetic ''accidents''.

It is very conceivable that white tigers are nothing more than accidental mutations. Felids as a group throw up an extraordinarily large number of colour mutations, some which appear to be very successful - black leopards in Malaysia, and black jaguars in Central America. Others appear less so - blue/Maltese tigers and King cheetahs. Throwing out the odd mutation is the foundation stone for Darwin's theory of evolution. It is just that some work and some don't. The role of (good) zoos is to maintain virtually 100% of the captive genome of a given species, not to focus on one small genetic line with an odd colour quirk. The latter is all that happens when people concentrate on breeding white tigers, lions etc. There is no conservation value in doing this despite pleas from those collections which persist in doing so.

 

[tetrapod]

I forgot to add that I totally agree that the individual welfare of any animal is important, even if a mutant colour bred by a misguided collection. Again good zoos control breeding and also find good homes for surplus animals.