New Study Reveals How White Tiger Got Its Coat

Put more simply I believe it is the same colour pigment change that causes the 'Chinchilla' effect in rabbits viz. the brown ground colour (in the rabbits) is replaced by grey but the black hairs remain, giving a colour that looks like a Chinchilla- hence the name. In the tigers, the orange ground colour is replaced by white instead.

The problem with reintroducing the white gene back into the wild is that all(?) the captive tigers carrying it nowadays appear to be crossbreeds with admixtures of other tiger species- so their genes would be added too.
 
I thought this was already common place knowledge. It really does not serve any useful scientific purpose, it only seems to emphasize - undeservedly so - the uniqueness of the white tiger. As Pertinax pointed out rightly ... what makes this gene mutation pronounced is the crossbreed/generic nature of these tigers. Nothing natural about them .., having been bred by human hands (much like we cross tulips into something completely different than their wild counterparts ... I thought I put in a Dutch ... joke :D).
 
Last edited:
White tigers have now disappeared from the wild. "The white tiger represents part of the natural genetic diversity of the tiger that is worth conserving, but is now seen only in captivity," study author Shu-Jin Luo of China's Peking University said in a statement.
Click to expand...

White tigers might only be found in captivity today, but the gene is most likely still present in the wild population.

:p

Hix
 
Hix said:
White tigers might only be found in captivity today, but the gene is most likely still present in the wild population.
Click to expand...

Unless all the Tigers carrying it have been eradicated. If its correct no White tiger has been seen in the wild since 1958, its possible the gene has really been 'exterminated' in the wild.
 
hmm, a Chinese study on the importance of preserving white tiger breeding programmes, using tigers from a Chinese zoo with a white tiger breeding programme......

Conflict of interest much?
 
Pertinax said:
Unless all the Tigers carrying it have been eradicated. If its correct no White tiger has been seen in the wild since 1958, its possible the gene has really been 'exterminated' in the wild.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but considering white tigers weren't common in the first place, it's safe to assume the gene's frequency is low in the wild population. And becomes rarer as more animals are hunted and killed.

:(

Hix
 
Hix said:
And becomes rarer as more animals are hunted and killed.
Click to expand...

Exactly, as tigers carrying the gene are less and less likely to meet and mate together. Until the colour phase eventually dies out entirely- it is quite possible.
 
There is an error in the sentence on the third and fourth line of Page 8.

Also, (Ritland et al, 2001) cited twice on page 8, is not referenced in the bibliography.

:p

Hix
 
Also the relative lack of seeing white tigers have to do with it being a relative genetic disadvantage in the wild?
 
A logical assumption, but not necessarily the case.

:p

Hix
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top