The scientist here uses "SEEMS", so either does not know full details or has no access to the type specimen van Roosmalen talked off per se.
In what light we have to see this observation then?
I would say on both … tread very lightly indeed!
New Tapir Species!
- Thread starter ThylacineAlive
- Start date
-
- Tags
- endangered new species tapir
The scientist here uses "SEEMS", so either does not know full details or has no access to the type specimen van Roosmalen talked off per se.
In what light we have to see this observation then?
I would say on both … tread very lightly indeed!
Hello TLD and others, here one can enjoy uninterrupted views of the new publication: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
I find it increasingly deplorable, nay … unintelligible and less than in the spirit of scientific discovery and dissemination of new publications and information for all that most science papers remain non open access!!!
I find it increasingly deplorable, nay … unintelligible and less than in the spirit of scientific discovery and dissemination of new publications and information for all that most science papers remain non open access!!!
@DDcorvus, he did bother to write. Whether he did so and sought advice outside his own expertise on callichtrids taxonomy and morphology is something I cannot answer. I would think his descriptions of the latter at species level as valid, whether his tapirid is is open to debate.
I say … again … solely on the basis of the presented photography of skull and mandible I would be inclined to … veer towards a juvenile animal (!!!). Mind this is not the same as saying it is either T. terristris nor T. kabomani or a third tapirid species (as quite formidable evidence in the western and north-western Amazon SEEMS to suggest.
One explanation for the tapir publication team not mentioning his name:
QUOTE: "Marcus van Roosmalen commented:
“I discovered the dwarf tapir provisionally named by me Tapirus pygmaeus already back in 2000. I tried to publish the find but the referees claimed I had confused the skull with that of a juvenile Brazilian tapir. So, I decided to ‘publish’ the “Pretinho” (=Blackie) it on my website Marc van Roosmalen, Brazil, New Species, Amazon Association for the Preservation of Nature and recently again in my book Barefoot through the Amazon. Just a matter of time till the scientific world is going to accept the 20 or so other megafauna discoveries I did exclusively in the larger Rio Aripuana basin. Most stunningly the dwarf manatee and the Pontoporia dolphin adapted to the clearwaters of the Rio Aripuana and some of its tributaries (Rio Arauazinho and Rio Juma). Trying to publish these caused me to be thrown in a public jail in Manaus sentenced by a federal judge to 14+ yrs in prison. “Crimes against Nature”, or “Biopiracy”. I still have to hide myself from the state and federal environmental institutes in the Brazilian Amazon, even after being acquitted by the Supreme Court in Brasilia, back in 2009! Thanks, Robert for posting me on this. MARC”
Mongabay.com wrote: “I have little doubt that this was probably the same tapir Marcus wrote about years ago. But it should be noted that Marcus wasn’t the only one aware of the possibility of the new species. The lead scientist on the paper spent 10 years researching it before publishing. Other tapir scientists were in on the loop and quietly waited the results. Why the credit goes to this team in particular is because they put in the time and effort including years of research (genetic tests and morphological studies) to confirm that this is very likely a new species. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Marcus’ other new species are confirmed in the future. But it takes a lot of years to build the evidence needed to convince the world of a new species. – Jeremy”
UNQUOTE
Source: Debate Over Discovery of New Tapir
Some of them are with ICB - Chico Mendes Institute and have affiliations with IBAMA .., so unlikely to endanger their 10-year scientific record to back up Marc van Roosmalen's reputation or his erstwhile findings.
Over and above: I usually do not have much up with crypto-zoology figurines …, but the site actually does include several new zoological discoveries next to all the mumbo jumbo Sasquatch crap.
QUOTE: "Marcus van Roosmalen commented:
“I discovered the dwarf tapir provisionally named by me Tapirus pygmaeus already back in 2000. I tried to publish the find but the referees claimed I had confused the skull with that of a juvenile Brazilian tapir. So, I decided to ‘publish’ the “Pretinho” (=Blackie) it on my website Marc van Roosmalen, Brazil, New Species, Amazon Association for the Preservation of Nature and recently again in my book Barefoot through the Amazon. Just a matter of time till the scientific world is going to accept the 20 or so other megafauna discoveries I did exclusively in the larger Rio Aripuana basin. Most stunningly the dwarf manatee and the Pontoporia dolphin adapted to the clearwaters of the Rio Aripuana and some of its tributaries (Rio Arauazinho and Rio Juma). Trying to publish these caused me to be thrown in a public jail in Manaus sentenced by a federal judge to 14+ yrs in prison. “Crimes against Nature”, or “Biopiracy”. I still have to hide myself from the state and federal environmental institutes in the Brazilian Amazon, even after being acquitted by the Supreme Court in Brasilia, back in 2009! Thanks, Robert for posting me on this. MARC”
Mongabay.com wrote: “I have little doubt that this was probably the same tapir Marcus wrote about years ago. But it should be noted that Marcus wasn’t the only one aware of the possibility of the new species. The lead scientist on the paper spent 10 years researching it before publishing. Other tapir scientists were in on the loop and quietly waited the results. Why the credit goes to this team in particular is because they put in the time and effort including years of research (genetic tests and morphological studies) to confirm that this is very likely a new species. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Marcus’ other new species are confirmed in the future. But it takes a lot of years to build the evidence needed to convince the world of a new species. – Jeremy”
UNQUOTE
Source: Debate Over Discovery of New Tapir
Some of them are with ICB - Chico Mendes Institute and have affiliations with IBAMA .., so unlikely to endanger their 10-year scientific record to back up Marc van Roosmalen's reputation or his erstwhile findings.
Over and above: I usually do not have much up with crypto-zoology figurines …, but the site actually does include several new zoological discoveries next to all the mumbo jumbo Sasquatch crap.
Last edited:
Nope, it is a full species indeed!
And just another article about the new discovery :
Wildlife Extra News - Dramatic discovery of new tapir species in south-west Amazon
Wildlife Extra News - Dramatic discovery of new tapir species in south-west Amazon
The species now has a Wikipedia page
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapirus_kabomani]Tapirus kabomani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
~Thylo
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapirus_kabomani]Tapirus kabomani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
~Thylo
As someone with practical experience raising animals, I think constant segregation of animals into ever more idiosyncratic species and subspeies is counter productive to conservation. Imagine if the current prevailing attitudes toward species preservation existed when the whitetail deer was severely reduced a century ago. We wouldn't have whitetails in large swaths of the country today because "we can't cross a northeastern whitetail and a texas whitetail". Practical and economic realities tell me I am right. Imagine when your grandkids are alive and there are no tigers because we split 5000 (and shrinking) individuals into more and more subspecies. In most cases the differences are less than any two cattle on my farm.
I think speciation today is mostly political. Name a new Tapir? You get grant money to pay off your student loans, and the habitat it lives in is protected from ever being developed because Vulnerable gets slapped on this new species.
I would rather my grandkids see tigers one day than having none at all because of short sighted scientific thinking.
Think about it the only reason we slap the term "breed" on the differences between Angus and Holstein or Doberman and Chihuahua is because of attitude not fact.
If two subspecies of a species (or even species of a genus) that inhabit similar habitat, have similar niches, readily mix on their own, and breed reliably healthy and fertile offspring then we shouldn't be exploiting minor differences for short term gain. After all research changes constantly, the Caspian tiger might still be alive if we had breed it with the Amur Tiger.
I think speciation today is mostly political. Name a new Tapir? You get grant money to pay off your student loans, and the habitat it lives in is protected from ever being developed because Vulnerable gets slapped on this new species.
I would rather my grandkids see tigers one day than having none at all because of short sighted scientific thinking.
Think about it the only reason we slap the term "breed" on the differences between Angus and Holstein or Doberman and Chihuahua is because of attitude not fact.
If two subspecies of a species (or even species of a genus) that inhabit similar habitat, have similar niches, readily mix on their own, and breed reliably healthy and fertile offspring then we shouldn't be exploiting minor differences for short term gain. After all research changes constantly, the Caspian tiger might still be alive if we had breed it with the Amur Tiger.
That's quite a soapbox with a heavy dose of ignorance. This "new tapir" is a lot more than what you seem to believe it is. Have you read the paper describing the new species?
Next time you choose to jump on this soapbox again, I suggest reading a book on conservation genetics. There is such a thing as "outbreeding depression". Experience will only go so far unless you know what you are actually working with.
Next time you choose to jump on this soapbox again, I suggest reading a book on conservation genetics. There is such a thing as "outbreeding depression". Experience will only go so far unless you know what you are actually working with.
But outbreeding depression would imply breeding that leads to negative consequences which isn't what I said. You breed hybrid cattle for hybrid vigor which disappears more and more with each successive generation. But like my example with Caspian and Amur tigers, the designation between the subspecies is only arbitrary because of human action (that separated the populations). We should not be crossbreeding ligers for instance but in the case of many subspecies the difference isn't niche it is genetic isolation because of human action. Or the Transvaal Lion/Cape Lion is another great example. They were thought for over a century by "scientific consensus to be separate subspecies only to be genetically similar. Subspecies should be maintained that arose from natural selection but not human action. If humans hadn't reduced their range then the subspecies that ranges coincide would and did in the past interbreed. Would it even necessarily even be a hybrid at that point? If the effects produce outbreeding depression that would cause the line of the new animal to stop breeding eventually, compared to those that do not exhibit the negative traits. So yes it would seem practical when possible to keep genetically/ecologically similar populations closer not farther apart. Especially if human action caused the populations to be physically separated.
Now that's a much more intelligent thought. I'm glad you understand that there are processes that must be taken into account before we go and generalize about everything.
Taxonomy is technically a human action upon the natural world. We have come a long way since Linnaeus put together his book, gave everything a name, and grouped things based on his opinions and observations. Yes, there was a time when subspecies were arbitrarily assigned to different populations of the same species - often to make a name for those zoologists. However, one could theorize that these populations may become a distinct species in their own time and with pressures from their environments. **This is where it does become political** Purists would like to believe these theories and want to keep the subspecies separate. This is how animals like the Caspian tiger became extinct.
With that said, today's taxonomists and geneticists have quite a bit more technology and science as evidence for speciation and what entails a "distinct population" than those old-school zoologists. Unfortunately, all of these findings have conservation and management implications because we have relied on the old zoology for such a long time. So I would trust many of these current changes than the work of zoologists from long ago. However, it is going to take a long time to re-look at all of the taxonomy.
Taxonomy is technically a human action upon the natural world. We have come a long way since Linnaeus put together his book, gave everything a name, and grouped things based on his opinions and observations. Yes, there was a time when subspecies were arbitrarily assigned to different populations of the same species - often to make a name for those zoologists. However, one could theorize that these populations may become a distinct species in their own time and with pressures from their environments. **This is where it does become political** Purists would like to believe these theories and want to keep the subspecies separate. This is how animals like the Caspian tiger became extinct.
With that said, today's taxonomists and geneticists have quite a bit more technology and science as evidence for speciation and what entails a "distinct population" than those old-school zoologists. Unfortunately, all of these findings have conservation and management implications because we have relied on the old zoology for such a long time. So I would trust many of these current changes than the work of zoologists from long ago. However, it is going to take a long time to re-look at all of the taxonomy.
Gerenuk has hinted into another big point as well Tschlander. What if a population of a species that we once thought was a subspecies turned out to be a separate species! It's an event that's occurring more and more these days. Take the Grey Wolf for example. The Grey Wolf is a species that was once described as ranging across most of the continents through varying subspecies. Now, people are starting to realize through modern technology that some of these subspecies are actually full species! The Eastern Timber Wolf is a good example of this and there are most certainly several others. Even well-known and very famous species like the Tiger that you mentioned are facing this. There's evidence to split the Sumatran and Javan/Bali Tigers into two separate species. Now if we went with your idea and simply introduced Malayan Tigers to Sumatra in order to increase the population, we would certainly now have an island full of hybrids with the origin species probably Extinct (or at least Extinct in the Wild). Two other examples are giraffes, whose once many subspecies are now thought to all be separate species with maybe one or two being subspecies of each other, and white rhinos, with the current thought being that the Southern White and Northern White are two separate species, not subspecies.
~Thylo
~Thylo
Any attempt at saving the northern white rhino already involves the importation of Southern White Rhino to Kenya and Uganda. The only living/breeding population of Northern Whites lives in a sanctuary with imported Southern whites. Hopefully there is an undiscovered population in South Sudan.
The Southern Whites were brought in to simply try and encourage the Northern Whites into breeding. I believe the only real hope for the species, though, is if there's a semi-large undiscovered population like you said or if we get cloning technology underway and can breed them back using frozen samples, which are at San Diego I think.
~Thylo
An update on the question of the valid name for the 'new' tapir species:
Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 71(2), June 2014, Case 3650 -
Abstract. The purpose of this application, under Articles 78.2.3 and 80.2.1 of the Code, is to confirm the availability of the nominal species Tapirus pygmaeus Van Roosmalen & Van Hooft in Van Roosmalen 2013 [22 April] for the black dwarf tapir, thus also confirming its priority over the subjective synonym Tapirus kabomani Cozzuol et al., 2013 [December], by ruling that Van Roosmalen’s edited book Barefoot through the Amazon – On the path of evolution, in which T. pygmaeus was proposed, is not unavailable solely on account of its being advertised as a print-on-demand work, but is an original multiple-copy, simultaneously available edition. It is shown that Van Roosmalen & Van Hooft’s publication contained information sufficient to satisfy the criteria of availability under Articles 10 to 20 of the Code.
We'll have to see how The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature responds to this application.
Blackduiker
Well-Known Member
Incredible news. I personally believe there are a multitude of species just waiting to be discovered; possibly many to be rediscovered.