The Revival of the Northern White Rhino?
- Thread starter The Speeding Carnotaurus
- Start date
Well the genetics that Groves based at least part of the split on, turned out to be not correct. They stated both taxa had been separated approx 1.84 mya, a whole genome study concluded that it was more likely less than half that time (Comparison of whole mitochondrial genome sequences of northern and southern white rhinoceroses ( Ceratotherium simum): the conservation consequences of species definitions ), there is however good evidence that both taxa have been in regular contact during glacial times, including the last 14-26.000 years ago (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rspb.2018.1567). Combining this with the small morphological differences, the majority of authors continue to regard NRW as a subspecies rather than a species.
Interesting, thanks for the information. I didn't know that Groves was the one who had called the split in the first place, I thought it was before he moved on to ungulates.
~Thylo
Bib Fortuna
Well-Known Member
Well, the Northern White Rhinoceros is just what it is - a White Rhinoceros!The zoological system is made by humans in order to bring the various animal species into a certain "logical" order, which certainly makes sense. But It is only an invention of man that does not necessarily have biological relevance. Above all, this subspecies policy serves the sole purpose of making certain people stand out and make a name for themselves. Just because a plains zebra has shadow stripes, it is of course immediately a "subspecies" ... How many subspecies of plains zebra are there now ? 2? 7? 17, or 75? Quite simply, depending on who you ask ... And that's the same with the "Northern" White Rhinoceros, which is not even visually different from the "Southern" White Rhino. Oh yes, the hairy ear tips would be there. "Well, I have some Northern White rhinos seen in zoos (and touched- and nevertheless, I washed my hands after that ....) - some had hair tufts on their ears, some just did not.If I post images of these animals here, nobody would recognize them as "Northern" white rhino.And instead of experimenting with the nonsense of oocyte transplantation with these two last "Northern" White Rhinos, they should use that time, energy, and money to save the Sumatran rhinoceros, because that could help them ... because of that White Rhinoceros is not even threatened as a species. The species must be protected, not the "subspecies." The zoological systematics is only an invention of man. Of course, this is only my personal opinion, which has no relevance - who wants to believe in the Northern White Rhinoceros, of course, can continue to do so - there are also people who believe in a "god" ... they have not yet recognized that religion was invented by humans to control, dominate and rule other people ..
I don't think the ridiculousness-- and not to mention the insensitivity-- of the above is even worth properly addressing. I will say that I think you'll find the vast, vast majority of scientists highly disagreeing with you.
"Why bother wasting resources on the Iberian Lynx? There are other brown lynxes elsewhere in Europe"
~Thylo
"Why bother wasting resources on the Iberian Lynx? There are other brown lynxes elsewhere in Europe"
~Thylo
Having recognized the conservation value of preventing the extinction of subspecies... I would ask if there is enough genetic diversity within the two living females and the stored genetic material to make the northern whites viable again? Because if not, then is this really more worthwhile than diverting resources towards the four more endangered rhino species and all the subspecies thereof?
Bib Fortuna
Well-Known Member
Right-always judge by the crowd ....As ridiculous as you think my opinion on the subject is not at all.Well, how many subspecies of common zebra are there? You still owe me the answer ...
We'll, and I'm disagreering with the vast majority of scientists, very simple, isn't it ?
But if zoological systematics is an invention of man lacking biological relevance, with the sole purpose of gaining prestige for scientists, by your own logic there is no such thing as a species to protect and the whole thing is pointless anyway.....
You never actually asked him the question in the first place, merely raised the issue in the middle of a long run-on-sentence rant.....
Bib Fortuna
Well-Known Member
But if zoological systematics is an invention of man lacking biological relevance, with the sole purpose of gaining prestige for scientists, by your own logic there is no such thing as a species to protect and the whole thing is pointless anyway.....
You never actually asked him the question in the first place, merely raised the issue in the middle of a long run-on-sentence rant.....
You put this in a wrong context - there is no biological evidence that the man-made system of all life on earth is right - how could this evidence exist? We humans only believe that it is so ... roughly it is true. Because undoubtedly, a lion with a mole may only have so much to do that are both mammals ....I meant that the "subspecies policy" is a good way for many biologists to profile themselves-"look, the zebra has three more stripes on the neck, a new subspecies I've discovered"-about a slightly exaggerated example call. Woth to be protetced are all animals, but you should not be so stuck on "subspecies". Suppose that there were only the two cows of the northern subspecies, and a bull of the southern subspecies of white rhinoceros .. what to do? Purists would have to insist on not crossing both subordinates, right? There will never be unity only in the plains zebras - but it is so easy.You're right-I did not ask Thylo alone about the subspecies of common zebras. So I'll put the question here to the general public-or I'll pull it back, because it's clear there's no clear answer to that question.Every systematist sees it differently. By the way, according to the "Handbook of the Mammals of the World", there are 12 species of Klipspringer and 52 species of Duiker ...do you really think it is so, only because Wilson and Mittermaier writes in their book ?
I appreciate your view on species and I partly agree with you, but your comparison between Zebra and Northern white rhino subspecies is not a good one.
The fact that you do not see any difference between Northern and Southern white rhino does not mean there is none. These scientists you disagree with have described several consistent morphological differences, mainly in the skull, which are even visible in pictures of live animals. Additionally there are clear genetic differences, as the subspecies split between 0.5-1 million years ago (though there has been gene flow in glacial periods between them). Both morphological and genetic evidence agree with eachother and I cannot think of anyone with any serious knowledge about White rhino who would lump both taxa. The argument that you cannot see any difference, so there is no evidence for different (sub)species is non-valid, as this would automatically lump many cryptic species or species which are clearly distinguishable by skull/teeth characters but not from the outside (many bats & rodents), even though they do not interbreed.
The Zebra are a different story as though there are differences mainly between Eastern and Southern populations, this is more along a cline than a clearcut line, which is the case with the Rhino. Additionally morphological differences can be very large within a given population (e.g. presence of shadow stripes in Eastern populations). To make it even more complicated genetically several clades have been identified, but these clades do not coincide with morphological evidence. Plains zebra taxonomy is thus a big mess, but none of the things that make it messy are present in the White rhino. And I am not even going to get started about the mess HMW made of bovids....
There should be at least a decent amount of genetic diversity between the Frozen Zoo and museum specimens, probably not a whole ton though. I think another point to consider is that this isn't really possible to do with the other more endangered rhinos that don't have captive breeding programs atm, whereas this is possible with the N. White. The N. White is also an excellent experiment subject because of how well off the S. White is compared to all other rhinos. If this program is successful, who says we can't try starting a Javan program in a similar manner. It's riskier for both the Javan and Indian to start there though.
But if zoological systematics is an invention of man lacking biological relevance, with the sole purpose of gaining prestige for scientists, by your own logic there is no such thing as a species to protect and the whole thing is pointless anyway.....
Additionally, if subspecies and distinct population segments, etc. don't actually exist and it's more important to save the species as a whole, wouldn't saving those individual population which are genetically valuable still be a priority regardless in order to save the species as a whole?
And you never responded to my point. The Iberian Lynx was thought to be a subspecies of Eurasian Lynx for a long time. Scientists then realized it was distinct-- according to you, only to inflate their own egos. Yet I don't think you would claim that the resources point towards saving the taxa were pointless, despite your claims that there is no real-world evidence for taxonomic organization (even though there is, as @lintworm pointed out). So it seems a taxa all of a sudden matters when YOU accept that it does. So why can't everyone else decide that the N. White Rhinoceros matters? I'd imagine everyone else here, myself included, can see the morphological differences quite clearly. Why can't I decide that the maneless zebra population deserves to be preserved regardless of whether or not it's truly deserving of subspecies status? Are zoos in S. California wasting their time trying to save the Southern California Steelhead from extinction when it's only seen as a distinct population segment while the Rainbow Trout as a whole is quite common?
~Thylo
BBC going on an expedition in search for the Northern white rhino in South Sudan :
Bold expedition to find 'extinct' northern white rhino in war-ravaged Sudan
Bold expedition to find 'extinct' northern white rhino in war-ravaged Sudan
While on the surface this seems like an exciting proposition, in all likelihood its just another "lost species rediscovered???" tv show with cliffhangers and is just a dumb cash cow for the network. I find it hiiiighly unlikely that giant rhinos with half million dollar appendages would have survived a 22 year civil war. Govornments couldn't protect them in much more developed nations with an incentive to do so, why would war ravaged sudan be any better?
That government was offered outside help they refused it saying they did not need any help then they lost the last wild Northern white rhinos on the planet!
You would be talking of the DRC Congo and not S. Sudan!
According to a tour guide at SDZSP, the plan for impregnating a female southern white rhino with a northern white rhino is still moving ahead. He pointed out a group of female white rhinos who might be the surrogate.
I know it’s not particularly informative news, but I figured I should just add it to the thread.
I know it’s not particularly informative news, but I figured I should just add it to the thread.
Is there any hybrid population already existing between the two subspecies?
No; the two were fairly widely disjunct in range.
Correct the former!