Tiger Subspecies question
- Thread starter tigris115
- Start date
Pantheraman
Well-Known Member
Try this one.
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(18)31214-4
"No other species attracts more international resources, public attention, and protracted controversies over its intraspecific taxonomy than the tiger (Panthera tigris). Today, fewer than 4,000 free-ranging tigers survive, covering only 7% of their historical range, and debates persist over whether they comprise six, five, or two subspecies. The lack of consensus over the number of tiger subspecies has partially hindered the global effort to recover the species from the brink of extinction, as both captive breeding and landscape intervention of wild populations increasingly require an explicit delineation of the conservation management units. The recent coalescence to a late Pleistocene bottleneck (circa 110 kya) poses challenges for detecting tiger subspecific morphological traits, suggesting that elucidating intraspecific evolution in the tiger requires analyses at the genomic scale. Here, we present whole-genome sequencing analyses from 32 voucher specimens that resolve six statistically robust monophyletic clades corresponding to extant subspecies, including the recently recognized Malayan tiger (P. tigris jacksoni). The intersubspecies gene flow is very low, corroborating the recognized phylogeographic units. We identified multiple genomic regions that are candidates for identifying the adaptive divergence of subspecies. The body-size-related gene ADH7 appears to have been strongly selected in the Sumatran tiger, perhaps in association with adaptation to the tropical Sunda Islands. The identified genomic signatures provide a solid basis for recognizing appropriate conservation management units in the tiger and can benefit global conservation strategic planning for this charismatic megafauna icon."
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(18)31214-4
"No other species attracts more international resources, public attention, and protracted controversies over its intraspecific taxonomy than the tiger (Panthera tigris). Today, fewer than 4,000 free-ranging tigers survive, covering only 7% of their historical range, and debates persist over whether they comprise six, five, or two subspecies. The lack of consensus over the number of tiger subspecies has partially hindered the global effort to recover the species from the brink of extinction, as both captive breeding and landscape intervention of wild populations increasingly require an explicit delineation of the conservation management units. The recent coalescence to a late Pleistocene bottleneck (circa 110 kya) poses challenges for detecting tiger subspecific morphological traits, suggesting that elucidating intraspecific evolution in the tiger requires analyses at the genomic scale. Here, we present whole-genome sequencing analyses from 32 voucher specimens that resolve six statistically robust monophyletic clades corresponding to extant subspecies, including the recently recognized Malayan tiger (P. tigris jacksoni). The intersubspecies gene flow is very low, corroborating the recognized phylogeographic units. We identified multiple genomic regions that are candidates for identifying the adaptive divergence of subspecies. The body-size-related gene ADH7 appears to have been strongly selected in the Sumatran tiger, perhaps in association with adaptation to the tropical Sunda Islands. The identified genomic signatures provide a solid basis for recognizing appropriate conservation management units in the tiger and can benefit global conservation strategic planning for this charismatic megafauna icon."
Thanks.
I do think, for reintroduction, it's best to use the closest subspecies you can get.
For example, if you're rewilding Cambodia and Vietnam, grow Thailand's population, maybe augment the genes with tigers from zoos, and then use those to grow a new population
Not sure how pragmatic it'll be to put tigers back in Bali and Java but never say never
I do think, for reintroduction, it's best to use the closest subspecies you can get.
For example, if you're rewilding Cambodia and Vietnam, grow Thailand's population, maybe augment the genes with tigers from zoos, and then use those to grow a new population
Not sure how pragmatic it'll be to put tigers back in Bali and Java but never say never
Tapirus Lar
Well-Known Member
In java, there is very little scope for reintroduction of tigers. So much natural habitat and rainforest has been lost that it is becoming very hard for even the Javan leopard, a subspecies which is still extant, to survive-to the point that many people have speculated that the subspecies may end up needing a permanent captive population if it is to survive. There is simply barely enough habitat left to even sustain the existing leopard population, let alone a new introduced tiger population.
Apart from some tigers in South Africa, there don't seem to be any plans for reintroducing tigers into the wild. There are many more tigers in captivity than in the wild. If zoos are genuinely trying to reintroduce tigers into the wild, they should keep pure subspecies and phase out generic forms. If they aren't trying to reintroduce tigers into the wild, keeping pure subspecies is academic and it would be better to try to save other endangered species of animals.
Tapirus Lar
Well-Known Member
The tigers in South Africa are part of the 'Save China's Tigers' project. Some south china tigers have been released in the Laohu valley reserve in South Africa's free state province. The idea is, tigers in captivity tend to lose their hunting and similar natural behaviors that they would've exhibited in the wild, and hence can't survive just like that without these skills if released like that. South china tigers in particular have been in captivity for a long period of time and are virtually extinct in the wild. So, they have been released in that area, where they hunt South African animals and gain the skills required for hunting prey. At the same time, a suitable site in china will be identified and prepared for the release of tigers. Then, the offspring of these trained tigers from South Africa will be released there, while the original animals are planned to be kept there for continued breeding.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
Save China's Tigers has been active since 2000, nearly a quarter of a century.
The Laohu Valley Reserve has been home to South China Tigers for nearly as long. It was assembled in 2002.
And you're telling me that after all of this time, China still hasn't found a suitable release site?
The whole thing reeks of being a scam. Or at the very least, extraordinarily poorly managed.
Tapirus Lar
Well-Known Member
Whatever source I look up, says 'a suitable site is being identified' or the tigers will be reintroduced' or something. You can find sources and articles from 2007 saying the same, from 2023 saying the same. Apparently the founders got caught up in a bitter divorce case and no longer play any part in the organization. This is the most helpful article I found.
Can captive South China tigers return to the wild?
But none seem to give an exact reason on why they aren't being introduced yet. There is also a lot of controversy surrounding the project.
And about the question you asked, which is as to why china hasn't found a suitable release site yet, well this isn't a project created by the government [Like India's Project Tiger], but a private project that took tigers from Chinese zoos and bred 'em in south africa. Some sites were identified in the early 2000s but progress seems to have stalled
I've been watching this project on and off since it started but more 'off' than 'on' in recent years, mainly for the reasons you describe. ie. there is no real development and the same phrases are wheeled out years apart about ongoing developments. Its a bit like Barbary Lion reintroduction schemes in North Africa that are similarly talked about but nothing much happens. The loss of the two founders (human) of the project is another blow given they might have spearheaded further developments, but this sort of thing seems quite common. The main successes (so far) appear to be in the number of tigers that have been successfully bred in South Africa and the restoration of their hunting ability- even if it is in a totally different habitat.
Cambodia is bringing in P. t. tigris tigers from India for introduction, the native subspecies would be P. t. corbetti
The_Leopard_Seal
Well-Known Member
I honestly think the two-subspecies model is fine given that tigers historically had a wide range before having their habitats fragmented and being over-hunted within the past few centuries. The general trend nowadays is to lump in large carnivore subspecies (which makes sense given that they are large animals with wide ranges). Some researchers even argue that tigers (and lions) should be considered monotypic.