What species of Tiger are found in what UK zoos

I am sure this has been covered before, and at the risk of de-railing this thread further, I feel that some more corrections in addition to those above, must be made to the incorrect information posted above:

'Mohan' was not the first white tiger in captivity. Over 100 years earlier (!) one was exhibited at London's Exeter Change Menagerie in 1820, in England.

Not all white tigers are descended from one animal ('Mohan'). In 1980 three white cubs were born to 'orange' parents at Nandankanan Zoo in Orissa, India; from animals totally un-related to the Rewa 'line'.

It should be pointed out that white tigers have been found naturally across a huge area of eastern India, and 17 examples were recorded between 1907 and 1933 alone. The mutation is recessive and inherits in the same way as white lions, king cheetahs and melanistic leopards and jaguars. The huge range in which it occurs (including possibly Siberian and Chinese tigers too) implies that it is not due to a population bottleneck in a confined area, and therefore it can be argued that it is a much more natural colour form (like the melanistic leopard), than are either the white lion or the king cheetah, and that its rarity is only due to the low population density and social mobility of the species as a whole, combined with some negative impact on its camouflage. The gene is and probably remains, a widespread natural phenomenon and is not the result of captive-breeding.
 
ZooNews2024 said:
Not all white tigers are descended from one animal ('Mohan'). In 1980 three white cubs were born to 'orange' parents at Nandankanan Zoo in Orissa, India; from animals totally un-related to the Rewa 'line'.
Click to expand...
I would say most if not all white tigers in India are unrelated to Mohan and purebred.
 
I stand corrected. I knew there had been other white tigers prior. I was unaware of the litter from 1980. Still I would guess the vast majority of white tigers are still descended from Mohan.
 
Rohin said:
I would say most if not all white tigers in India are unrelated to Mohan and purebred.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
To state that 'all white tigers are hybrids' is another non-truth.
If the sub-species is an Indian endemic found widely across the country, then surely it is logical that most zoo tigers there (of whatever colour) are the local race?
Even further afield the assumption is perhaps just that. An example is the DNA testing some years ago of over 20 animals in the UK, showed up that 4 were pure Bengal. The testers had been sent the samples 'blind' to ensure no bias and all four turned out to be whites.
 
Apart from at Rewa, the next breeding of White tigers in India after took place at Delhi Zoo, between two of the first litter(1.3) of whites born at the Govindghar palace. (The Mahaharaja was finding the upkeep of his increasing number of captive tigers burdensome and came to an arrangement for Delhi to take some of them). I believe subsequent cubs from Delhi were later distributed among other Indian zoos so probably a lot more are still related to the original male Mohan, than are not.

In the UK, the last purebred Indian tiger appears to have been the white male Akbar 2 at Bristol Zoo. He died circa 1984.
 
Last edited:
Pertinax said:
Apart from at Rewa, the next breeding of White tigers in India after took place at Delhi Zoo, between two of the first litter(1.3) of whites born at the Govindghar palace. (The Mahaharaja was finding the upkeep of his increasing number of captive tigers burdensome and came to an arrangement for Delhi to take some of them). I believe subsequent cubs from Delhi were later distributed among other Indian zoos so probably a lot more are still related to the original male Mohan, than are not.

In the UK, the last purebred Indian tiger appears to have been the white male Akbar 2 at Bristol Zoo. He died circa 1984.
Click to expand...
In addition to the above, the Maharaja of Rewa sold another of the females (Mohini) of the first litter to Washington Zoo. While the 2nd litter born at Rewa consisted of two white males(Niladri & Himadri) and a normal female(Malini). These were also redistributed to Indian Zoos. The third litter at Rewa consisted of four white cubs but only two(1.1) survived. These were Champak and Chemili who were purchesed by Bristol Zoo and became the founders of the white tigers in the UK.
 
Pertinax said:
In addition to the above, the Maharaja of Rewa sold another of the females (Mohini) of the first litter to Washington Zoo. While the 2nd litter born at Rewa consisted of two white males(Niladri & Himadri) and a normal female(Malini). These were also redistributed to Indian Zoos. The third litter at Rewa consisted of four white cubs but only two(1.1) survived. These were Champak and Chemili who were purchesed by Bristol Zoo and became the founders of the white tigers in the UK.
Click to expand...
I remember seeing Champak and Chemili with four cubs at Bristol in 1968,don't know what their names were though
 
Last edited:
Strathmorezoo said:
I remember seeing Champak and Chemili with four cubs at Bristol in 1968,don't know what their names were though
Click to expand...
.Found more relevant information,. Chameli produced 3 litters, total of 14 cubs. First two litters died young, one was devoured by Chameli. The third litter of which there were 5 young, one died very early, the 4 that survived were one male, Akbar and the three females were, Sumati,Sarala and Shusmila.The reason for poor health in white tigers is due to extreme inbreeding. Champak and Chemili were the result of father/daughter mating. The inbreeding led to high mortality and congenital facial, eye,gastrointestinal tract plus cardiac and kidney problems.
 
Strathmorezoo said:
.Found more relevant information,. Chameli produced 3 litters, total of 14 cubs. First two litters died young, one was devoured by Chameli. The third litter of which there were 5 young, one died very early, the 4 that survived were one male, Akbar and the three females were, Sumati,Sarala and Shusmila.The reason for poor health in white tigers is due to extreme inbreeding. Champak and Chemili were the result of father/daughter mating. The inbreeding led to high mortality and congenital facial, eye,gastrointestinal tract plus cardiac and kidney problems.
Click to expand...
In-breeding (extreme or otherwise) does not cause 'poor health' or any other trait in any species. It purely magnifies the chance of any problem that might be there already.
Numerous other species will give you examples of issues due to in-breeding such as in zoo Lions, or many breeds of domestic dogs and other pet species, where the faults are often deliberately selected for - or indeed examples of extreme in-breeding which appear to have caused no problems at all (presumably because there were none there in the first place to be magnified) such as say, the Laysan Teal.
 
Strathmorezoo said:
.The reason for poor health in white tigers is due to extreme inbreeding. Champak and Chemili were the result of father/daughter mating. The inbreeding led to high mortality and congenital facial, eye,gastrointestinal tract plus cardiac and kidney problems.
Click to expand...

Champak and Chemili were also brother and sister. At the same time they got them Bristol also acquired a normal-coloured female from the same source which also carried the white gene, so she was presumably from one of the normal-coloured litters produced before the whites. She would have been related to them but not quite so closely. The intention was to 'outcross' her with Champak but this never happened. I don't think they were even put together at any time. Washington zoo did similar, getting a related normal male at the same time as their white female Mohini, but in their case he did father her cubs.

Afaik Bristol's whites never showed any signs of marked degeneration but then only a couple of generations were produced there.
 
ZooNews2024 said:
In-breeding (extreme or otherwise) does not cause 'poor health' or any other trait in any species. It purely magnifies the chance of any problem that might be there already.
Numerous other species will give you examples of issues due to in-breeding such as in zoo Lions, or many breeds of domestic dogs and other pet species, where the faults are often deliberately selected for - or indeed examples of extreme in-breeding which appear to have caused no problems at all (presumably because there were none there in the first place to be magnified) such as say, the Laysan Teal.
Click to expand...
.y information came from a paper " The White tigers of Rawa and Clifton" that was given at a conference at Bristol University in .July 2022.
 
Strathmorezoo said:
.y information came from a paper " The White tigers of Rawa and Clifton" that was given at a conference at Bristol University in .July 2022.
Click to expand...
Was it really miss-spelled in a university paper? - and whatever the paper might have said, my point stands - that in-breeding does not cause a trait to occur (as stated above), it simply doubles, quadruples etc the possibility of it being transmitted through the subsequent generations.
 
ZooNews2024 said:
Was it really miss-spelled in a university paper? - and whatever the paper might have said, my point stands - that in-breeding does not cause a trait to occur (as stated above), it simply doubles, quadruples etc the possibility of it being transmitted through the subsequent generations.
Click to expand...
No,it was my mistake
 
Deliberate inbreeding may occur more commonly than you think in breeding programmes. Obviously not ideal for genetic variation, but if a species is in such dire straights that simply more individuals are required to sustain the population it may be necessary. Then once the population is larger and more stable, that genetic relatedness can be effectively ‘bred out’ over generations. Like others above have said, inbreeding itself doesn’t produce malformations or susceptibility to particular diseases, it just increases the chance of closely related offspring carrying and presenting potentially ‘undesirable’ genes.
 
jtrbmvcq said:
Deliberate inbreeding may occur more commonly than you think in breeding programmes. Obviously not ideal for genetic variation, but if a species is in such dire straights that simply more individuals are required to sustain the population it may be necessary. Then once the population is larger and more stable, that genetic relatedness can be effectively ‘bred out’ over generations. Like others above have said, inbreeding itself doesn’t produce malformations or susceptibility to particular diseases, it just increases the chance of closely related offspring carrying and presenting potentially ‘undesirable’ genes.
Click to expand...
I was just reading about the Northern Elephant Seal-reduced at one time to around just 25 individuals. It's thought in their case that the genetic bottleneck that created was actualĺy advantageous in reducjng deleterious genes in the surviving animals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top