Comments thread for "The Bornean Tiger: Fact or Fiction?"

[tostwear]

(02-04-2022, 03:14 AM)tigerluver Wrote:

(02-03-2022, 04:26 PM)tostwear Wrote:

(09-03-2019, 09:27 PM)tigerluver Wrote: So based on the format we're going for the article section, we can't merge the threads. However, how does this proposition sound: Any questions or comments specifically regarding the article referenced in this thread are posted here and the rest of the discussion regarding the topic in the thread by @BorneanTiger.

I have a few questions for @tigerluver 

• The scientific name of the Borneo Tiger is Panthera Tigris Oxygnatha ?
• How many fossils of Panthera tigris oxygnatha and borneo tiger have been found?
  

Hi @tostwear,

1. So under the current school of thought, names like P. t. soloensis and the like have been retired and it is all just Panthera tigris, akin to how P. spelaea is dealt with. What has been referred to P. t. oxygnatha is a small tiger from the Early to Middle Pleistocene. The giant Bornean tiger is not given a subspecific classification (just like how scientific article just called the Ngandong tiger Panthera tigris). The Bornean tiger is Late Pleistocene in age.


2. There are quite a few fossils that would be from the P. t. oxygnatha era found from Sangiran, Kedung Brubus, and Ci Saat. For Borneo, there are 2 cases (Niah cave ~10 kya, Kahayan river ~20 kya) confirmed with figures and 2 more potential cases (fragmentary canine of the Neolithic and navicular from 10000 kya-3000 kya). Note the animals are all from different eras and thus distinct chronological populations.

Thank you for your reply. Tigers have a really interesting evolution. Reply