There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
04-27-2014, 10:23 AM( This post was last modified: 04-27-2014, 10:24 AM by GuateGojira )
Yes, even the Ngandong tiger was still Panthera tigris. I think that the great change probably happen after the Toba eruption. The great extinction of most of tiger populations probably eliminated many of the haplotypes from other populations and is highly unlikely that those particularly close to the Sunda tigers survived. In this scenario, the surviving mainland tigers from the south of China seems to not have all the same haplotypes than those surviving in the east of the Sunda shelf. This is a probably explanation to why this populations, definitively separated since about 12,000 years ago, never interbreed, except from the population that survived in the area that will give origin to the Sumatran island.
Now, about the time of separation, I am slightly skeptical now about if only 100,000 years are necessary to separate two populations in two species rather than just two much separated subspecies. The genetic variation of lions is much greater (since 600,000 years ago) and they are still somewhat close, so the relations between tigers are even closer. In the point of view of Dr Shu-Jin Luo and her team and Dr J. Mazák with Dr Groves, this is enough time and morphological studies support this point of view, but from the point of view of Dr Kitchener (and probably Yamaguchi too), this is not.
This is a good point to debate in this topic.
Is 100,000 years enough time to separate two populations into different species, or these are only two very separated, but still, close subspecies?