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.
06-26-2014, 11:16 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 11:17 AM by GuateGojira )
This is completely probable, as all our theories are based in modern DNA studies that are only focused in modern tiger DNA and not ancient tiger DNA. In this case, we will need to have Wanhsien tiger DNA in order to know how much of that DNA is on the modern Amur tiger population.
Why? Well, if the Wanhsien DNA is strong in the Amur tiger, then this would mean that the Caspian tigers probably found some last Wanhsien tigers and mixed with them. But if the DNA of the old tiger is less in the modern Amur population, then this would mean that the evolution of the Amur tiger was completely isolated and don't found any ancient tiger population in the Amur region.
Take in count that apparently all tigers (except those of South China-North Indochina region and those from the Sunda) died at about 78,000 years ago, then just up to 20,000 years ago, the Amur tiger re-invaded the Amur region. This would mean that for 58,000 years ago, the Manchurian region lacked of tigers. This could sound incredible, but you most take in count that Indian tigers existed only about 12,000 years ago, which means that India existed without tigers for much more time that just 50,000 years. Using this side of the history, a Manchuria without tigers doesn't seems to crazy at all.