ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)

Options

peter

Co-owner of Wildfact

2,609 Replies

34 Topics

Joined: Mar 2014

Reputation: 52

#108

07-12-2014, 07:12 PM

THE CASPIAN TIGER (Panthera tigris virgata)

The article Roflcopters posted (good find) is interesting, because it shows Kazakhstan is interested in re-introducing an extinct tiger subspecies in its original habitat. Mighty interesting.

Amur tigers could be transported to Kazakhstan and, perhaps, adjust after running trials. The reason is resecent research showed the genetic differences between Panthera tigris altaica and Panthera tigris virgata are close to zilch. This, however, doesn't mean they were or are one and the same, Guate. It depends on the point of view. If we follow Kitchener and Dugmore (1999) and assume there were Caspian tigers in the last glacial maximum, they could have dispersed to eastern parts of Asia and mixed with Panthera tigris amoyensis and/or Panthera tigris altaica. But J.H. Mazak made a case for a very different scenario (Amur tigers older and going west).

Based on everything I read, my take is the case still is unclear. One of the main questions I have is how tigers got to the Caspian region in the first place. Most biologists think tigers are unable to cross deserts and live in mountain ranges, but Brandt (1856), who read everything available on tigers, thought there were populations in very deserted regions in parts of Central-Asia a few hundred years ago. Not transients. Than there are the Bhutan tigers. They, without a shadow of doubt, show tigers can adjust to living in elevated and barren regions. Did tigers get to the Caspian region from India or did they travel from China?

Another question I have is why Caspian tigers showed so much variation in colour, stripe pattern, size and skull. They are much more diverse than in, say, the Amur region. To me, it points towards different populations in different regions. This, if you look at the map and the conditions, would make sense.

Anyhow. Below are a few pages of an article (Chikin-Tsaruk) I posted before (on AVA). I couldn't find a date, but assume it was written at the request of the Kazakhstan Departments responsible for the project mentioned in the article posted by Roflcopters:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Interesting info, I think. To finish the post, a few more maps I found in Heptner & Sludskij (German edition, 1980) and V. Mazak ('Der Tiger', 1983). All maps, in my opinion, point towards a more complicated picture regarding tiger distribution in north-west India, the Caspian region and Central-Asia:

a - V. Mazak on the distribution of Caspian and Amur tigers (1983)

*This image is copyright of its original author

b - Heptner on Amur tigers (1980)

*This image is copyright of its original author

c - Tiger distribution in Central-Asia (Heptner, 1980)

*This image is copyright of its original author

4 - Kitchener & Dugmore on tiger distribution in the last glacial maximum (1999, two models).

Compare with the previous maps and answer the question in what direction tigers spread after the last glacial maximum. Amur and Caspian tigers were present in both maps. Two very different regions and apparently nothing in between. The origin of Amur tigers seems clear (China), but where did the Caspians come from? And who was where first?

Let's move to the last millenium. Did Amur tigers spread west or did Caspian tigers go east? And why are tigers in central and western parts of China left out of the proceedings? Is it possible they spread north, west and east? There were tigers in parts of Central-Asia. Steady populations, according to Brandt (1856). They were the first to go when Russian spread east. Were they different from Amur and Caspian tigers? Everything I know says yes.

What is the real meaning of the genetic research on Amur and Caspian tigers, I wonder?