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

[Shadow]

(03-26-2019, 11:03 AM)BorneanTiger Wrote:

(03-22-2019, 11:20 AM)Rishi Wrote: @GuateGojira are you willing to include comparison with lions in this topic (name of the thread will depend on that)? 
In that case i plan on writing a follow-up post on how the lion subspecies being grouped into two could be a comparable case...

(03-22-2019, 10:10 AM)sanjay Wrote: I confirm.

After a name is decided you create the thread & how about you move the post there with in the blog-style you have in mind. One example from you will make future ones easier.

Here's something that I'd like to mention. As I pointed out in other pages, the Cat Specialist Group expressed uncertainty over its 2017 revision of subspecies of Felidae, such as lions (https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-north-e...ican-lions), leopards (https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-on-the-...light=puma), cheetahs (https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-cheetah...os?page=12) and cougars (https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-the-pum...light=puma), with the problem with lions apparently being that 'subspecies' overlap in Northeast Africa or parts of Africa close to the equator to form mixed or genetically confusing populations, see the question mark on Page 72 over Ethiopia: https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/hand...sAllowed=y

*This image is copyright of its original author

So the CSG wasn't 100% sure about its revision of subspecies of Felidae, and if genetic differences between Amur-Caspian, South Chinese, Bengal, North Indochinese and Malayan tigers within mainland Asia, and Sumatran, Javan and Balinese (and Bornean?) tigers in the Sunda Islands are so significant that they have to be treated separately, then I hope that the CSG reconsiders the way that they published the information on tigers (Pages 66–68: https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/hand...sAllowed=y), besides other species, and not treat this as the 'final' revision.

I wonder what are the reasons behind that two subspecies idea, genetic/scientifical basis or more like "political", I mean is it easier if trying to put conservation efforts to two subspecies? Interesting thing is to look for instance WWF websites, they seem to keep six subspecies on their websites, so most of people, who seek information quickly, will see six subspecies for tigers, not two. 

Obviously this will be an ongoing matter, because CSG wasn´t unanimous with that two subspecies and now two members of that group were in this new study with results, that there are those 9 subspecies and 6 extant. Interesting to see what happens in near future. Was CSG maybe a little bit hasty in conclusions after all. Or is conservation situation so desperate, that science have to step aside in a way to make it possible to save at least tiger as species even though that would mean sacrificing current subspecies in order to do that? My personal opinion is, that situation is very close to that. Reply