Caspian tigers from Azerbaijan

[zulfu1903]

Hello all, 

After messaging back and forth with Mr. Peter he suggested me to add these findings to the thread as well.

Firstly, there's a recent paper about extinction of Caspian tigers and information on how scientific bias doomed the survival of this formal ssp. Full article is aviliable via - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10....50191/full

Secondly, I wanted to add my recent findings regarding the size of this ssp. As you know (mentioned by mr.Peter as well) there is quite some variation on the size of turanian tiger speciemens. Here I add 2 photos of stuffed tigers acquired by Gustav Radde from his trip to South Caucasus (Lenkeran, Azerbaijan) in 1866. Later, Satunin gives the measuremnt of skins as follows: 283 cm (173 cm body+ 110 cm tail) and 254 cm (161 cm+93 cm tail). In the Museum there's a particullarly large caspian tiger skull from Bilesuvar (North of Lenkeran) with length of 36 cm according to Satunin, 1906.  I am adding the pictures of stuffed skins from 1866 and mentioned skull below. Reply

Attached Files

Image(s)
           

[zulfu1903]

(06-18-2023, 02:51 PM)zulfu1903 Wrote: Hello all, 

After messaging back and forth with Mr. Peter he suggested me to add these findings to the thread as well.

Firstly, there's a recent paper about extinction of Caspian tigers and information on how scientific bias doomed the survival of this formal ssp. Full article is aviliable via - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10....50191/full

Secondly, I wanted to add my recent findings regarding the size of this ssp. As you know (mentioned by mr.Peter as well) there is quite some variation on the size of turanian tiger speciemens. Here I add 2 photos of stuffed tigers acquired by Gustav Radde from his trip to South Caucasus (Lenkeran, Azerbaijan) in 1866. Later, Satunin gives the measuremnt of skins as follows: 283 cm (173 cm body+ 110 cm tail) and 254 cm (161 cm+93 cm tail). In the Museum there's a particullarly large caspian tiger skull from Bilesuvar (North of Lenkeran) with length of 36 cm according to Satunin, 1906.  I am adding the pictures of stuffed skins from 1866 and mentioned skull below.

Well originally I wanted to add these to Caspian tiger thread, but somehow ended up as seperate thread of its own, sorry. 

I found more info about mentioned skull, here is all the measurements of this skull Satunin published in 1906 (in german and russian) Reply

Attached Files

Image(s)
       

[Matias]

Hi, @zulfu1903 

The extinction of the Caspian tiger is within the conceptions of its time, and so it was attributed. Between the 1950s and 1980s, information, studies and considerations did not have the scope or financial and technological resources of today. Although redundant, it never hurts to reflect on the reasons and attributions in which a big cat no longer inhabits a territory. Looking at the map of Turkey's protected areas, it seems unlikely that something bigger would step in to save the tiger to the point of remaining genetically viable. So even if the subspecies were not officially declared extinct, it would still have the same fate. Poaching and recreational hunting would not have been less impacted by a Law whose usefulness would only exist on paper. When considering the time factor, over the 40 years prior to 1990, the reasoning becomes more credible, although fateful regarding any comparison outside its time and historical context.

This quote (below) makes an intriguing point, as previous genetic studies classified Virgata and Altaica as essentially the same animal (not enough genetic variation to separate them). Assigning a common ancestor seems like an oxymoron. Preliminarily, the authors may be adept at divisionist concepts, favoring the perspective of existential perspectives of several subspecies of tigers that, to attribute conservation measures, gain greater status and geographic relevance. I will need to read more about it.

Quote:Considering that Caspian tigers probably existed in Turkey perhaps up until early 1990s, some 40 years after international scientific community considered the species extinct, it is reasonable to posit that the complete absence of surveys throughout that period, as one symptom of national and international inertia, squandered a historical opportunity to save the species. Today, the continued presence of the Caspian tiger in some remote corner of eastern Turkey is less likely. However, it is important to note that a recent study elucidates the evolutionary and natural history of tigers (Sun et al., 2022). Specifically, the study indicates that the Caspian tiger may have originated from an ancestral Northeast Asian tiger population and then experienced gene flow from southern Bengal tigers (Sun et al., 2022). The study also suggests that Amur and Caspian tigers had a once-common ancestor in East or Northeast Asia (Sun et al., 2022). Moreover, similar to the tiger reintroduction programme in Kazakhstan (see WWF Russia, 2019 for details), reintroduction from the Amur tiger (P. t. altaica) stock to Turkey might be an option since “interruption of potential historical gene flow across the ancestral Eurasian distribution of P. t. altaica + P. t. virgata may have been too recent (<200 years) to accumulate sub-species level genetic differentiation” (Driscoll et al., 2009; see Chestin et al., 2017 for an assessment of tiger reintroduction in Central Asia).

Environmental DNA is our best tool for recognizing the existence or otherwise of a species in any landscape being surveyed. There is nothing like technological evolution to support the knowledge of the present towards the future.

We have good news: is tigers returning to Central Asia Reply

[zulfu1903]

(06-19-2023, 11:02 PM)Matias Wrote: Hi, @zulfu1903 

The extinction of the Caspian tiger is within the conceptions of its time, and so it was attributed. Between the 1950s and 1980s, information, studies and considerations did not have the scope or financial and technological resources of today. Although redundant, it never hurts to reflect on the reasons and attributions in which a big cat no longer inhabits a territory. Looking at the map of Turkey's protected areas, it seems unlikely that something bigger would step in to save the tiger to the point of remaining genetically viable. So even if the subspecies were not officially declared extinct, it would still have the same fate. Poaching and recreational hunting would not have been less impacted by a Law whose usefulness would only exist on paper. When considering the time factor, over the 40 years prior to 1990, the reasoning becomes more credible, although fateful regarding any comparison outside its time and historical context.

This quote (below) makes an intriguing point, as previous genetic studies classified Virgata and Altaica as essentially the same animal (not enough genetic variation to separate them). Assigning a common ancestor seems like an oxymoron. Preliminarily, the authors may be adept at divisionist concepts, favoring the perspective of existential perspectives of several subspecies of tigers that, to attribute conservation measures, gain greater status and geographic relevance. I will need to read more about it.

Quote:Considering that Caspian tigers probably existed in Turkey perhaps up until early 1990s, some 40 years after international scientific community considered the species extinct, it is reasonable to posit that the complete absence of surveys throughout that period, as one symptom of national and international inertia, squandered a historical opportunity to save the species. Today, the continued presence of the Caspian tiger in some remote corner of eastern Turkey is less likely. However, it is important to note that a recent study elucidates the evolutionary and natural history of tigers (Sun et al., 2022). Specifically, the study indicates that the Caspian tiger may have originated from an ancestral Northeast Asian tiger population and then experienced gene flow from southern Bengal tigers (Sun et al., 2022). The study also suggests that Amur and Caspian tigers had a once-common ancestor in East or Northeast Asia (Sun et al., 2022). Moreover, similar to the tiger reintroduction programme in Kazakhstan (see WWF Russia, 2019 for details), reintroduction from the Amur tiger (P. t. altaica) stock to Turkey might be an option since “interruption of potential historical gene flow across the ancestral Eurasian distribution of P. t. altaica + P. t. virgata may have been too recent (<200 years) to accumulate sub-species level genetic differentiation” (Driscoll et al., 2009; see Chestin et al., 2017 for an assessment of tiger reintroduction in Central Asia).

Environmental DNA is our best tool for recognizing the existence or otherwise of a species in any landscape being surveyed. There is nothing like technological evolution to support the knowledge of the present towards the future.

We have good news: is tigers returning to Central Asia

Thanks for your feedback. Yes indeed legislation and the reality in the ground not always go in hand. And I agree in Turkey that's the case, even for some other species today. Thus considering dwindling population of Caspian tigers I think extinction was inevitable in the last century. However, I think this piece of paper sheds light on something important, bias of conservationists towards citizen science projects or a like. Lastly, it is quite interesting to know genetically altaica and virgata wasn't that different (I know that's why IUCN lumped them with tigris in 2017), but morphologically I still think there was enough difference to tell them apart. Reply

[Matias]

Morphological differences and similarities no longer distinguish or approximate one species from another. See the recent classification of Giraffes into 4 species. In the past, reproductive incompatibility was the most unambiguous concept that there really is differentiation at the species level. Morphologically different species, with different shapes and appearance, can appear bewildering relationships. Genetic science is there to recognize or not to recognize, in a profound way, the level of kinship.

Even if geneticists are vulnerable to different ideologies and pragmatisms, there is certainly always a complementarity when the focus is differentiation and/or genetic similarity, in the face of analysis of different sources/materials. Nothing should be seen separately, genetics together with techniques of anatomy, physiology, reproductive biology, etc., are useful to understand the limits of each species and identify the possible mechanisms of differentiation. "No single method accurately solves all problems."

Genetic science progressed and reduced concepts linked to morphological subjectivity. For tigers, conserving them in the wild is an unprecedented challenge. For some, better uniting than separating. There are more than 100,000 tigers in captivity around the world, “genetically mixed”, with no conservation value until then. By attributing differentiation only between island tigers and mainland tigers a broad focus for conservation opened up. However, Malayan or Indochinese tiger projects may lose conceptual and financial relevance in terms of local conservation, so they say, as there is no longer any reason to keep them at subspecies level. “Investing in projects that do not present a tangible and real future for the species to continue evolving”. The fact is that to have or not an animal in your borders, it will be necessary much more involvement than geneticists, zoologists and biologists can propose.

There is certainly the contrary thinking, but I see no point or use in debating whether or not the Caspian tiger has enough morphological differences to remove its current classification. Reply

[AlejoBravo96]

Según leí hace poco los científicos del centro del tigre de Amur llegaron a la conclusión que el tigre del Caspio y el siberiano o de Amur valga la pena la redundancia son la misma especie. Es por eso que para 2024 se iniciará la primera fase de restauración de la especie en Kazajistán. 
Según lo que leí se iniciará primero con la adecuación del terreno es decir la delimitación de la reserva así como también la liberación de otros grupos de fauna que constituyen la dieta de los tigres. Espero que ese proyecto en realidad sea fructífero dado a qué incluso se sabe de lla existencia de tigres de Amur en zonas de Judía.
Saludos. Reply

[GuateGojira]

(07-04-2023, 12:04 PM)AlejoBravo96 Wrote: Según leí hace poco los científicos del centro del tigre de Amur llegaron a la conclusión que el tigre del Caspio y el siberiano o de Amur valga la pena la redundancia son la misma especie. Es por eso que para 2024 se iniciará la primera fase de restauración de la especie en Kazajistán. 
Según lo que leí se iniciará primero con la adecuación del terreno es decir la delimitación de la reserva así como también la liberación de otros grupos de fauna que constituyen la dieta de los tigres. Espero que ese proyecto en realidad sea fructífero dado a qué incluso se sabe de lla existencia de tigres de Amur en zonas de Judía.
Saludos.

Mi estimado, mas o menos desde cuando has comenzado a estudiar a los tigers de Amur? Hago esta pregunta porque el descubrimiento de que los tigres del Caspio y los tigres de Amur son el mismo animal viene ya desde 2009. Es mas, el nombre cientifico "altaica" no deberia de ser utilizado pues por regla el mas antiguo es "virgata", y seria este el nombre para toda la "subespecie" desde Turquia hasta el lejano oriente ruso.

Lamentablemente, como veras en las mismas paginas de internet que estas consultando, nadie le pone atencion a los descubrimientos y estudios modernos y solo copian y pegan lo mismo una y otra vez, inclusive en paginas "oficiales" de organizaciones conservacionistas. Sin embargo, dado que ahora la clasificacion "oficial" es solo dos subespecies, los dos nombres "virgata" o "altaica" pasan a descartarse (ambos se unen con "tigris"), o a usarse solo para describir una poblacion, mas no una subspecies en si. Yo todavia uso el "altaica" en mis documentos, pero es un mero formalismo para no confundir al lector comun. Reply