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.
06-25-2014, 06:56 AM( This post was last modified: 06-25-2014, 06:57 AM by peter )
One more on Korean tigers. This article of G.S. Song ('State of the Korean Tiger and its specific Feature') was published in 1966. Watch the pages: page 6 is at the top, page 7 below and page 8 at the right.
If we combine his information on Korean tigers with that of Barclay, we can conclude tigers were exterminated in the southern part of Korea just after the turn of the last century. In northern and central parts of North-Korea, tigers apparently increased in numbers after World War Two. Today (Miquelle) there could be 10-20 tigers in northern and western parts of North-Korea.
06-25-2014, 08:00 PM( This post was last modified: 11-03-2014, 06:06 AM by peter )
I decided to delete the post on Ford Barclay, because the quality of the scans was well below par. I'll try it again some time later. We'll remember he shot and measured a male tiger of 9.7 (292,10 cm.). The tiger, shot in the southern part of Korea, was measured 'between sticks', meaning the record can be used for tables.
We also remember tigers at the southern tip of Korea just before the turn of the last century were anything but few and far between. They, however, completely disappeared in the first decade of the 20th century. One reason was the Japanese occupation. Tigers were targeted by Japanese officers. Ford Barclay might have been one of the last western hunters who shot tigers in Korea.
Finally, we remember Korean tigers, although some apparently compared to their relatives in south-east Russia and Manchuria, were described as more reddish and a bit smaller.
Here's a few more scans to finish with.
1 - Korean tiger hunters just outside Seoul about a decade before the Japanse occupied Korea:
06-25-2014, 08:17 PM( This post was last modified: 11-08-2014, 03:39 PM by peter )
Encouraged by Guate's post on tiger evolution (post 6 in this thread) and the articles I read, I decided to write a survey on tiger evolution and taxonomy. I added some ideas in the conclusions.
Although I took my time reading and writing, I do not doubt mistakes were made. Anyone interested in evolution is invited to correct the information below. Remarks on visibility also are appreciated. If the scans should be enlarged, let me know.
The survey itself consists of 5 pages. Two more were needed for references and the last 10 have illustrations of topics discussed in the survey. As you can see, I didn't use glue to get the illustrations on the right page (I was out of it when I finished the survey, and it was Sunday). The tape, however, was just fine. Visible and a bit sloppy, but it does the job.
1 - The old Imperial Hunting Reserve (green) on the border of Korea, China and south-east Russia (a century ago). So there was a reserve where animals were left in peace most of the time for hundreds of years. Tigers in particular were protected. Rumour has it that's the reason they were large in those days:
*This image is copyright of its original author
2 - Russian hunters on the border with Korea (a century ago):
*This image is copyright of its original author
3 - A better quality picture of one of the tigers (from the text, I concluded it was a tigress) shot in the south of Korea by Ford Barclay:
*This image is copyright of its original author
4 - In the Imperial Hunting Reserve, tigers were left in peace most of the time. They grew large and a century later it still shows:
*This image is copyright of its original author
5 - Compare -4- with this one taken in facility. There's tigers and tigers and the size of some captive Amur tigers captures the imagination. I remember seeing one in Berlin a long time ago. Not quite as large as this one, but more massive all the way. I talked to people who also saw exceptional animals. It seems they are all but gone today, but I wouldn't be surprised to find one in Wild Russia in the near future when the situation improves. Russia has the best conditions (large forests, few people and Putin definitely is interested), but it could be the eastern parts of what was Manchuria has even better conditions.
*This image is copyright of its original author
6 - Amur tiger distribution in 2011. I was most surprised about the new population in the north-eastern part of China, but they also seem to move north:
06-26-2014, 08:23 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 08:29 AM by peter )
Two more on Russia to finish with.
1 - This is Putin in Sichote-Alin. I know about presidents, public relations and everything connected, but he has been there more than once and he's one of the few who uses his position in this way. It certainly has an effect when a well-known man shows an interest in the tiger and conservation. The tiger, by the way, is a large tigress:
*This image is copyright of its original author
2 - And now for something entirely different. This is a map from Heptner & Sludskij ('Mammals of the Sovjet-Union'). The book was published in the late seventies, but the map was made in the sixties of the last century when tigers were on their way back in Russia. It shows Amur tigers were seen in regions well west and north of Sichote-Alin.
The question is what to make of the statement that Amur tigers were in fact Caspian tigers pushing east, whereas reports of explorers writing about tigers in eastern parts of Siberia (500-600 years ago) seem to point in another direction (Amur tigers going north and west):
06-26-2014, 09:52 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 09:53 AM by GuateGojira )
Bengal tigers in Russia???
I was reading some books about tigers when I found THIS, read it please:
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
When I read this, I was shocked, after all, this suggest that human intervention on tiger DNA goes far beyond modern days. The case of Tara and the Amur genes in the Indian reserve was nothing new, according with this data.
The author suggest that the huge size of the largest Amur tiger is not particular of this race but a result of the mix of Amur and Bengal genes. [img]images/smilies/dodgy.gif[/img]
How reliable is this statement? I don't know, but the author quotes Yankovsky in this issue. What do you think guys?
I think the case of Baikal has pretty much debunked this allegation.
Some purebred Amurs can simply become gigantic in the captivity without acquiring the exotic mixture.
If the Amur population has any mixed gene, then it must trace back to the old time where the remaining population of the Great Pleistocene tigers got absorbed by the newly arrived Amur tigers. Baikal's gargantuan size pretty explains this possible scenario.
06-26-2014, 10:21 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 10:22 AM by GuateGojira )
Thank you very much for your replay GrizzlyClaws. That was about the same that I think in the first moment, after all, the large size of the Amur tigers can be simple explained by the "little" fact that the Caspian tigers that invaded the northeast of Asia were already large and have the unique characteristics of the Amur-Caspian tiger skulls, that no other tiger, nor even the largest Bengal tigers, have on them, like for example, the huge sagital crest.
I decided to put it here because Peter normally quotes Yankonsky, so I would want to know if this hunter actually said that. Other thing that I am not agree is the old myth that Korean tigers were another tiger race. In fact, a DNA study made by Koreans proved that they were the same than those from the Amur region. All those tigers where the same subspecies-race-variety. What the old hunters observed were only geographical variations, nothing more. By the way, there is no such thing as "white tigers" in Russia, those are only misinterpretations or simple hunter's imaginations.
06-26-2014, 10:25 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 10:30 AM by GrizzlyClaws )
Consider that the modern Sumatran tiger can have the dual ancestry, then i will also take that chance for the modern Amur tiger.
The only difference is that the Sumatran tiger is basically 50% mainland tiger + 50% island tiger.
However, the Amur tiger's ancestry might be predominantly dominated by the Caspian tiger lineage, most likely at least 90% Caspian tiger + 10% Wanhsien tiger.
We all know that when the Caspian-Amur population was thriving, the Wanhsien tiger was already on the verge of extinction.
The Caspian population that moved eastward might just absorb the remaining population, maybe breeding with their females. Since some Amur tigers do have clustered with the South Chinese/Indochinese population in term of the mtDNA. Maybe this could be the founder effect?
06-26-2014, 10:39 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 10:41 AM by GuateGojira )
Here is the study of the Korean tigers DNA:
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
Modern Phylogeny states that the old taxonomy classification is based in few specimens, sometimes from Zoos and probably from aberrant specimens that don't represent the true average population (Kitchener, 1999). This DNA study provides evidence to say that those "small" Korean tigers are only regional variations of the Amur-Caspian tiger population (Panthera tigris virgata), which had the largest habitat from all the tiger populations.
There is no doubt that the Korean tiger to the Caspian-Amur tiger is just like the Sunderban tiger to the Bengal tiger, just a smaller regional variant.
BTW, if the Ngandong tiger was descended from the earliest Wanhsien tiger that colonized Indonesia and absorbed the remaining population of the old Sonda tiger.
How about the rest of tiger population? It would be interesting to see whole picture of the tiger lineage.
06-26-2014, 10:56 AM( This post was last modified: 06-26-2014, 10:58 AM by GuateGojira )
(06-26-2014, 10:25 AM)'GrizzlyClaws' Wrote: Consider that the modern Sumatran tiger can have the dual ancestry, then i will also take that chance for the modern Amur tiger.
The only difference is that the Sumatran tiger is basically 50% mainland tiger + 50% island tiger.
However, the Amur tiger's ancestry might be predominantly dominated by the Caspian tiger lineage, most likely at least 90% Caspian tiger + 10% Wanhsien tiger.
We all know that when the Caspian-Amur population was thriving, the Wanhsien tiger was already on the verge of extinction.
The Caspian population that moved eastward might just absorb the remaining population, maybe breeding with their females. Since some Amur tigers do have clustered with the South Chinese/Indochinese population in term of the mtDNA. Maybe this could be the founder effect?
I think that at 72,000 years ago, the Wanshien tiger per se (Panthera tigris acutidens) was allready extinct, however, following our original theory, modern tigers are in fact, just modern and more evolved Wanhsien tigers, as there was not another genetic mix in mainland since the Toba eruption.
In this case, we can surely say that the modern tigers are just more evolved Wanhsien tigers, and the variations (Amur-Caspian, Bengal, South China and Indochina) are probably just geographical variations made by humans in modern times by habitat fragmentation or by the availability of prey.
For example, check that the Bengal, Amur and Caspian tigers, which lived in places with good prey base and that competed with other large predators, evolved in large forms and the three weighed between 240-260 kg at normal maximum weights and up to 320 kg in extreme cases. However, those that lived in "closed" jungles, like those of South China, Indochina and the Malayan peninsula, all weighed between 160-200 kg at maximum, but they were smaller just because the prey density in high forested areas is lower. However, Mazák's taxonomy is based in the habitat fragmented by humans, not from a natural differentiation. For example, there is much more differences between the Kaziranga and the Sundarbans tigers (both Bengal, by DNA) than between an Indian and a Indochina tiger. Just those of the extreme areas, like the Amur region and the Malayan peninsula, presents some special characteristics, but even they can be mixed, at simple eye, with other tiger populations in mainland.
The mix of mtDNA of Amur tigers with those of Indochina and South China is easely explained by the fact that all the modern mainland tigers descend from the last remaining population of Wanhsien tigers that lived in South China and North of Indochina region.
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
