WildFact
›
Premier Section
›
Edge of Extinction
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE SOBOLONYE TIGER, PEACOCK, PIKUNOV AND VAILLANT
a - The Sobolonye tiger In December 1997, near the village of Sobolonye in the Bikin Valley, a man was killed and eaten by a male tiger. Yuri Trush, the squad leader of an Inspection Tiger unit (one of six in the territory whose purpose was to investigate forest crimes) and the men of his unit went after him. Some weeks later, after he had killed another man, the tiger was shot. In mid-air. In spite of the bullits fired by Yuri Trush himself, Yuri Pionka en Vladimir Shibnev, the tiger: " ... hit Yuri Trush at full speed - claws extended, jaws agape. The impact was concentrated on Trush' right shoulder, and his rifle was torn from his hands. Trush, now disarmed with the tiger upon him, threw his arms around his attacker, grasping fistfuls of his fur and burying his face in the animal's chest. He was overcome in every sense: by the inexorable force of the tiger; by the point-blank blast of Pionka's and Shibnev's rifles; by the impossible softness of the tiger's fur, the muscles taut as cables underneath. Like this, man and beast went down together, bound in a wrestler's embrace ... " (The Tiger, pp. 275-276). When they were skinning the tiger: " ... they came to understand that it had been shot an extraordinary number of times - not just by them and Markov (the man killed and eaten by the tiger); this tiger had absorbed bullits the way Moby Dick absorbed harpoons ... " (The Tiger, pp. 282). b - Peacock and Pikunov The Sobolonye tiger was about 10 years of age when he was shot in 1997. In 1992, he might have been very close to a group of American kayakers visiting the Russian Far East. One of them was Doug Peacock. While waiting for permission, they met Dmitry Pikunov. He adviced them to visit the Bikin Valley. They did and Pikunov joined them. Somewhere in the valley, Pikunov saw the track of an adult male tiger in the mud. Peacock later wondered if it was the Sobolonye tiger:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's the link to Peacock's story: http://www.dougpeacock.net/siberia c - Vaillant When preparing this post, I reread most of Vaillant's book. Although he only focused on one incident, the book is a kind of monument. Compared to most other books, it really stands out. When you can, buy it:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's a map of the Russian Far East. Sobolonye is situated in the Bikin Valley:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here's two photographs with some of the tigermen he talked to. I won't repeat they were loaded with experience, but they were. Anyone with questions about Vaillant's remarks on tigers and bears in the Russian Far East should direct them at these authorities. Center left (first photograph) is Dmitry Pikunov:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
 A large face male Bengal tiger. I think its skull must be huge.  
Show me data..
Siberian tiger and india now is 1 subspecies tigris tigris (08-16-2018, 05:07 PM)P.T.Sondaica Wrote: Show me data.. Of course. India's last Siberian tiger (Kunal) died on 19th November, 2011 in Nainital Zoo, near @SuSpicious's home. www.indiatoday.in/India's-last-siberian-tiger-dies All other captive tigers we have are Bengal tigers of Indian & Nepali ancestry. This link of Central Zoo Authority has studbooks with the data: http://cza.nic.in/studbooks.html Lastly, claims that all mainland tigers can be one subspecies, is not absolute. To reintroduce tigers to Satkosia Tiger Reserve they looked for similar genes within the Central Indian landscape itself! Tigers living in other corner of the world are not considered same subspecies in India. 
@P.T.Sondaica
You dispute that a Bengal tiger at an Indian zoo is actually Bengal, to which Rishi replied that all tigers in Indian zoos are from India. Then you said they needed dna test to know that, and asked for proof, to which Rishi replied that Siberians in Indian zoos never breed. Then you said that both Bengal and Siberian tigers are a single subspecies, contradicting the very first thing you said. You're not making any sense whatsoever... 
08-18-2018, 07:08 PM
( This post was last modified: 08-18-2018, 10:38 PM by sanjay
Edit Reason: corrected the formating
)
PETER.
The sketch of skeleton you posted is far from the real one. Here's the comparison of that sketch and real skeleton (posted by warsaw on shaggy god pro boards)...  *This image is copyright of its original author Look at the real one. Despite the head was turned, the whole skeleton was in the right position. The sketch was actually overrated. Indeed the bear might have slightly larger overall. But that doesn't mean it has stronger bones. Infact a few years ago 'vodmeister' made a thread of morphological comparison of tigers and Brown bears. Here's it... https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/animalun...are_type=t According to his data. The bears have more cavity (hollow space) in their bones as compared to tigers. He gave values 55.65% of hollow space for bigcats. And 59% of hollow space for Bears. Relatively thinner walls for bears as compared to Tige According to that bigcats have more bone density than bears. Infact bears have latlar bones doesn't mean having stronger bones. It really sounds quite reliable for me. But unfortunately some of the images he posted were later removed from his 'Image shack' account. I hope some of you guys had the information what he posted.
@Shir Babr
U very wrong.. Sorry bro siberian and bengal is one subspecies in IUCN now You ego cannot change IUCN understaind?  (08-18-2018, 07:08 PM)Vegeta San Wrote: PETER. @ Was this a study with a good number of bears and tigers or was it a one-on-one comparison (most pictures were deleted)? The bear could be malnourished, bone deformity, or anything if it was only one bear compared to a tiger. More subjects would be needed to determine if tigers (in general) actually have thicker cortical bone than bears. (08-20-2018, 06:09 PM)P.T.Sondaica Wrote: @Shir Babr A study of scientists from the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research in Berlin in 2015 (https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/the-tiger-subspecies-revised-2017/) suggested that tigers are only two subspecies: Mainland & Sunda. But i haven't found any source if IUCN ever adopted that suggestion. Multiple sources like this (www.zmescience.com/different-tigers) says that it was rejected. First confirm your claim. Do you have link of it being official? (08-20-2018, 06:22 PM)Polar Wrote:(08-18-2018, 07:08 PM)Vegeta San Wrote: PETER. POLAR I don't know clearly how much but definitely numerous specimens. As he posted it many times on carnivora but no one pointed out or doubted at his data. He even posted it on AVA. I think one of you guys might had it. But there's some data I invisted. And it says tiger has strongest humerus than Lions. I think you guys may know about this already.. Tiger has more Ca (calcium) in their humerus. While Lions has more Fe (iron) in their humerus. Here's it..  *This image is copyright of its original author Source: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article...=printable I know iron was also one important element in bone strength. But calcium is the main factor. And tigti also was rich in Si, P, S,K, Ti, Zn, etc... The lion was in V, MN, Ag,Se, etc... Thus tiger has stronger humerus than lion. The study inclues several specimens of each species. I just posted this data for clarification on tiger bones. I'm just searching about Brown bear bones and minerals in it. I thought you people has some data, if so please post it here... I'm yet to see a study about Brown bears bones being stronger than tigers. I've read a study recently saying that tigers have stronger bones in fore quarters than hind quarters. (08-20-2018, 07:08 PM)Rishi Wrote:(08-20-2018, 06:09 PM)P.T.Sondaica Wrote: @Shir Babr 'A REVISED TAXONOMY OF THE FELIDAE' (CAT-news, winter 2017, pp. 66-67) The revised taxonomy of the felidae (see title) is based on two studies. One of these is 'Planning tiger recovery: Understanding intraspecific variation for effective conservation' (Wilting et al., 2015). Although the article resulted in discussions, most authorities more or less agree with the recommendation to distinguish between two tiger subspecies only: mainland tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) and Indonesian tigers (Panthera tigris sondaica). The main reason is it facilitates conservation. Here's the link to the article: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400175 As to the discussion on Indian and Amur tigers on this thread. In the article mentioned above ('Planning tiger recovery: Understanding intraspecific variation for effective conservation'), regarding mainland tigers, a distinction is made between a northern (virgata and altaica) and a southern (amoyensis, corbetti and tigris) 'management unit'. Sondaica, therefore, is right in that most authorities today distinguish between two tiger subspecies only, but he omitted info on the northern and southern clades (regarding mainland tigers). Here's the link to 'A revised taxonomy of the felidae': https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/32616/A_revised_Felidae_Taxonomy_CatNews.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y The special edition of CAT-news features in post 1,279. Comments in posts 1,285 - 1,286 - 1,289 - 1,291. Although most agree with the proposal on two tiger subspecies only, the discussion on tiger subspecies hasn't been concluded. As to captive tigers. All zoos and facilities distinguish between Sumatran tigers, tigers from southeast Asia and Amur tigers. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 10 Guest(s) |