WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Tiger
White, Black & Golden Tigers
White, Black & Golden Tigers
|
White, Black & Golden Tigers
|
This thread is for facts, myths, data and infromation about white tigers, black tigers and golden tigers in the WILD.
Only Bengal tigers naturally possess these peculiar colours's gene, I believe. Any siberian or other subspecies' tiger carrying these coloured coats is thus also crossbred and never can it be a purebred.
We also have 0 knowledge of their weights, age, or family history.
Bengals are slightly smaller in captivity than in the wild, but they are still large. And many are as large as their wild counterparts. You want to see what real captive Bengals look like? Here are a few link http://animalvsanimal.yuku.com/reply/113...eply-11387 http://wildtigerwatch.blogspot.com/2010/...ndian.html There are a bunch more. I just can't find the thread I am looking for atm.  *This image is copyright of its original author
Quote:Bengal tigers do not possess the white tiger gene, only siberians I believe. Any white tiger is also completely inbreed and never will it be a pure bred anything. So these are not "bengals". Quote:I may be mixed up, it may be the siberian who doesn't carry the white gene and the bengal does. But either way, the gene comes from one cat that has been inbreed for generations and that is why almost all white tigers have some sort of deformity.  (05-08-2014, 09:28 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: Bengal tigers do not possess the white tiger gene, only siberians I believe. Any white tiger is also completely inbreed and never will it be a pure bred anything. So these are not "bengals" These tigers are 100% Bengals, my friend, they are from India and only Indian tigers have the white gene. I think you probably made a mistake here, but don't worry, this is a small correction, I know you already know this. [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img] It is interesting to see that these tigers are very "light" in body size in comparison with the wild ones. Still, these white tigers are far more muscular than the orange ones in the background (females or subadults???). Sontakke et al. (2009) are the only ones that have published an official male tiger average weights from captive Indian specimens. They calculate and average of 183.3 kg (range 165 - 210 kg) for these specimens. The "Bengal" tigers reported by KingT are probably all specimens of the "American tiger", after all, no Bengal has been proved 100% pure outside India. Other thing that I noted is that the smaller male was the aggressor, however he get the worst of it, as the larger one put him down many times. it seems that aggressiveness is not everything in a fight. (07-08-2014, 09:57 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote:(05-08-2014, 09:28 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: Bengal tigers do not possess the white tiger gene, only siberians I believe. Any white tiger is also completely inbreed and never will it be a pure bred anything. So these are not "bengals"These tigers are 100% Bengals, my friend, they are from India and only Indian tigers have the white gene. I think you probably made a mistake here, but don't worry, this is a small correction, I know you already know this. [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img] I posted on this page that I made a mistake and it is the Bengal who only carries the white gene. All white are genetically inbreed, deformed and unnatural. Their sizes vary throughout, it doesn't matter if its a N. american Tiger or Indian Bengal, if they are white, every single one of their genes comes from Mohan. Every single one is genetically deformed in some way. All of the captive weights used by King are pure bengals. (I believe) N. American Tigers are different than Bengals, a N. American and most common tiger in the World, now, it's a mix between all tigers. Could be bengal/amur etc... Their bloodlines are too muddy because they were sold to breed, pretty much like a puppy mill. Also, America did have many pure bred Bengals, Siberian, Sumatran etc.. Same with Europe. Circuses brought wild specimans back from all over the world. They traveled by train from country to country, selling and buying cats throughout time, most of the pure bred cats were sold and mated with different sub species, wether on accident or purpose. But I believe the captive cats on the table all have stud books that show their pure blood lineage. I'm sure king can confirm this because I didn't collect the info on the Captive table. But I'm sure you already know all of this [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img] (05-08-2014, 09:48 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: I may be mixed up, it may be the siberian who doesn't carry the white gene and the bengal does. But either way, the gene comes from one cat that has been inbreed for generations and that is why almost all white tigers have some sort of deformity.See Gaute [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img] Info about White tigers http://bigcatrescue.org/abuse-issues/iss...te-tigers/
Oakland Zoo has bengals
http://www.oaklandzoo.org/Tiger.php Alabama Gulf Coast Zoo has bengals http://www.al.com/news/beaches/index.ssf..._at_a.html Miami Zoo http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/09/16/36...tiger.html Noahs Ark has Two bengals it claims http://www.noahsarkzoofarm.co.uk/pages/a...-tiger.php Their FB page just posted a pic of the Tiger, "Golden" who apparently is a pure bred bengal who was too aggressive for the the sanctuary it was at so Noahs ark took him, I have asked them if he is a Pure bred Bengal, waiting on a reply. Once I get it, I will post it here.
I also read that old time conditions in Indian zoos were poor and that is why the bengals used to weigh less, apparently conditions have improved and captive bengals seem to be putting on more mass. But I have no confirmation on this, just read it on another forum.
I got confirmation from Noahs Ark that "Golden" is a mix and not a pure Bengal. Last question Gaute, so you're saying that No Bengal outside of India has the stud book to prove that they are Pure bred bengals? I also saw a lot of sumatrans now, in the US. I wonder why that is? Maybe easier to take care of a smaller cat?
1- White tigers:
About the white tigers, I have the good look to found the free edition of the book “Tigers of the World”, the first edition of 1987. For a stupid reason I lost the link but I saved the PDF. In this book it is stated that in fact, there are two lineages of white tigers, the one from Mohan which is the origin from all American whites and another from Orissa, which have not been mixed with Amur tigers yet. Is in the part VI of the book with chapters 34 to 36. It is a long reading, I have not finished yet. This proved that at least some white tigers are viable and most be conserved, after all, white tigers were part of the wild in India and it is a myth that white tigers can’t survive in the wild, after all, Jim Corbett filmed a female white tiger with cubs! What more evidence do we need that a female that was not only able to survive, but also to breed! The problem is that the “American” white tigers are just a freak prone to deformities that must be disappear. However, to bring “pure” white tigers from the Orissa lineage is not cheap, so they prefer to defend they mixed tigers instead of conserve the “true” white tigers that still exist. 2 - Bengals in America: Now, about the Bengal tigers in America, I have not saw a single document that state that Bengals still exist in any zoo in America, nor even ONE. In fact the AZA (American Zoo Association) breed only Amur, Sumatran and Malayan tigers. There are no Indochinese tigers in America too, all came from the Malayan region and the only “pure” Indochinese tigers in captivity are in Zoos from they own region, but none of them belongs to an international breeding program. Believe me, I was also shocked when I read all this. European Zoos are also focused in Amur, Sumatran and Malayan tigers too. So, at the end, pure Indian tigers are only in India, South China tigers are only in China and South Africa and pure Indochinese tigers are only in Indochina (Thailand mostly). I have also noted that most tigers in AZA zoos are Sumatran, while most of the European zoos are focused in the Amur variety. Don’t know the policies here, but it seems that for American zoos, it is easier (and cheaper) to breed small tigers than large ones. The tigers from T.I.G.E.R.S. are not pure Bengals, in fact, they are a mix of Amur-Bengal and even Bagavan Antle stated in an interview at a program in NatGeo, that he believed in the theory of Kitchener (1999) and that is also used by John Varty in “Tiger canyon” in South Africa. They believe that there are no tiger subspecies at all, and then, they interbreed all its tigers, creating a useless tiger soup. Sadly indeed, but what more we can expect from a guy that bred “ligers” for the sake of money, and they have the stupid idea that this “freak giants” are ambassadors of conservation!!! 3 - Weigh in captive Bengal tigers: Finally, about the low weight of captive Bengals, we have discussed this in past posts, and the conclusion was that Indian Zoos can’t take care very well of they tigers, so they weight much less. Craig Kennion said that from 19 males in Indian Zoos recorded by his friend, the heaviest was one of 436 lb (198 kg). From another sample of 16 males, Sontakke et al. (2009) found a higher figure of up to 210 kg. Finally, the heaviest pure Bengal tiger in captivity, that I know, is a male named “Raja”, that have 12 years old and weigh 280 kg! Here is the link: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-...457625.ece So yes, probably some Indian Zoos are improving them facilities in order to give a better life to them tigers. But for the moment, evidence suggests that captive Bengal tigers are, on average, no larger than the wild African lions and much lighter than the captive Amur tigers. (07-09-2014, 11:27 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: 1- White tigers: The info on the White tiger female with cubs, do you know where this video is posted? I know white tigers are able to survive in the wild, mohan was taken from the wild. But every white tiger that has been bred was once his gene, since he was the only white tiger ever used for captive breeding, correct? And since both parents must have the ''white" gene in them, to create a white tiger, that means that its constant inbreeding. And while it can happen in the wild, it would be extremely rare, hence why we only know of 1 or 2 times of it happening. I know antle and Varty only use hybrids and thats why varty is looked at as some what of a fraud, because he was motivated by getting a white tiger and making money. But to be honest, I think he does far more good for big cats than bad. So I don't hold hard feelings towards him. In regards to my research on Zoo's in the US having bengals, it has been hard going to find anywhere that says they have a pure bred Bengal. Usually they say bengal but then I see that the tigers they have are usually white or at least one is. But it seems that us has adopted a no White tiger policy lately. Even the Zoo that has Cameron and Zazu said they would never take a white tiger but they didnt want to seperate them because they had already bonded. So at least that is good that the tide seems to be changing on these tigers, and maybe one day the states will be able to negotiate some purchase of real Indian Bengals and provide them the massive habitats that they provide for other animals in zoos and sanctuaries here. Any way, until proven other wise, I agree that no True Bengal tiger exists in the US any more. Now comes the other question I have, Peter could probably clarify it for me. I have read numerous circus trainer books which specifically state them going to india and bringing back cubs, same for sumatran and amur. We see all the hybrids in N. America so we know that some "bengals" where brought back. Does this mean that all remaining pure bred species have been bred with other sub species? It doesn't seem like that they would breed all these sub species together and just disregard genetic purety, I mean, you always hear of trainers who speak specifically of their Giant Amurs or their Bengals or their Sumatrans, what happened to these pure breeds?
The info and the reference of the video of Jim Corbett are in his book “Man Eaters of Kumaon”. Jim made several videos of wild tigers, sadly many of them are lost forever, although other are safe in the Natural History Museum of London (as far I remember). There is even a picture of the white tigress and her cubs at the book.
On the white tigers, in fact, I was reading, again, the chapters on the white tigers, and I noted that I was wrong, because ALL the white tiger’s lineages came from Mohan and all are highly inbreed. The problem is that although Indian white tigers have problems, the American white tigers are even worst, because the Indian ones are STILL 100% pure Bengals, while the American ones are a mix of Amur-Bengal. In this last point, I am right, at least. A study on white tigers from Dr Luo in 2012 or 2013, don’t remember the exact year, she showed that in fact, there is no need of constant inbreeding in order to produce white tigers. There is only one gene what causes the new color. Sadly, this is somewhat late for many of these captive populations, especially for the American one, which is practically useless. I will found the document in order to be read by all. About Varty and Antle, I agree that many of them actions seem to be positive for tiger conservation and are based in “good intentions”, but we must remember the old phrase: the way to hell is paved of “good intentions”. A deeper analysis show that in fact, both men are searching they own benefit and none of them follow the purposes of conserve the purity of the tiger varieties. Besides, the actions of Antle are even worst, as he promote the breeding of American white tigers and the unnatural ligers. So NO, I can’t see him with good eyes, tiger conservation is not a business, at least, not like what he is doing. About Varty, well, he made a “fake” documentary and now he allows “rich” people to “hunt” his tigers with sedative darts for money. On the Bengal tigers in America, the old webpage “Tiger territory” (AKA Lairweb) stated that at the years 2000 or around it, there was only one pure Bengal tigress in America. At 2014, this tigress is surely dead and it is 100% certain that no pure Bengal tiger exist in USA, Mexico, Argentina or any other American country. Finally, about the “pure” tigers in circuses and private facilities, Luo et al. (2010) stated that these specimens still present genetic variations that are now absents in the wild, so even those “pure” or more or less pure tigers can be used for conservation. Current tiger conservation conserves the idea of “subspecies”, but this is more for “law issues” than for Biology. As I have showed many times, there is not a universal classification for tigers, with some scientists stating that there are at least 5 or 6 subspecies and others saying that there are only two and even others that state that there are two species with many other subspecies. At the end, it will depend on the point of view and interpretation of the data. The only fact that we can’t denied is that Amur and Sumatran tigers are so different that they clearly represent two different tiger forms and most not be crossed. Bengal and Amur tigers are also different, and although the distance between them is much smaller than that of the Island specimens, they still present differences that must be taken in count. They are separated since about 20,000 years ago, so they must not be crossed. Finally, the difference between Indian and Indochinese tigers is very small, but it has the largest backup from a morphological (Mazák) and genetically (Luo) point of view, with respect of other tropical varieties in the mainland. In this case, they must not be crossed too. Now, about the Malayan and Indochinese tigers, there is a little genetic difference but the morphological data don’t support this, however the AZA and the European zoos are already breeding them separately, so this new “variety” is more man-made than nature-made. At least in this case, this point of view is good for Malayan tigers, because the government protect they tigers like a national symbol and the idea that these tigers are “unique” increase they protection. The differentiation of the South China tiger is still in debate as the evidence is scanty (morphologically and genetically); however we must take in count that there are very few specimens and the last ones still alive are highly inbreed. 
Some remarks regarding Guate´s post (from the top down).
1 - White tigers in India. Some time ago, I posted an authentic report about two adult white tigresses shot and measured in India. In ´Man-Eaters of Kumaon´, Jim Corbett wrote he saw and filmed a white tigress in Kumaon. 2 - White tigers have been seen in Manchuria as well. Chapter XVII of ´The Tiger´s Claw´ is about a white tiger in Manchuria. This animal, at the request of a Japan zoo, was hunted by Jankowski and his sons. Although the tiger was very close to them (he attacked a domestic ox in a shed next to the house in which they slept), they couldn´t get to him. Jankowski didn´t see the tiger himself, but others did. This animal, a large male, was not afraid of humans and hunted by day. Apart from that, Jankowski saw skins of white tigers. These skins were completely white and had palish brown stripes. 3 - Tiger facilities. I know of a number of facilities in Europe and read a number of articles about facilities in the US, Africa and China. I also talked to different people who were involved, trainers, owners and directors included. It isn´t easy to get to an opinion about these facilities and the motives of the owners. I noticed all were fascinated by tigers, all had different objectives and most, although educated to a degree, didn´t seem to have a clue as to what they were really doing. Inside, I sometimes had the idea I was on an island playing in a very adventurous movie (including a weird scientist playing with fire). At other times, I saw committed people giving it their all. After everything I saw, my conclusion a circus is better than a facility or a zoo and big cat trainers usually are more committed and educated than all others combined. Everyone involved in captive or semi-captive big cats in some way really is involved in the past. 4 - Tiger and lion subspecies in captivity. I read many books written by people who caught wild big cats and other animals. Some owners of menageries and zoos caught their own animals. Many tigers described as ´Bengals´ were in fact Panthera tigris corbetti. Apart from a few exceptions, the supply line regarding India was cut in the seventies of the last century. Java and Sumatra tigers were caught until the late fifties and early sixties and the Russians, regarding Amur tigers, continued a little longer. I am absolutely convinced some wild tigers ´poached´ today can be found in established and well-known zoos or facilities in some way. Everything has a price. It´s very difficult to get to a conclusion regarding subspecies in captivity. In some cases, tigers of different subspecies were seperated from others for many generations and only bred to tigers of the same subspecies. Recent research proved some captive tigers, for this reason, can be used for breeding. In most cases, however, tiger were interbred. I talked to a big cat trainer who showed me the result of a meeting between a large Amur male and a small Sumatran tigress. He said he was convinced both were completely pure. I talked more than once with him. Long conversations. My conclusion was he was both very well educated and sound in every way. These tigers, all very healthy males in their prime when I saw them, could have been the largest I saw. Ground colour very red, numerous very black stripes and different from all other captive Amur tigers I saw. 5 - Today. Over the years, attempts have been made to get to a breeding program of tiger subspecies. Some zoos concentrate on corbetti, whereas others have Kruger lions or Amur tigers only. Research has shown there still are pure subspecies in some facilities. This, however, doesn´t mean these animals can be used to rewild. The reason is captivity has a profound effect on big cats. They are apex-predators and it takes a very long time to get there. My guess is different generations. If things continue the way they do (regarding wild tigers), we could see new facilities in the future. These could be close to those seen in Russia. The ones created for abandoned cubs or wounded tigers, I mean. No humans allowed.
I have noted that instead of been a "Excellent Wildlife and Nature Videos" topic, this is now a "White tigers" topic. Sorry for that. [img]images/smilies/tongue.gif[/img]
Continuing with these, I have found the document about the genetic of the white tigers and other two documents that can help us to understand why this mutation happen and that prove that the white gene has nothing to do with deformities (this is a cause of inbreeding, not of the gene). Original document: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23707431 Support data: http://abc.cbi.pku.edu.cn/talk/xu-xiao-tiger.pdf Another new thesis: http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/han...sequence=1 Let's see what we can learn from this new documents. About Peter post, yes, there are other records of white tigers, he has post them previously so there is no doubt that white tigers are completely able to survive in the wild. Now, about the white tiger in Russia, I will take that like a grain of salt, as there is no evidence that the white gene existed in this population. There are only rumors and rumors of rumors, nothing reliable, and about the skins, we most remember that skins can "travel" great distances, if not, remember the "Sudan tiger" described by Dereniyagala, based only in a skin, a ridiculous part on taxonomical history, according with Mazák, and I agree.
Shouldn't we look at white tigers surviving in the wild the same way we would look at the claim of a 400kg cat?
I know these are valid reports, but to my knowledge the only confirmed white tiger was Mohan, I am not saying these other cats didn't exist, but I would really love to see any images of them. Especially if they reportedly already exist. I just think we should be as thorough as possible, we've debunked quite a few popular ideas already by being that way. Gaute- on your point about white bengals in india being 100% pure compared to N. American White tigers. They are still inbred. They still come from the only white tiger ever known in captivity, then his cubs where used because you need two cats with the same white gene, and so on it went. All white tigers in captivity are inbred and will never be pure. Any tiger they have ever mated with and had cubs with will be the same. I would venture to bet that even regular colored cubs that come from white tigress' still have deformities more often than wild tigers. Also, when did you hear that Varty was using his cats for canned hunts? He always preaches against it and documents his cats throughout their life. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 5 Guest(s) |