I already answered this - these differences are extremely slight, and if they are legitimate and not just the result of a biased sample size (due to the relative scarcity of remaining specimens, it’s a bit hard to be certain what the average Caspian tiger actually looked like), they’re probably due to clinal variation - when a taxon differs slightly across its range due to different conditions without actually being distinct populations genetically speaking. The tigers in Siberia having longer fur was probably due to the climate there being colder, the same way that spotted hyenas have the ability to develop a thicker winter coat when they’re kept in zoos in colder climates (this doesn’t make them a distinct animal from the wild populations). Again, they were part of the same continuous population before recent human pressure caused their distribution to split, which means they were still breeding and intermingling with one another. Genetically they’re the same animal.How come the fur is thicker on the Siberian Tiger?
Why is the size different?
I think the better question is why the WWF says the Caspian tiger is extinct in the wild when the common consensus is that it’s fully extinct.Why does it say on the WWF website the Caspian Tiger is EW?
Ok. You set me right.I already answered this - these differences are extremely slight, and if they are legitimate and not just the result of a biased sample size (due to the relative scarcity of remaining specimens, it’s a bit hard to be certain what the average Caspian tiger actually looked like), they’re probably due to clinal variation - when a taxon differs slightly across its range due to different conditions without actually being distinct populations genetically speaking. The tigers in Siberia having longer fur was probably due to the climate there being colder, the same way that spotted hyenas have the ability to develop a thicker winter coat when they’re kept in zoos in colder climates (this doesn’t make them a distinct animal from the wild populations). Again, they were part of the same continuous population before recent human pressure caused their distribution to split, which means they were still breeding and intermingling with one another. Genetically they’re the same animal.
I think the better question is why the WWF says the Caspian tiger is extinct in the wild when the common consensus is that it’s fully extinct.
Didn't know that. Thanks for sharing. Pretty interestingGood morning, to begin with I don't know how to speak English, I live in the area where the "glaucous macaw" as you call it once lived, to begin with, none of the macaws that you show are glaucous, all of them are Lears' macaws, I have seen through local foundation archives the bird and its description up close, you simply cannot see that the glaucous macaw changes color. In the dark or without sunlight, it is bluish in color. When it is illuminated in a certain way it becomes almost light blue, or aqua green, its head is dark. This does not happen in any way with the Lear's macaw.
To finish, this bird is extinct, no one here, not even the oldest inhabitants who live in surrounding areas have knowledge of this bird, I have personally known fields of "yatai palm" which are small today, I have also traveled by boat along the river Uruguay and Parana, I have sailed kilometers on fishing trips, the cliffs where the bird nested in the past, today are deserted.
If there is any chance it exists, it is in private collections.View attachment 399985View attachment 399986View attachment 399987