African elephant, but which?

[KevinBevin]

Hello fellow people on the internet. I have recently learnt that there are two subspecies of African elephant living in Africa: the African forest elephant, and the African bush elephant. Seeing as Frontier can go into subspecies (Chinese pangolin, Himalayan brown bear, West african lion, Golden poison frog, etc), Would it be okay to assume a change to the elephant's subspecies can be made? I am unsure, but I reckon the elephant in planet zoo is the larger African bush elephant, and should be changed to that if it is something Frontier would be cool looking into.

In short: could a change to the African elephant's species name take place, since Frontier mostly goes by subspecies?

 

[Firestar97]

The African Forest Elephant is a different Species and it is obvious that the African Elephant in the Game is the African Bush Elephant, so I don't think it gets changed

 

[TFG21]

As Urufu said, not subspecies but completely different species, so other than the common name (African elephant) which are notorious for being different depending on who you ask, the taxonomy is correct

 

[jcp011c]

Maybe they could change it in the zoopedia entry but nowhere else? Bit of a slog to get through on the trade market, the pop up screens for the habitats and animals, guest thoughts etc.

 

[paul78]

Yeah definitely Bush elephant as the forest elephant is smaller then the Indian elephant.

 

[KevinBevin]

Good points from all of you, and thank you for correcting that it is indeed species, but subspecies. Had a speculation late at night yesterday that this might exclude the African forest elephant from being implemented in the game, as two "African elephant" named animals would be odd, to say the least. could this be a plausible speculation?

 

[VetGirl330]

Had a speculation late at night yesterday that this might exclude the African forest elephant from being implemented in the game, as two "African elephant" named animals would be odd, to say the least. could this be a plausible speculation?

All of the zoopedia entries (which are also available online) include the species Scientific name (Genus species). As you have pointed common names can be confusing, especially when translated among multiple languages, and sometimes can refer to more than one species. The entire purpose of scientific names is to eliminate this confusion and allow people to communicate precisely regardless of native tongue. The model in the game very clearly depicts the African "bush" elephant, and is correctly identified as Loxodonta africana.
I would say it is a very safe bet that the forest elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis) will not be added by Frontier. As far as I know there are no forest elephants remaining in captivity (there may be a few individuals remaining in Asian zoos). As much as I would like more diversity in this game, even I think it is unnecessary to add another elephant species to the game. Given the communities previous negative responses to including "similar" species, adding another elephant would likely generate a lot of backlash.

However, as far as your train of logic goes, given the fact that Frontier included the Timber wolf (Canis lupus) and Arctic wolf (Canis lupus arctos), they don't seem opposed to creating the overlapping species/ subspecies mess.

Seeing as Frontier can go into subspecies (Chinese pangolin, Himalayan brown bear, West african lion, Golden poison frog).

Point of interest, half those examples are not even subspecies. Again the taxonomic naming convention is ALWAYS Genus species subspecies. Unless there are three names listed it is recognized as a distinct species, not a subspecies.
Chinese pangolin, Manis pentadactyla (species)
Himalayan brown bear, Ursus arctos isabellinus (subspecies)
Grizzly bear, Ursus arctos horribilis (subspecies) - despite the fact that the grizzly bear doesn't have the word "brown" in its common name it is a subspecies of the brown bear.
West African lion, Panthera leo leo (if Frontier were to "fix" any subspecies in the game it would make more sense to include P. l. melanochaita as representative of the African savanna, or just a generic African lion, Panthera leo).
Golden poison frog, Phyllobates terribilis (species)
Lehmann's poison frog, Oophaga lehmanni (species) - there are numerous genera, let alone species, that are given the common name "poison frog"

 

[LN]

those examples are not even subspecies. Again the taxonomic naming convention is ALWAYS Genus species subspecies. Unless there are three names listed it is recognized as a distinct species, not a subspecies.
Chinese pangolin, Manis pentadactyla (species)
Himalayan brown bear, Ursus arctos isabellinus (subspecies)
Grizzly bear, Ursus arctos horribilis (subspecies) - despite the fact that the grizzly bear doesn't have the word "brown" in its common name it is a subspecies of the brown bear.
West African lion, Panthera leo leo (if Frontier were to "fix" any subspecies in the game it would make more sense to include P. l. melanochaita as representative of the African savanna, or just a generic African lion, Panthera leo).
Golden poison frog, Phyllobates terribilis (species)
Lehmann's poison frog, Oophaga lehmanni (species) - there are numerous genera, let alone species, that are given the common name "poison frog"

Interesting! Another thing learned.

 

[giu94]

View attachment 184087
Yeah definitely Bush elephant as the forest elephant is smaller then the Indian elephant.

Would love to have the forest elephant too

 

[KevinBevin]

All of the zoopedia entries (which are also available online) include the species Scientific name (Genus species). As you have pointed common names can be confusing, especially when translated among multiple languages, and sometimes can refer to more than one species. The entire purpose of scientific names is to eliminate this confusion and allow people to communicate precisely regardless of native tongue. The model in the game very clearly depicts the African "bush" elephant, and is correctly identified as Loxodonta africana.
I would say it is a very safe bet that the forest elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis) will not be added by Frontier. As far as I know there are no forest elephants remaining in captivity (there may be a few individuals remaining in Asian zoos). As much as I would like more diversity in this game, even I think it is unnecessary to add another elephant species to the game. Given the communities previous negative responses to including "similar" species, adding another elephant would likely generate a lot of backlash.

However, as far as your train of logic goes, given the fact that Frontier included the Timber wolf (Canis lupus) and Arctic wolf (Canis lupus arctos), they don't seem opposed to creating the overlapping species/ subspecies mess.


Point of interest, half those examples are not even subspecies. Again the taxonomic naming convention is ALWAYS Genus species subspecies. Unless there are three names listed it is recognized as a distinct species, not a subspecies.
Chinese pangolin, Manis pentadactyla (species)
Himalayan brown bear, Ursus arctos isabellinus (subspecies)
Grizzly bear, Ursus arctos horribilis (subspecies) - despite the fact that the grizzly bear doesn't have the word "brown" in its common name it is a subspecies of the brown bear.
West African lion, Panthera leo leo (if Frontier were to "fix" any subspecies in the game it would make more sense to include P. l. melanochaita as representative of the African savanna, or just a generic African lion, Panthera leo).
Golden poison frog, Phyllobates terribilis (species)
Lehmann's poison frog, Oophaga lehmanni (species) - there are numerous genera, let alone species, that are given the common name "poison frog"

Thank you, it's really appreciated. Today I learnt something new, I will keep this in mind. I really appreciate that you took the time to proberly explain how it works, I understand it much better now

 

[Ursidae]

I think what has happened with the African elephant is, they are mostly taking the IUCN Red List website as reference for their taxonomy and animal profiles on there are only updated once a decade or two, thus some are outdated. For instance the IUCN has accepted the changes to the lion and tiger taxonomy, but it will take more time for it to be reflected on their species profiles on the public website, as it is a very long process to update those profiles. It is a multi-layered assessment that includes the review of every single bit of information, including population trends that require field work, thus takes ages to complete as they need to update the whole page at once and not just the taxonomy. Plus they have thousands of new species profiles that need to be added that aren't on the website yet. Therefore Frontier needs to use multiple sources for their Zoopedia taxonomy, or at least keep on tabs with IUCN announcements of newly accepted taxonomic changes, before they are published on species profiles.

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Established in 1964, the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species has evolved to become the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungi and plant species.

www.iucnredlist.org

As you can see, in the case of the African elephant, the last assessment was in 2008.