Does anyone else think this animal is extinct?

The Carcharodontogenius

The Carcharodontogenius
CoyoteRodeo said:
Absent of any well-defined field markings and with a dearth of information, it would be very difficult (if not impossible) to determine the species of these birds from photographs alone. From what I can tell, the two species are incredibly similar (with some debate over whether they might just be different subspecies of the same species), and the only difference is the color variation. Birds can often look like different colours in different lighting/photographic conditions: look at these two pictures of the same species, the loggerhead shrike--note how one appears dusty blue while the other is a mid-tone grey. Similarly, birds within the same species often have phenological differences that make identification difficult. Just scroll through eBird to see debate about the identification of numerous common, similar species by photograph--it's very difficult! And that's even for species that have more field identifiers than just a slight color difference. I wouldn't be opposed to genetic testing of captive individuals, particularly if it helps clear up the provenance of the birds, but I think postulating that they're Glaucous macaws based on photos alone (many of them of taxidermized birds, which introduces further issues with identifying coloration) is a fool's errand.
Click to expand...
You think that all images are fake here?
 

CoyoteRodeo

CoyoteRodeo
The Carcharodontogenius said:
You think that all images are fake here?
Click to expand...
Unsure if you're being sincere or not here, but in case you are: no, I'm not saying that the images themselves are fake. I'm simply saying that it's very difficult to judge coloration in birds from photographs, and in a case where the only discernible difference between two species is a slight difference in color, photographs don't make great evidence when it comes to identification.
 

The Carcharodontogenius

The Carcharodontogenius
CoyoteRodeo said:
Unsure if you're being sincere or not here, but in case you are: no, I'm not saying that the images themselves are fake. I'm simply saying that it's very difficult to judge coloration in birds from photographs, and in a case where the only discernible difference between two species is a slight difference in color, photographs don't make great evidence when it comes to identification.
Click to expand...
Oh, OK.
 

The Carcharodontogenius

The Carcharodontogenius
1694155006210.png
 

The Carcharodontogenius

The Carcharodontogenius
Here is another animal I think is still be out there. (I recently saw this)

The Caspian Tiger. I looked at Siberian Tigers in zoos worldwide & came across this one in Tierpark Berlin. The stripes look very similar to those of Soraya (last captive Caspian Tiger) & the museum specimen.
1707156424710.png
1707156518126.png

1707156652797.png
 

leehonglocal

L

Marvinb

Marvinb
The Carcharodontogenius said:
Here is another animal I think is still be out there. (I recently saw this)

The Caspian Tiger. I looked at Siberian Tigers in zoos worldwide & came across this one in Tierpark Berlin. The stripes look very similar to those of Soraya (last captive Caspian Tiger) & the museum specimen.
View attachment 382923View attachment 382924
View attachment 382925
Click to expand...
I think its almost certainly a tiger that just resembles the caspian due to individual variation.
Now i think its not unpossible that some captive tigers have small amounts of caspian blood in them. Back in the day they werent to concerend with subspeicies and localities and more or less threw everything vaguely tiger lokking together. So from what i know there are less actually pureblood tigers in captivity than one would expect.
 

Chuditch

Chuditch
The Carcharodontogenius said:
Here is another animal I think is still be out there. (I recently saw this)

The Caspian Tiger. I looked at Siberian Tigers in zoos worldwide & came across this one in Tierpark Berlin. The stripes look very similar to those of Soraya (last captive Caspian Tiger) & the museum specimen.
View attachment 382923View attachment 382924
View attachment 382925
Click to expand...
That's because Siberian and Caspian tigers are essentially the same thing - they were part of the same contiguous population until human impacts caused their distributions to become fragmented within the last 200 years, and genetically they're virtually identical. There are apparently some minute visual differences between the average Caspian tiger and the average Siberian tiger (probably due to clinal variation), but the characteristics of the Caspian tiger are presumably still within the realm of variation for Siberian tigers.
 
Last edited:

Cynogale bennettii II

Cynogale bennettii II
Everything I've heard suggests that Caspian and Siberian tigers are genetically the same. Their genetic identicalness is what has encouraged Kazakhstan to use the Siberian tiger for a project to reintroduce the tiger to their country, even though the animals that live there were technically described as 'Caspian'.

astanatimes.com

Wild Tiger Population Could Be Reintroduced in Kazakhstan by 2025, Says Expert - The Astana Times

Wild Tiger Population Could Be Reintroduced in Kazakhstan by 2025, Says Expert
astanatimes.com astanatimes.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom