Europe pack: megathread

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Like polar bears, they both are found in Svalbard. It's not the first animal I would associate with Europe, but they could be in such a pack.
I'd much rather an animal endemic to Europe, or an animal widely associated with Europe. Walruses shouldn't be in a Europe pack in my opinion. Not that I wouldn't want Walruses in the game, they are pretty cool animals. But not in a Europe pack where they would take the place of an animal that breathes Europe.
 
I'd much rather an animal endemic to Europe, or an animal widely associated with Europe. Walruses shouldn't be in a Europe pack in my opinion. Not that I wouldn't want Walruses in the game, they are pretty cool animals. But not in a Europe pack where they would take the place of an animal that breathes Europe.
I agree with you! I think the same about the horse for example.
 
I agree with you! I think the same about the horse for example.
Theres honestly one i would like to see, the tarpan.
An "extinct" species of wild horse, thats getting breed back into existance and is rather common in especally smaller zoos and wildparks.
The reason i put extinct in " is because they arnt fully extinct. Similar to for example the auroch they didnt really got wiped out, only the wild population was. Both have been domesticated with the tarpan being crossbred with other species of horses, meaning that their are still horses, that very much resemble tarpans.
There were even projects to reestablish a wild population, that sadly have lost most traction. But the breed is still alive and well, known as domestic tarpan or heck horse.
1636753093548.png
 
Theres honestly one i would like to see, the tarpan.
An "extinct" species of wild horse, thats getting breed back into existance and is rather common in especally smaller zoos and wildparks.
The reason i put extinct in " is because they arnt fully extinct. Similar to for example the auroch they didnt really got wiped out, only the wild population was. Both have been domesticated with the tarpan being crossbred with other species of horses, meaning that their are still horses, that very much resemble tarpans.
There were even projects to reestablish a wild population, that sadly have lost most traction. But the breed is still alive and well, known as domestic tarpan or heck horse.
View attachment 274747
No it isn't; this is actually impossible. A bunch of new breeds have been created that resemble the tarpan but they are not at all related to the actual tarpans.
Technically, they could in theory de-extinct the actual Tarpan with cloning, but what they are currently doing with breeding is only creating a morphological doppleganger, as @NZFanatic said, it's not an actual Tarpan.
 
No it isn't; this is actually impossible. A bunch of new breeds have been created that resemble the tarpan but they are not at all related to the actual tarpans.
Unrelated, but if you are interested, it is not impossible ;) There are records of extinct species re-evolving into existence again, one particular noteable animal is the Aldabra rail which evolved from the white-throated rail and became extinct for 20,000 years. It then re-evolved from the white-throated rail again into the aldabra rail recently when the island re-emerged from the water.
 
Unrelated, but if you are interested, it is not impossible ;) There are records of extinct species re-evolving into existence again, one particular noteable animal is the Aldabra rail which evolved from the white-throated rail and became extinct for 20,000 years. It then re-evolved from the white-throated rail again into the aldabra rail recently when the island re-emerged from the water.
But the chances of this happening are astronomical. It requires:

1. For the parent species to still exist
2. For the conditions which led to the species's diversion to still exist
3. For the cause of the first species' extinction to not exist anymore

It's amazing when it does happen though.
 
Still a cool animal though
Yes it is! For the same reason I would love for the Tauros to come to the game one day. This is a breeding project that recreates the aurochs based on genetic traces and phenotypic elements found in existing cattle breeds. The aurochs itself has been gone for a couple hundred years, but their genes are still found dispersed in our domesticated cattle. So now it's like a puzzle, and finding the right animals that fit, mixing and matching, and in a few years we'll have a bovine with most of the genetic traits of an aurochs, most of the phenotypic traits of an aurochs, and for all intents and purposes is an aurochs. It's just that they can't call it an aurochs due to semantics, so the name is Tauros.

They are very impressive and found in Dutch nature reserves and I believe Polish nature reserves as well. In Germany too?
 
... we'll have a bovine with most of the genetic traits of an aurochs, most of the phenotypic traits of an aurochs, and for all intents and purposes is an aurochs. It's just that they can't call it an aurochs due to semantics, so the name is Tauros.
...
Nope, sorry, it’s more than semantics.

As much as the re-bread animal may morphologically look like an aurochs, it doesn’t have the instincts and behavior of the extinct aurochs. It is basically just a re-skinned ( :p) domestic animal.
And even if a certain “wilderness” is bred into the new race, we simply can not know, how a real aurochs would have acted. (All we have is pre-scientific descriptions.)

What is lost, is lost.
A ‘Tauros’ is basically just the Disney Land version of an extinct creature.
 
I dont see the problem with those projects. Both the tauros and the heck horse ate attempts to breed back the charakteristics of an extinct relative and to release them back into the wild in hopes of restoring a part of the ecosystem that has been lost.
Nature doesnt give a dang what horse is filling the niche that the wild horse had posessed, just if its filled or not.
 
Nope, sorry, it’s more than semantics.

As much as the re-bread animal may morphologically look like an aurochs, it doesn’t have the instincts and behavior of the extinct aurochs. It is basically just a re-skinned ( :p) domestic animal.
And even if a certain “wilderness” is bred into the new race, we simply can not know, how a real aurochs would have acted. (All we have is pre-scientific descriptions.)

What is lost, is lost.
A ‘Tauros’ is basically just the Disney Land version of an extinct creature.
I disagree. A lot is known about the aurochs and its role in the ecosystem, and their instincts and behavior is found in our modern-day cattle.
The only major differences between aurochs and modern-day cattle, are
  • size. Domestic cattle were bred to be smaller and more manageable. At their shortest, domestic cattle were as short as 1 meter at the withers. Aurochs stood quite tall, up to 180 cm at the withers for bulls and up to 155 cm for cows. In modern times, cattle are often bred larger again (think of Holstein cattle, which are as tall as Aurochs).
  • friendliness. Domestic cattle were bred for safe handling.
All other characteristics of Aurochs are still found in modern-day cattle, and by using cattle with DNA sequences that match the aurochs genotype, you can reconstruct the aurochs by selective breeding. Or at least as close as is possible without the use of actual cloning techniques.

Similar attempts were made in the past, like Heck cattle, but they were only selected on appearance. I will agree that only selecting on phenotype results in what you describe: domestic cattle in an aurochs-like skin. But that's not what's happening in the Tauros project, which is why I think the Tauros project is so amazing (I study genetics) :)
 
Unrelated, but if you are interested, it is not impossible ;) There are records of extinct species re-evolving into existence again, one particular noteable animal is the Aldabra rail which evolved from the white-throated rail and became extinct for 20,000 years. It then re-evolved from the white-throated rail again into the aldabra rail recently when the island re-emerged from the water.
It's not actually the same species, so it didn't "re-evolve", unfortunately (that's just a meme and a catchy headline). The "new" Aldabra rail is actually a subspecies of the white-throated rail, morphologically near-identical to the extinct species but genetically closer to the white-throated rail.
 
All other characteristics of Aurochs are still found in modern-day cattle, and by using cattle with DNA sequences that match the aurochs genotype, you can reconstruct the aurochs by selective breeding. Or at least as close as is possible without the use of actual cloning techniques.
Ok, so that might work for the genetics, but species are not totally reducible to their genes. First, I’m guessing that you’re talking about the nuclear genome only (I.e., excluding mitochondrial genes). Second, species in action are additionally defined, in practice, by their parasitic load (including, for example, gut and other bacteria) which will, in many cases, have gone extinct with their host (symbiotic bacterial flora can have a substantial effect on how an organism functions within its ecosystem). Third, non genetic factors (e.g., epigenetics, maternal effects) also define species and populations. Fourth, social/cultural factors which can also substantially affect how populations function. (Nuclear) genes are a VERY important factor in defining species but they are not the only factor.
These ‘re-evolved’ species are certainly cool and far from worthless (since they can fill vacated niches within ecosystems) but they do not represent genuine de-extinction or genuine re-evolution of a species - and this is far more than just semantics.
 
Ok, so that might work for the genetics, but species are not totally reducible to their genes. First, I’m guessing that you’re talking about the nuclear genome only (I.e., excluding mitochondrial genes). Second, species in action are additionally defined, in practice, by their parasitic load (including, for example, gut and other bacteria) which will, in many cases, have gone extinct with their host (symbiotic bacterial flora can have a substantial effect on how an organism functions within its ecosystem). Third, non genetic factors (e.g., epigenetics, maternal effects) also define species and populations. Fourth, social/cultural factors which can also substantially affect how populations function. (Nuclear) genes are a VERY important factor in defining species but they are not the only factor.
These ‘re-evolved’ species are certainly cool and far from worthless (since they can fill vacated niches within ecosystems) but they do not represent genuine de-extinction or genuine re-evolution of a species - and this is far more than just semantics.
These points I do agree with. You know your stuff!

And yeah, that's why they are as close as possible without actual cloning. And why Tauros instead of Aurochs is fine.
Though even in the case of cloning, it still wouldn't be exactly the same animal as back then, like what's happening to the mammoth resurrection project right now. Though in that project the mammoth genome is 'cut and pasted' into Asian elephant DNA, and the mammoth-elephant hybrids will then be bred together to create the most genetically and phenotypically similar mammoth like animal. Just like with the Tauros project. So I expect that if the project is successful, the resulting animals will get a new name too. Neomammoth or something in that direction.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom