Thursday, July 9, 2020
Contact us    |    Advertise    |   Help    |   Cookie Policy    |   Privacy Policy    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon
    Home  ·  News  ·  Forum  ·  Stories  ·  Image Gallery  ·  Columns  ·  Encyclopedia  ·  Videos
Find: in

Red pandas may be two separate species


Posted on Sunday, 1 March, 2020 | Comment icon 9 comments

One species or two ? Image Credit: CC BY 4.0 Magdalena Smyczek
It turns out that there may be more to China's endangered red panda than meets the eye.
Writing in The Conversation, Adam Moolna - a lecturer in Environment and Sustainability at the UK's Keele University - discusses the latest revelation surrounding this endangered Asian mammal species.



Red pandas are not bears but they do mainly eat bamboo, like their much larger namesake the black and white giant panda. Officially classified as endangered, red pandas live across a stretch of the Himalayas and are in fact part of the same family as weasels and raccoons. Now, advances in fancy gene sequencing have allowed scientists to analyse their full genetic make up for the first time - with big implications for conservation.

Previously, scientists recognised two different subspecies. Those pandas to the east of the Nujiang River (also known as the Salween River), with wider cheekbones and redder faces, were classified as the Chinese red panda. Those to the west were the Himalayan red panda.

But this division into has long been debated. The Nujiang River was perhaps a convenient and seemingly obvious geographical feature on which to place a boundary, but pandas on either side didn't show a clear difference.

Two species

A new study published in the journal Science Advances by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences places a firm marker in that debate. According to their work, the pandas do indeed fall into two clear genetic clusters, albeit with the likely boundary between the two actually being the Yalu Zangbu River, several hundred kilometres further west. The two clusters are distinct enough for the researchers to conclude they can be classified genetically as two distinct species.

Cleverly, the scientists also compared the DNA of female-inherited mitochondria (the "batteries" of cells) and the Y chromosome carried by males. This showed that, as in giant pandas, it is the females that disperse throughout their range, not the males. This is different from most mammals in which it is the males that travel around and spread genetic diversity among different populations. As in the giant panda this may be due to competition for dens between females and because of male territoriality.

What this means for red pandas

Does any of this matter? After all, such classifications may seem irrelevant and nerdy if we need molecular genetics just to distinguish between two otherwise matching fluffy pandas. But, yes, species (and subspecies) do matter.

First, it's useful for raising awareness. You may have heard of Lonesome George in the Galapagos, the last surviving Pinta Island giant tortoise. He became famous (and attracted serious conservation attention and popular support) precisely because scientists recognised that giant tortoises were different species or subspecies on different islands.
Molecular genetics knowledge is also crucial to the survival prospects of red pandas. Knowing past patterns of gene flow and that females were largely responsible means conservationists can plan zoo breeding or translocations of individuals in the wild, in line with population genetics.

The researchers identify three distinct populations within the Chinese red panda and suggest they are treated as separate conservation units. For one of the populations, this would need international cooperation between China, Myanmar and India. Identifying this in the genetics of a cute "flagship species" like the red panda is a promising way to get politicians to work together across borders to protect entire ecosystems, with much wider conservation benefits.

There is limited information on red panda population status but overall assessment is of major declines. Distinguishing two species might allow different levels of vulnerability to be highlighted. Importantly, the Himalayan red panda has very low genetic diversity and carries a high level of potentially unhealthy mutations. In theory, this means scientists could carry out a genetic rescue by selectively breeding them with Chinese red pandas.

Controversial questions

But this is where different concepts of species as separate entities become controversial. The use of genetics to define a species as a cluster sharing uniform genomes - the "phenotypic species" concept - is increasingly common but still contested. One option would be to instead default back to the "biological species" concept, which says animals that can interbreed are the same species and distinctions based on appearance or other characteristics form separate subspecies. On that basis, Himalayan and Chinese red pandas - which are able to breed with each other - are the same species.

This all raises lots of tricky questions: would we be right to genetically isolate the Himalayan red panda for purity, but risk poor genetic health and a greater risk of extinction? Or should we maximise its survival chances with selective aid of Chinese red panda DNA, even if that means conserving a less "pure" Himalayan "species"? Is maintaining a genetic divide between "species" more important than between "subspecies"?

Deciding the two are separate species may also have unforeseen consequences for conservation administration. Well-meaning frameworks for species protection may limit genetic rescue options for the Himalayan red panda or put paperwork barriers in place between wild populations. Given the blurred genetic boundaries and uncertain geographic separation, perhaps dividing animals into species based on genetics is indeed unhelpful.

We should finish with a word of warning. To most people, a "tiger" is a tiger, but scientists recognise various subtly different subspecies. That recognition has been central to realising the vulnerability of certain populations and targeting conservation efforts towards the critically endangered subspecies like Sumatran or Malayan tigers. Despite that, however, several subspecies have already gone extinct. Reclassifying a subspecies as a species may help conserve it, but it can't reverse decades of hunting and habitat loss.

Adam Moolna, Lecturer in Environment and Sustainability, Keele University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.

Read the original article.The Conversation

Source: The Conversation | Comments (9)


Tags: Red Panda


Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #1 Posted by Robotic Jew on 27 February, 2020, 12:37
If they need a safe habitat I would gladly lend my living room. These things are so cute. They're my favorite animal.†
Comment icon #2 Posted by The Wistman on 27 February, 2020, 13:31
Comment icon #3 Posted by Seti42 on 1 March, 2020, 19:30
'pure bred' = inbred. I say, let them mix it up.
Comment icon #4 Posted by joshy on 1 March, 2020, 20:35
what the ****? they were already two when i was a kid 20 years ago?
Comment icon #5 Posted by XenoFish on 1 March, 2020, 23:07
"I am Death, Destroyer of Worlds."
Comment icon #6 Posted by XenoFish on 1 March, 2020, 23:08
Same here. I call them raccoon bears.
Comment icon #7 Posted by susieice on 2 March, 2020, 18:06
They're absolutely beautiful. My favorite animal at the Cape May Zoo.†
Comment icon #8 Posted by Robotic Jew on 2 March, 2020, 18:14
Freaking Mandela is at it again?!?!?
Comment icon #9 Posted by Jon the frog on 11 March, 2020, 22:36
Two species or two distinct populations ? Can they interbreed in the wild and get offspring that can reproduce? It's a bit blurry...


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


  On the forums
Forum posts:
Forum topics:
Members:

6733913
280534
185449

 
Penguins can fire their own droppings over 4ft
7-8-2020
If there's one place you don't want to stand, it's within around 4ft of the back of a Humboldt penguin.
Tiny dinosaur was the size of a coffee cup
7-8-2020
Scientists have discovered a pint-sized dinosaur that was so small you could literally hold it in your hand.
Fossil of gigantic predatory fish unearthed
7-7-2020
Palaeontologists have discovered the fossil remains of a 70 million-year-old carnivorous fish in Patagonia.
Is intelligent life doomed to self-destruct ?
7-7-2020
Scientists argue that if a civilization is advanced enough to communicate with us, it can also destroy itself.
Stories & Experiences
 
 
Grim reaper-like visitation
6-16-2020 | Canada
 
My monster catfish story
6-15-2020 | Dallas texas
 
Orb of light in room
5-9-2020 | USA/Texas/Waco
 
Not sleeping alone
5-9-2020 | Los Angeles
 
Glowing red eyes
5-9-2020 | Fields, Louisiana
 
Two creature sightings
5-1-2020 | Augusta and Louisana
 
 
My haunted home
5-1-2020 | Rainham, Essex, UK
 

         More stories | Send us your story
Featured Videos
Gallery icon 
NASA studies underwater 'white smoker' vents
Posted 4-17-2020 | 3 comments
Hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor can teach us about possible habitats on other worlds.
 
10 strange things about our solar system
Posted 3-17-2020 | 0 comments
A look at some of the most mysterious things about our solar system.
 
Lizzie - Scotland's other loch monster
Posted 3-8-2020 | 0 comments
Amelia Dimoldenberg investigates the Loch Ness Monster's neighbor.
 
 View: More videos
 
Top   |  Home   |   Forum   |   News   |   Image Gallery   |  Columns   |   Encyclopedia   |   Videos   |   Polls
UM-X 10.712 Unexplained-Mysteries.com (c) 2001-2020
Terms   |   Privacy Policy   |   Cookies   |   Advertise   |   Contact   |   Help/FAQ