Why the leopard tortoise name change?

[zenoandthetortoise]

For those who care about such things.

When genes meet nomenclature: tortoise phylogeny and the shifting generic concepts of Testudo and Geochelone.

AuthorsFritz U, et al. Show all Journal
Zoology (Jena). 2007;110(4):298-307. Epub 2007 Jul 3.

Affiliation
Erratum in
Zoology (Jena). 2008;111(1):84.
Abstract
We used a five-gene data set (mtDNA: 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, cyt-b; nDNA: Cmos, Rag2) comprising approximately two-thirds of all extant testudinid species and, for the first time, including all five Testudo species to investigate the question of whether all western Palaearctic testudinids are monophyletic. Further, we examined whether the recently suggested allocation of the African Geochelone pardalis in the otherwise exclusively South African genus Psammobates and of the Malagasy G. yniphora in the monotypic genus Angonoka is justified in the face of considerable morphological evidence against such placements. Our phylogenetic analyses do not support the paraphyly and generic break-up of Testudo, as suggested by previous papers using a smaller taxon sampling and mtDNA data only. We propose a continued usage of the generic name Testudo for all five western Palaearctic tortoise species. Within Testudo, two monophyletic subclades are present, one containing T. hermanni+T. horsfieldii, and the other comprising (T. kleinmanni+T. marginata)+T. graeca. Nomenclaturally, we demonstrate that Eurotestudo Lapparent de Broin et al., 2006, which was recently erected with the type species T. hermanni, is an objective junior synonym of Chersine Merrem, 1820 and Medaestia Wussow, 1916. Recognition of a monotypic genus Angonoka for G. yniphora is unwarranted according to both our re-analysis of sequence data and morphological data. Acknowledging the strong morphological similarity between G. yniphora and G. radiata, we suggest placing both species into the genus Astrochelys. Although sequence data for only one of the three Psammobates species was available for analysis, there is currently no cause to challenge the monophyly of this genus as established on the basis of morphological evidence. Thus, we hypothesize that G. pardalis is sister to a monophyletic Psammobates. In light of the clear morphological gap between G. pardalis and Psammobates species, the recognition of a distinct genus Stigmochelys for the former seems justified.

 

[peasinapod]

Thanks for the info! Do you know if there's anything more recent changes or are these the most up to datr changes?

 

[peasinapod]

Thanks for the info! Do you know if there's anything more recent changes or are these the most up to datr changes?

Found this: http://www.iucn-tftsg.org/wp-content/uploads/file/Accounts/crm_5_000_checklist_v7_2014.pdf

 

[Kapidolo Farms]

That's all scientific mumbo jumbo*.

*That's my snarky sarcasim.

Good Post, and that is sincere.

 

[zenoandthetortoise]

That's all scientific mumbo jumbo*.

Indeed

By the way, does anyone have any info on where the perceived pardalis pardalis/pardalis babcocki dichotomy came from? I'm not going to be able to swing a leopard till next year, but in my anticipatory reading, I'm not finding any research that supports this subspecies distinction.

Any help is appreciated

 

[Kapidolo Farms]

I conversed with a few on the ground tortoise reptile scientists in South Africa, and they find it a rational explaination that those leopards that do occur in the southern Karoo were transplanted by ranchers to the cape. Ranchers there eat tortoises as a delicacy once in awhile, you should see, or not, some of the shells in the homestead dump pits. So these were passively farmed. As ranchers came from many places throughout Africa to the cape, some brought leopards with them. As we can see from our backyard breeding programs selection takes place pretty quick.

There are many anthropolgists who use tortoise skeletal remians to help identify periods when caves have been in use in recent pre-European influenced southern Africa. The places where remains from leopards are found does not include the cape. There are no written records of ranchers moving tortoises a few hundred years ago, but there are almost non today, and ranchers still do this. The really giant leopards come from the NORTHERN most part of the range, not the southern.

What it comes down to is people select for the 'pretty' ones. If your a rancher for sheep or cattle in South Africa that may be different than a backyard breeders here in the US. I like the more leopardy looking ones with high contrast, and a more domed rounded shell. Some like the individuals with low black content and/or elongate shells. Those really big ones in southern Africa are likely older than most of us have been keeping tortoises as pets.

I saw some in Karoo National Park that were much bigger than any I've seen here in the US, and even though that is in South Africa, it is hardly the Cape.

 

[Neal]

By the way, does anyone have any info on where the perceived pardalis pardalis/pardalis babcocki dichotomy came from? I'm not going to be able to swing a leopard till next year, but in my anticipatory reading, I'm not finding any research that supports this subspecies distinction.

Please let me know if you find any information on this. Having done a fair amount of research on the very topic, I have come up empty handed.

Some of us non-scientifically minded pukes (maybe just me) still try to use some sort of distinction between leopards that are known to have originated from South Africa from all other types because there are some physical distinctions that are perpetuated from like-kind adults, and with as much diversity as there is in leopard tortoises, any sort of characteristic that is consistently observed should be preserved in my humble opinion. So in that context I do like to see the distinction made, but only if the talk occurs among "friends".

 

[tortadise]

Please let me know if you find any information on this. Having done a fair amount of research on the very topic, I have come up empty handed.

Some of us non-scientifically minded pukes (maybe just me) still try to use some sort of distinction between leopards that are known to have originated from South Africa from all other types because there are some physical distinctions that are perpetuated from like-kind adults, and with as much diversity as there is in leopard tortoises, any sort of characteristic that is consistently observed should be preserved in my humble opinion. So in that context I do like to see the distinction made, but only if the talk occurs among "friends".

Here yah go. You can only view the abstract(at least I only can) have to sign up for full PDF format. But maybe something to do, it states in the abstract of breaking down the pseudo mitochondrial phytogeography. Which is a little different of course than phylogenetical break down which of course was not substantiated in the leopard to elevate two full species.

 

[tortadise]

Oops forgot to attach.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1439-0469.2010.00565.x/abstract

 

[Neal]

Here yah go. You can only view the abstract(at least I only can) have to sign up for full PDF format. But maybe something to do, it states in the abstract of breaking down the pseudo mitochondrial phytogeography. Which is a little different of course than phylogenetical break down which of course was not substantiated in the leopard to elevate two full species.

I had forgotten to review this article before making my post, but of course this article would have the answer.

Here's the full article.

http://www.iucn-tftsg.org/wp-content/uploads/file/Articles/Fritz_etal_2010a.pdf

 

[Moozillion]

Umm...can someone translate this into plain English for us interested but non-scientific types???

 

[Kapidolo Farms]

In science, most advances come from better observation. With taxaonomy most observation has traditionally come from what the animal lokks like. At the big picture level it's easy to see fish are not mammals by their body form how they breath etc. At ever finer levels of detail observation is more difficult. In short that paper is saying even though there are some aesthetic differences between some populations of leopard tortoises, those differences are not great enough to describe them as seperate subspecies. Just 20 years ago, that level of fine detail wss not readily observed. The distinction of what is a species or subspecies can be blurry, but with the observation tools of looking at genes it is becoming ever more clear. And not just looking at genes as they are today, there is also the idea that from where in history of the animal group came, how related they are. Today right now, all the animals we call leopard tortoises have such a close relatedness, they count as one species, thought their history suggests a few population that have nits of genes that are unique.

 

[Moozillion]

Thanks, Will!!!