The reason the taxonomy of the giant panda was debated for years was because we didn't have the luxury of testing an animal's DNA code until relatively recently. Once we got to study giant panda DNA, its odd myriad of features starts to make sense; it's the most basal extant member of the bear family, meaning it split off very early in ursid evolution, and as such, retains certain "primitive" characteristics that were once widespread across all caniform carnivorans, and bears are very closely related to the musteloid superfamily (weasels, raccoons, skunks, and the red panda), so it's not surprising that the giant panda (as a basal ursid) would share certain characteristics with musteloids such as the red panda. In other words, there is no reason to assume that the giant panda might get reclassified, it's very confidently classified as a bear, and it's just a textbook example of a token basal species within a family whose only other extant members are more derived and more closely related to each other than the former. If anything, it might need to be renamed, as the red panda was the first one to be called a panda. DNA is far more reliable than anatomical traits when classing an animal, since anatomy can easily be warped by convergent evolution, and trivial things like slit pupils don't mean much either. Cougars and panthers (lions, tigers, leopards, jaguars) are both big and both have rounded pupils, yet everyone agrees that the cougar is more closely related to the housecat and other small felids, which have slit pupils (which are more advantageous for small-bodied predators that are closer to the ground like housecats, or foxes). And I don't see how temperament means anything in taxonomy? Chimps and bonobos, for example, are sister species from the same genus (Pan), yet the former are violent psychopaths, and the latter pacifist hippies.
I can understand the stubborn side of not wanting reclassification of species into multiple species. At the base level It's politics. I can see how adding more species to the endangered species list can be used as arguments for passing legislation.
To be honest, it does look an awful lot like a scam. Divide a species as many times as it takes to get 1 or 2 new "endangered" species out of it, collect your funding to protect the newly endangered species (not to mention pass new laws, shut down whole areas from development, etc...). It looks an awful lot like manufacturing endangered species for financial or political reasons. I can totally understand the skepticism towards this sort of thing.
I am curious to know what the reasons are for splitting it into different species to begin with. None were mentioned in the video, only that people were disagreeing with it and that this was 'stubborn.' I think it is pretty fair that unless the '4 species of Giraffe' side comes with an explanation as to why this needs to be done, the giraffe is one species people are in the right. Let me give a counter point using the orca example as well, were some reasons have been given (appearance, dialect, keeping to themselves etc). If we would apply these same standards to humans, then the human race would become split into different species. So Africans who eat different foods, speak different languages, etc would be a different species of ape compared to Europeans. I don't think I have to explain why this is problematic. As far as I am concerned, if the differences between groups of the same species are just what we would call 'cultural differences' when talking about humans, then this is what they are in animals: cultural differences.
This is why conservatives lose elections. Just save the damned animals and get over your politics. This is why your adult children don't come to holiday dinners.
Can you make a list of 5 invasive fish in lake toba here and on the list can you include the red devil Cichlid the Nile tilapia the pleco the grass carp and the clown knife
That was fascinating, Tsuki, thank you. You made an excellent point, that reclassifying species, emphasises that they have different requirements and therefore probably require differeing approaches to their conservation.
Can you make a video about 3 rare wild animals: wild bactrian camel, wild water buffalo and wild yak? Their domestic version are kept in many zoo but there is no wild form in captivity. I would like to know more about their saving programs
I remember as a kid when i read an animal book and the Giant Panda was classified as a Racoon. And that never made any sense to me because it's very obviously a bear. Im so glad that it's been corrected and it is now classified as a bear as it should be.
I don't think behavior is a good basis for classification. Inteligent, social mammals like Orcas, Chimps and Humans display a wide variety of learned behaviors. That doesn't necessarily mean that individual populations are separate species (although they could theoretically become different species if they remain genetically isolated for a long enough period of time).
Aside from monotypic genuses being split into multiple species, on the opposite end, some subspecies seem to be rendered null as of late. I remember when they revised how many subspecies of the Asian giant hornet were actually recognized, I think it went from 4 to 1. Plus, later on the Entomological Society of America decided they will recognize 'northern giant hornet' as its common name, even though 'Asian giant hornet' has been in use for years. Just cause.
learning more about something doesn’t mean that we’ve genuinely learned that these animals should be classified as different species. Also- instead of changing why we created these lines of delineation between species in the first place- change the laws. It’s sounds like we are “creating” new species to get around limitations in clunky language to protect these animals. While a noble reason- I wouldn’t call it a scientific one. And therefore- I wouldn’t say the scientists that oppose THIS particular change are being stubborn or resistant to growth. They are keeping politics out of science. As they should. Imagine- creating a new species simply because some clunky government in a certain region wont protect an animal or because the language within a given region’s laws makes it tricky. Rather than for biological and evolutionary purposes. Find a better way.
Hello Tsuki. I just wanna thank you. So like a week ago, i was at a local quiz competition, and there were a lot of questions, ranging from the CEO of OpenAI to why the weird mosquito-shaped flies die only after 24 hours. And thanks to you i got one question correct that ensured i'd win the competition, it was a question for 20k points, and it was a question about what or who is Pizzly. I got it correct because of one of your hybrid animals videos. Thank you, i won alcohol!
Tsuki, would it undermine your mystique to respond to the question of your background in zoology? Only ask cos you seem to be an approachable animal and as a human (?) I think you'd be classified as high in agreeableness :)
Being classed as a different species is usually down to genetics. Common gallinule and common moorhen look almost identical but they are different species
I think it plays a factor, bit I feel like it also has to do with whether the animals have separate distinct populations. Some species have a more diverse gene pool than others, but readily hybridize where they overlap, so they aren't considered multiple different species. Of course having a separate population eventually leads to becoming genetically separate too.
@lzl4226 Yeah, indeed. The thing is, giraffes would probably fall very ill after eating from eucalyptus trees because they haven't got a special digestive system that allows koalas to eat them
Thank you for another informative video. I always learn something new from you. Thanks again for a fantastic video. Hope you and Arnie are doing great. 😊
@TsukiCove OH wow. You live in one of the places that got snow over the last few days. I'm so glad that I don't. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE snow. When it's 8-10 inches deep at least and when it's fresh and pretty. That's the kind of snows that we used to get here, but not anymore. It's changed. Now we only get a couple of inches BUT we get ICE with it now. It makes it a nasty, slushy mess. And when it freezes overnight, it makes the roads treacherous because you can't see it. I remember when I was a kid, we used to miss school about 3-7 days each time it snowed. But my poor grandkids very rarely miss much more than a 2hr delay or maybe half a day. LOL 😆. Oh goodness, I better stop yapping. Sorry.
Interestingly, while the black panda (and panda merely means bamboo eating, hence the same name for lesser or red pandas) has the skull of a bear the brown panda doesn't, their skull is like those of the the cat family in shape and features. One has bigger teeth but a weaker bite, the other has smaller teeth and a stronger bite, there is also only one brown panda in captivity and he was found as a cub badly injured and taken to the local centre for treatment. Also interestingly his offspring came out looking like mum and are black in colour.
This is the classic lumper/ splitter debate. What adds proverbial fuel to the debate is the recent advances in DNA phylogeny, as well as laws that protect species. What I mean by that is if a population of, say, giraffes is considered a separate species that is endangered, it will be given legal protection that it would bot be given if it were considered to be a part of a larger species that is only listed as "threatened." Obviously, political groups and interests get involved and the debates change from strictly scientific taxonomy into competing political interests.
The reason the taxonomy of the giant panda was debated for years was because we didn't have the luxury of testing an animal's DNA code until relatively recently. Once we got to study giant panda DNA, its odd myriad of features starts to make sense; it's the most basal extant member of the bear family, meaning it split off very early in ursid evolution, and as such, retains certain "primitive" characteristics that were once widespread across all caniform carnivorans, and bears are very closely related to the musteloid superfamily (weasels, raccoons, skunks, and the red panda), so it's not surprising that the giant panda (as a basal ursid) would share certain characteristics with musteloids such as the red panda. In other words, there is no reason to assume that the giant panda might get reclassified, it's very confidently classified as a bear, and it's just a textbook example of a token basal species within a family whose only other extant members are more derived and more closely related to each other than the former. If anything, it might need to be renamed, as the red panda was the first one to be called a panda. DNA is far more reliable than anatomical traits when classing an animal, since anatomy can easily be warped by convergent evolution, and trivial things like slit pupils don't mean much either. Cougars and panthers (lions, tigers, leopards, jaguars) are both big and both have rounded pupils, yet everyone agrees that the cougar is more closely related to the housecat and other small felids, which have slit pupils (which are more advantageous for small-bodied predators that are closer to the ground like housecats, or foxes). And I don't see how temperament means anything in taxonomy? Chimps and bonobos, for example, are sister species from the same genus (Pan), yet the former are violent psychopaths, and the latter pacifist hippies.
Marine animals to orcas : can we share the food chain
Orcas:👁️. 👄. 👁️
Marine animals : sorry we asked 👉👈
I can understand the stubborn side of not wanting reclassification of species into multiple species. At the base level It's politics. I can see how adding more species to the endangered species list can be used as arguments for passing legislation.
Yes very true and there are strong arguments for both sides but personally i think splitting up the giraffe into 4 species is a very good idea
To be honest, it does look an awful lot like a scam. Divide a species as many times as it takes to get 1 or 2 new "endangered" species out of it, collect your funding to protect the newly endangered species (not to mention pass new laws, shut down whole areas from development, etc...). It looks an awful lot like manufacturing endangered species for financial or political reasons. I can totally understand the skepticism towards this sort of thing.
I am curious to know what the reasons are for splitting it into different species to begin with. None were mentioned in the video, only that people were disagreeing with it and that this was 'stubborn.' I think it is pretty fair that unless the '4 species of Giraffe' side comes with an explanation as to why this needs to be done, the giraffe is one species people are in the right.
Let me give a counter point using the orca example as well, were some reasons have been given (appearance, dialect, keeping to themselves etc). If we would apply these same standards to humans, then the human race would become split into different species. So Africans who eat different foods, speak different languages, etc would be a different species of ape compared to Europeans. I don't think I have to explain why this is problematic.
As far as I am concerned, if the differences between groups of the same species are just what we would call 'cultural differences' when talking about humans, then this is what they are in animals: cultural differences.
This is why conservatives lose elections. Just save the damned animals and get over your politics.
This is why your adult children don't come to holiday dinners.
@@chetisanhart3457 No need to be rude. I'm not conservative. How do you want your tax payer money spent on animals on another continent?
Can you make a list of 5 invasive fish in lake toba here and on the list can you include the red devil Cichlid the Nile tilapia the pleco the grass carp and the clown knife
Wait i thought there where now 8 different Giraffe species?
Who looks at any panda and says, "raccoon?"
Anybody who's seen both of them in a mischievous mood
A lot of people
Any updates on red fox taxonomy? They were proposing to separate North American and Eurasian populations sometime ago
That was fascinating, Tsuki, thank you. You made an excellent point, that reclassifying species, emphasises that they have different requirements and therefore probably require differeing approaches to their conservation.
Can you make a video about 3 rare wild animals: wild bactrian camel, wild water buffalo and wild yak? Their domestic version are kept in many zoo but there is no wild form in captivity. I would like to know more about their saving programs
I remember as a kid when i read an animal book and the Giant Panda was classified as a Racoon. And that never made any sense to me because it's very obviously a bear. Im so glad that it's been corrected and it is now classified as a bear as it should be.
The domestic dog, keeps fluctuating from being its own species to a mere subspecies as grey wolf.
Canis lupus and canis lupus familiarius
I don't think behavior is a good basis for classification. Inteligent, social mammals like Orcas, Chimps and Humans display a wide variety of learned behaviors. That doesn't necessarily mean that individual populations are separate species (although they could theoretically become different species if they remain genetically isolated for a long enough period of time).
I wondering what would happen if the giant panda will spread outside china
It would need a lot of food to sustain it. If they did spread, I predict they would take a more omnivorous diet on the way.
Nah it too dumb to pull a play like that
Given that they're currently isolated to a few mountain ranges in central China, I doubt that they'll get out of the country any time soon
Need large bamboo forests to feed on which isn’t found outside China
@@debbieanne7962 maybe we can also plant big bamboo forests outside China in the future
Could you do a video of parrots?
i'm sure i will at some point :)
@@TsukiCove Lion charges at Buffalo Herdua-cam.com/video/yQOYLxSq01Q/v-deo.html
@@TsukiCove Courage of Male Lionua-cam.com/video/9Sj-C1Nehfo/v-deo.html
@@TsukiCove 30 Hyenas scared of one Male Lionua-cam.com/video/3RZH9rBc0y0/v-deo.html
@@TsukiCove Lion stands ground against Elephantua-cam.com/video/5Mh0gPp91-8/v-deo.html
Aside from monotypic genuses being split into multiple species, on the opposite end, some subspecies seem to be rendered null as of late. I remember when they revised how many subspecies of the Asian giant hornet were actually recognized, I think it went from 4 to 1. Plus, later on the Entomological Society of America decided they will recognize 'northern giant hornet' as its common name, even though 'Asian giant hornet' has been in use for years. Just cause.
learning more about something doesn’t mean that we’ve genuinely learned that these animals should be classified as different species. Also- instead of changing why we created these lines of delineation between species in the first place- change the laws. It’s sounds like we are “creating” new species to get around limitations in clunky language to protect these animals. While a noble reason- I wouldn’t call it a scientific one. And therefore- I wouldn’t say the scientists that oppose THIS particular change are being stubborn or resistant to growth. They are keeping politics out of science. As they should. Imagine- creating a new species simply because some clunky government in a certain region wont protect an animal or because the language within a given region’s laws makes it tricky. Rather than for biological and evolutionary purposes. Find a better way.
The elephant in the Congo and the elephant in.
Savannah africa
i know
I’ve never seen a panda and thought it was a giant rodent
I think you mean "subspecies".
Taxonomists need love too.
Thanks!
some other (potential) examples: tigers, turtles, anacondas, banxrings, burrunan dolphins, ounces, eastern wolf, lemurs, akikiki
Hello Tsuki. I just wanna thank you. So like a week ago, i was at a local quiz competition, and there were a lot of questions, ranging from the CEO of OpenAI to why the weird mosquito-shaped flies die only after 24 hours. And thanks to you i got one question correct that ensured i'd win the competition, it was a question for 20k points, and it was a question about what or who is Pizzly. I got it correct because of one of your hybrid animals videos. Thank you, i won alcohol!
4 humans
Reclassification of species of plants and animals is interesting
Rakobear
7:53 I propose we gather the best in the field to reclassify the Arnie
Can you do a video on the biggest Salamanders pls
Tsuki, would it undermine your mystique to respond to the question of your background in zoology? Only ask cos you seem to be an approachable animal and as a human (?) I think you'd be classified as high in agreeableness :)
Being classed as a different species is usually down to genetics. Common gallinule and common moorhen look almost identical but they are different species
I think it plays a factor, bit I feel like it also has to do with whether the animals have separate distinct populations. Some species have a more diverse gene pool than others, but readily hybridize where they overlap, so they aren't considered multiple different species. Of course having a separate population eventually leads to becoming genetically separate too.
@Tsuki, What do you think would happen if giraffes were introduced to Australia and North America?🦒🦒🦒🦒
I don't know about N. America, but if they were introduced to Australia, the person who introduced them would get a huge fine.
@lzl4226 Yeah, indeed.
The thing is, giraffes would probably fall very ill after eating from eucalyptus trees because they haven't got a special digestive system that allows koalas to eat them
@@arkprice79 I don't think they'll even attempt to eat eucalyptus......
@@lzl4226 Exactly
@@TravisWillden54 Not true, possums also eat eucalyptus leaves, don't forget the drop bears too..... oh wait no they eat human liver
3:24 What is that in its mouth?
giraffes are unique creatures, nothing more nothing less.
species are just names we give animals.There is no essence in the words we give creatures.Words are dead things.
Thank you for another informative video. I always learn something new from you. Thanks again for a fantastic video. Hope you and Arnie are doing great. 😊
thanks for the support and Arnie is doing great, he had a walk in the snow today :)
@TsukiCove OH wow. You live in one of the places that got snow over the last few days. I'm so glad that I don't. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE snow. When it's 8-10 inches deep at least and when it's fresh and pretty. That's the kind of snows that we used to get here, but not anymore. It's changed. Now we only get a couple of inches BUT we get ICE with it now. It makes it a nasty, slushy mess. And when it freezes overnight, it makes the roads treacherous because you can't see it. I remember when I was a kid, we used to miss school about 3-7 days each time it snowed. But my poor grandkids very rarely miss much more than a 2hr delay or maybe half a day. LOL 😆. Oh goodness, I better stop yapping. Sorry.
Interestingly, while the black panda (and panda merely means bamboo eating, hence the same name for lesser or red pandas) has the skull of a bear the brown panda doesn't, their skull is like those of the the cat family in shape and features. One has bigger teeth but a weaker bite, the other has smaller teeth and a stronger bite, there is also only one brown panda in captivity and he was found as a cub badly injured and taken to the local centre for treatment. Also interestingly his offspring came out looking like mum and are black in colour.
For a second video, the first creature that comes to mind is The Pygmy Right Whale.
This is the classic lumper/ splitter debate. What adds proverbial fuel to the debate is the recent advances in DNA phylogeny, as well as laws that protect species. What I mean by that is if a population of, say, giraffes is considered a separate species that is endangered, it will be given legal protection that it would bot be given if it were considered to be a part of a larger species that is only listed as "threatened." Obviously, political groups and interests get involved and the debates change from strictly scientific taxonomy into competing political interests.
The Javan Barb?
Darth Vader should be reclassified from Sith lord to badass.
Nice topic and list 🙂👍
Thank You 🙏