![]() By using next-generation sequencing technology, Hu and his team were able to conduct a comprehensive analysis using 65 whole genomes, 49 Y-chromosomes and 49 mitochondrial genomes to demonstrate a significant inter-species genetic divergence, as well as to correct species distribution boundaries. However, in 2020 a genetic study conducted by Yibo Hu and his colleagues at the Chinese Academy of Sciences determined that Chinese and Himalayan red pandas are in fact two distinct species. The difficulty with differentiation was exacerbated by the fact that red pandas found along either side of the The Nujiang River, previously considered to be the geographic boundary between the two species, were found to be morphologically similar. Whilst morphological differences were evident – the Chinese red panda was found to have a longer skull, wider cheekbones, an inflated forehead, more distinctive tail rings, and less white fur on its face – scientists expressed differing views on whether the distinctions were sufficient to warrant a classification of two species. Limitations in genetic technology and insufficient sample sizes prevented studies from reaching definitive conclusions on the topic. Traditionally, the determination of species, subspecies and population delimitation was based on morphological and biogeographical data, as well as reproductive isolation. Whilst the distinction may not seem significant, erroneous classifications of basal taxa lead to a misunderstanding of the species’ adaptive mechanisms and evolutionary background, resulting in misinformed, ineffective conservation strategies. Nevertheless, as Ailuridae forms part of the superfamily Musteloidea, along with the Procyonidae, Mephitidae, and Mustelidae families, red pandas are believed to be closest to racoons, weasels and skunks.Īpart from the red panda’s relationship to fellow Carnivora, scientists have long debated whether Chinese and Himalayan red pandas constitute two subspecies, or whether they are distinct enough to be regarded as two separate species. This classification indicates that the species represents a lengthy, uniquely separate evolutionary course with its closest known relative ( Parailurus ) having gone extinct approximately two to four million years ago, the modern red panda has earned the title of a “ living fossil ” as the sole extant member of the Ailuridae family. After three decades of extensive testing, during most of which the red panda was contentiously placed within the Procyonidae family, recent genetic research has indicated a more isolated phylogenetic position for the red panda by placing it in a family of its own ( Ailuridae ). This apparent coincidence has been described as one of the most dramatic cases of evolutionary convergence observed amongst vertebrates.Īs such, the exact evolutionary history and taxonomic classification of the enigmatic red panda has long baffled scientists, as physiological, ecological and genetic similarities to species within the Ursidae (polar bears, black bears, brown bears, giant pandas) Procyonidae (racoons, ringtails, cacomistles, coatis), Mephitidae (skunks), and Mustelidae (weasels, badgers, otters, ferrets) groups have resulted in several differing opinions within the scientific community. The herbivorous diet of the modern red panda led to the digit developing a secondary ability of bamboo manipulation (known as “preadaptation”). Whilst the two fossils were found to possess the additional digit, scientists determined that the false thumb had evolved in each species for different purposes: as Ailurarctos shifted from a carnivorous diet to one consisting primarily of bamboo, the extra appendage aided with bamboo manipulation Simocyon batalleri, on the other hand, remained a carnivorous mammal and so the additional digit is believed to have evolved for arboreal locomotion. Although once believed to substantiate a close relationship between the two species, the discovery of a Miocene red panda relative ( Simocyon batalleri ) and a Late Miocene giant panda relative ( Ailurarctos ) suggested otherwise. Aside from their appetite for bamboo, giant and red pandas share similar specialisations in the forefoot, male genitalia and masticatory system, and both species possess a “false thumb”: a carpal bone, or radial sesamoid, acting as an opposable sixth digit on the animal’s wrist. The word “panda” is thought to have been derived from the Nepalese words “nigalya ponya”, meaning “bamboo eater”, and was subsequently ascribed to the giant panda due to certain morphological similarities it shared with the red panda. Taxonomyĭespite common assumptions to the contrary, the red panda was actually discovered 50 years prior to the giant panda. ![]() ![]() ![]() Species: Ailurus fulgens (Himalayan Red Panda), Ailurus styani (Chinese Red Panda)Ī red panda resting on a tree branch (photograph by Jessica Weiller for Unsplash). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |