New Article about Tylototriton shanjing taxonomy based on mitochondrial DNA

[HouMian]

the article named 《The validity of red knobby newt (Tylototriton shanjing) species status based on mitochondrial》, in this article conclusion the shanjing and verrucosus is synonymy.

[Foster Reves]

Could you post a link to this article? I would be very interested in reading it (if it is in English).
Chip

[HouMian]

Originally Posted by freves

Could you post a link to this article? I would be very interested in reading it (if it is in English).
Chip

Sorry have not any free resource online but if you tell me your mail I can send you the PDF file, this article only have Chinese edition.

[Foster Reves]

Send it to chip_reves@carilion.com Perhaps I can find someone to translate it. Thanks.
Chip

[Robkeulers]

Could you mail me a copy too?
There is a study chinese in my building, I can ask if they can translate...

thanks!

rob@keulers.com

[Francesco Spallone]

Hi guys
the link to the pdf is:
http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?zr07065
shame it's all in chinese except for the abstract

[Mark Aartse-Tuyn]

We need a Chinese member with spare time on their hands to translate this .

I must say I don’t really understand how a genetic distance of 1.2% signifies synonymy. The genetic difference between chimps and humans is 1.23%.... any geneticists care to explain?

[mantighoul]

Ill see if my neighbors have time to translate it, no promises though.

[wouter]

I'm looking forward to the english version people!

Anyway, I'm curious about the conclusion, since there doesn't seem to be taxonomic conclusions except for the doubtfull species status of T. shanjing. Will this become a subspecies of T. verrucosus? I't isn't impossible that there is some transition between both species in extreme southwestern Yunnan (although I had never expected that). It seems to me preliminary to give T. shanjing a subspecific status, certainly when compared to T. verrucosus from other countries which are cleary different at a species level to me (Nepal, India). Complete phylogeography of the complex is needed though, maybe I'm totally wrong...

[Foster Reves]

I have a herper friend who speaks Chinese. I have not had time to follow up on this yet but I plan on seeing if he can translate. Taxonomy is certainly not a strong point for me personally and I agree that this is difficult to accept from a purely morphological viewpoint. I hope to be able to read the paper for a somewhat better understanding (as much as my 12 year old BS in biology will allow anyway).
Chip

[John Clare]

I find this somewhat amusing, having just come across the thread (thanks Jen). I would very much have liked to have seen the animals used in this test. I've seen individuals (in person) described as Tylototriton verrucosus that were very close to Tylototriton shanjing in appearance. They were also less happy living in the water for extended periods of time than what I am accustomed to experiencing with Tylototriton verrucosus. Many enthusiasts and some scientists have suspected for a long time that the various "shades" between T. shanjing and T. verrucosus all constitute a large complex of closely allied species/subspecies but no one has bothered to study these in detail yet.

Frankly I think this paper (and consequently the journal for accepting the paper) disqualifies itself as a definitive source for information on these animals simply for not recognising the many varieties we have observed in the hobby. Obviously I can't read Chinese but assuming their data is accurate I strongly suspect they caught two closely allied variants within this mess of a complex. Also it should be noted that mitochondrial DNA analysis is not the be-all and end-all of species distinction.

And on a final note, not to be a snob but if this paper were something special I would have thought they would have attempted to publish it in a slightly more prestigious journal (no offense to anyone) - that's usually how it works in academia.

[Foster Reves]

I tend to agree with you John however I would love to read an english translation of the paper. My friend never did respond with a translation. If this does prove to be valid (and again I find this difficult to accept) then I am sure that the paper will eventually be translated.
Chip

[Roy van Grunsven]

It is hard to follow the paper as they did not put the species names in the tree. But I would not disqualify it this fast.

-There is a lot of work published in chinese, the fact that someone doesn't speak english doesn't mean they are not a good scientist. Funding is also different in China which affects the choice where to publish.

- I strongly disagree with John on recognizing different forms. We have the tunnel vision not this scientist. We only know examples from a few lines and do not have a clue about what is really out there. They sampled throughout the area and therefore have a lot of variation captured. Also within T. shanjing!!

-The conclusion is the opposite to mentioned before, T. shanjing is paraphyletic. This means that there are two groups of T. shanjing that are not closely related. At least one of these groups is more closely related to some verrucosus than to the other group
This means we do not recognize the two types within shanjing (of which one might not be known in captivity)

[John Clare]

Originally Posted by grunsven

There is a lot of work published in chinese, the fact that someone doesn't speak english doesn't mean they are not a good scientist.

I deal with scientific literature every day as part of my work, and frequently as part of my free time. Unfortunately the Chinese literature I have come across is often of a (significantly) lower standard than other sources. To classify what I said as a judgement on non-English literature as a whole in general offends me greatly, particularly since I have published in journals that are not run/owned/whatever by English-speaking nations. I also firmly believe that there are quality papers published in China - make no mistake. I am just saying that in my experience the papers applicable to my work that have their origin in Chinese journals have often been of a lower standard than those from other sources. Addendum to the last sentence: I should also say that I'm speaking in terms of Biology and Chemistry topics.

Originally Posted by grunsven

Funding is also different in China which affects the choice where to publish.

This I will grant you (no pun intended).

Originally Posted by grunsven

I strongly disagree with John on recognizing different forms. We have the tunnel vision not this scientist. We only know examples from a few lines and do not have a clue about what is really out there. They sampled throughout the area and therefore have a lot of variation captured. Also within T. shanjing!!

I would very much like to read a translation of the paper before I agree or disagree with you here. Frankly though I can't see them having had significant enough funding to do a true survey of the forms in China. It's a big country and little funding for this sort of application is forthcoming (I don't need to speak Chinese to know that latter fact).

Originally Posted by grunsven

The conclusion is the opposite to mentioned before, T. shanjing is paraphyletic. This means that there are two groups of T. shanjing that are not closely related. At least one of these groups is more closely related to some verrucosus than to the other group
This means we do not recognize the two types within shanjing (of which one might not be known in captivity)

Can you tell us what the geographic origins were of the forms they described? How closely are they allied geographically? Do they describe the appearance of the forms? Any frame of reference would be most useful.

Thank you for giving us an insight into the paper.

[wouter]

Amphibiaweb seems to accept the whole article, since T. shanjing just dissapeared from their list. In my opinion a remarkable action at least. If I notice all the species and subspecies we have in Europe, certainly those like S. atra pasubiensis and S. algira spelea, I can't help but think that we still have to discover so much in Asia... and sample way, way more. Just erasing T. shanjing from one of the prime amphibian information sources seems somewhat preliminary to me.

[Robkeulers]

They added the shanjing pictures to the T. verrucosus database

[John Clare]

They have jumped the gun imho. We need locality data and photos of the specimens.

[acerno]

I read the English abstract of the Chinese article and tend to agree strongly with Mark and Johns argument. Mark states that 1.2% is to small to signify synonymy; John indicates that there may be an actual complex between T. verrucosus and shanjing. I favor the assumption of a complex/integrade within verrucosus and shanjing. Clearly more work needs to be done within these two species before ruling T. shanjing a type of verrucosus. Amphibiaweb.org seemed to have jumped too quickly in removing shanjing as a valid species.

[Jennewt]

I have an English translation available! Anybody who wants it, please send me an e-mail (jpmacke - at - comcast.net) and I will send you the translation and the original. Do NOT post to this forum saying that you want a copy - I will just laugh at you for not following instructions.

The paper is believable, except for one major deficiency: they only tested ONE sample of T. verrucosus (an animal from China). If this paper had included samples of verrucosus from other geographic regions (India, Burma, etc), then I would find it a lot more credible. As-is, I would say this is an interesting preliminary study, but I wouldn't yet discard the idea that there are two species or a complex of species/subspecies. But clearly, the color and prominence of the "orange spots" is not enough to say that two animals of this complex are separate species.

[Jennewt]

I should have mentioned... thank you to Yong Zhao, who did the translation. And thank you to Alejandro Carrillo, who asked him to do the translation. The translator was not a biologist, but his translation was sufficient for me to put the words into fairly normal biology descriptions. When reading, keep in mind that it's a translation and still has some imperfections.