The C. chenggongensis thread again (I)

[jesper]

Btw, those pics at livingunderworld has been confirmed as cyanurus cyanurus? Then we might be able to compare with them.

 

[william]

is it just me or does the last one have a prominent vertebral ridge and rough skin

Tim can you get a close up of the darkest one (if it hasn't changed colour by now)

(Message edited by will_j on October 09, 2004)

 

[TJ]

This should help:

 

[william]

well if they don't have a prominent vertebral ridge then i don't know what does

 

[mattias]

Splendid pics!

Picture no 3 should be in some book somewhere, its amazing! Just the right view to see everything you would like to se on the dorsal and lateral parts.

Still waiting for the original text...
I really would like to see it and not just a summary of it.

I am also looking for it, but time is just not enough (though one of the worlds largest collections of herpetological literature is in the neigbour town of mine, in a private collection).

Greetings
Mattias

 

[TJ]

And this is just absolutely breathtaking (if not mouth-watering!)

 

[william]

absolute beauties looks like you could have both sexes but i cant tell if it's 2 males or 2 females mind you i have judged that on colour so who knows.

 

[william]

what are their dimensions Tim?

(Message edited by will_j on October 09, 2004)

 

[mattias]

As cyanurus is much variable, plenty pics of theme is needed. Just because Angus´s specimens (now Tims´s

) are not looking like the referens type or morph doesn´t say its not a cyanurus too.

Is it possible to get David Wake to take a look at the pics?

/M

 

[TJ]

Thanks Mattias. It almost looks as if the newt was placed on a pane of glass for that pic, but no, it's mid-water.

I'd love to have an opportunity to see that collection you mention. In about 10 days or so though, I may get a chance to see the collection at Kyoto University

William, yes, that vertebral ridge certainly defines the word "prominent"

Jesper, thanks for reposting that info here. I'll get some pics of the cyanurus up shortly.

But first, some belly shots of the "C. chenggonensis (?)"...

 

[TJ]

 

[william]

WOW WOW WOW

I repeat what beauties, you really have a way with your camera!! they are certainly the same species, race, subspecies. The one on the far right has a very swollen cloaca

 

[benjamin]

If they are chengongensis, then judging by the tail spots you might have two females. One of the newts seems too orange for one to be able to tell whether it has dorsolateral spots or not. I my self have difficulty coming to grasp with what a species is. Back in sixth grade I was told If two animals can produce fertile young then they are of the same species. Now I've found out this isn't true and that with amphibians its even more complex, where you can get fertile triploid hybrids desended from three "seperate species" with a trisomy of every chromosome, that always females and when they reproduce sperm serves as merely an activator for cell division meanwhile the male doesn't pass on any of his genes, so the female simply clones her self. It doesn't seem to me that what makes a species in amphibians is very well defined, let alone sub species. If some one could clarify what makes an individual species and subspecies, for amphibians, it would be greatly appreciated.

Right now it seems to me that any description of an animal that differs slightly from another animal's description qualifies it to be a new species. It also seems there is nothing in the original description of chengongensis that differs it from cyanarus, some of you even said in another thread that it wouldn't be difficult to imagine a cyanarus with 10 or 11 dorsolateral spots. What proof did Kou and Xing have that they'd found another species?

 

[william]

the more i look the more the one on the left looks like a c.ophricus (another species on Angus' website)

 

[TJ]

Despite the swollen cloaca on that one suspected male, I see no vivid blue tail sheen of the sort exhibited by my C. cyanurus males...

(C.cyanurus -- subspecies unknown at present)

see also: http://www.caudata.org/forum/messages/13/24227.jpg

(Message edited by TJ on October 09, 2004)

 

[TJ]

Sorry William, I almost missed your question about the dimensions. I neglected to measure them so I will have to get back to you on that. All I can say for now is that they are larger than the C. cyanurus I received from Angus. But this might just be because the C. cyanurus are younger. Here is a shot showing a C. chenggonensis<font color="ff0000">???</font>(top) and a C. cyanurus (bottom) together, though this spectacularly patterned C. cyanurus is not really representative of the group.

They are being kept separately, by the way.

Ah, I see Nate has logged in! This should be interesting

(Message edited by TJ on October 09, 2004)

 

[nate]

Hi Tim,

Nice cyanurus.

 

[TJ]

Somehow I just knew he would say that!

I just amended my above post to add the missing question marks after the name C. chenggongensis!

 

[edward]

Well for my (small two cents) I would be hard pressed to tell them from the cyanureus at work. They look exceptionally like cyanureus to me.

Ed

 

[TJ]

Well, Ed, I don't take your two cents lightly. I'd be more convinced that they are chenggongensis if I knew for a fact that they were caught in Chenggong Country of Yunnan Province. In the meantime, I'll play devil's advocate here by suggesting they might be what they're portrayed as until proven otherwise, if only for the sake of argument

I would like to hear what Prof. Wake has to say about them, as well as some more supportive arguments by Angus.