Where are we most likely to discover new animals?

steddyeddy

With the news that the recent expeditions to the island of New Guinea have discovered thousands of new species scientists are deciding where else can new species be found. There has been success from the amazon with the recent discovery of the snub nosed monkey but I would put money on new species of mammal for instance could be found in China. If you could get funding for an expidition where would you like to explore?

Sid_Justice

by animals do you mean cuddly vertebrates?

steddyeddy

Sid_Justice wrote: »

by animals do you mean cuddly vertebrates?

Well lets say megafauna as theres likely a lot less of them remaining undiscovered.

g'em

I guess a tropical rainforest would be the most likely place for a new animal species to be discovered (invertebrate wise I think you'd be better off going extreme North or South myself, the Arctic clime is largely undiscovered purely by virtue of not having the technology to explore it until quite recently).

Sid_Justice

deep sea too, wasn't there a new 'old' eel discovered there.

g'em

I don't know about eels, but Coelocanths are a pretty famous example of the discovery of an animal that was long since believed to have been extinct - thought to have gone extinct 80 million years ago during the Cretaceous and then 'rediscovered' in the 1930's in South America.

steddyeddy

Im sure there are several different species of large creature to be found in the deepest oceans and along with the law of deep sea gigantisim you can bet they will be big creatures too. Tropical and seasonal forests are likely to harbour some new types of primates.

Saying that I would put more money on new creatures being found in the seasonal forests of China and some parts of eurasian say than africa because a lot of the chinese and eurasian forests have been there a lot longer. Many african forests are "only" a few thousand years old having previously been savannah.

Sid_Justice

g'em wrote: »

I don't know about eels, but Coelocanths are a pretty famous example of the discovery of an animal that was long since believed to have been extinct - thought to have gone extinct 80 million years ago during the Cretaceous and then 'rediscovered' in the 1930's in South America.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056361643

Mr. Boo

Deep oceans are where the most new species are likely to be discovered. Very little of it has been explored. Completely new ecosystems are discovered every time we go for a look.

Megafauna? Dense forest may be home to some large animals, but the likelihood of a significant number of new species of megafauna being discovered there is probably low enough. Especially at the rate we're chewing it up. It is the megafauna that are sustaining the heaviest losses of the sixth extinction.

I think the coelacanth was off Eastern South Africa....

g'em

Mr. Boo wrote: »

I think the coelacanth was off Eastern South Africa....

So did I tbh! I was almost sure it was off Madagascar that it was first found but when I went Googling apparently it was first found in the 30's off S. America, and typical me I never took the link for it. And I think there was another spp. discovered much more recently in Indonesia?

steddyeddy

g'em wrote: »

So did I tbh! I was almost sure it was off Madagascar that it was first found but when I went Googling apparently it was first found in the 30's off S. America, and typical me I never took the link for it. And I think there was another spp. discovered much more recently in Indonesia?

Yes indeed there was and chances are It could be a different species of coelacant. Another more recent creature discovered was the megamouth shark which new evidence suggests could be related to the basking shark which was until recently thought to be the only member of its genus!

Adam Khor

I would keep an eye on the Amazonian rainforest. It's very old, very large, and parts of it are still unexplored. New animals, including big ones, are reported every year there. Not so long ago, a potential third species of peccary was found (the giant peccary, Pecari maximus- not a monster but substantially larger than its relatives):



By the way, Marc van Roosmalen, the biologist who discovered the Giant Peccary has also discovered several other new species in the Amazon, including the dwarf or pigmy manatee Trichechus pygmaeus, which at 1.30 meters long is the smallest sirenian, as well as several kinds of monkeys.
Van Roosmalen has a VERY controversial story and some scientists don´t agree with him with some of his identifications of new species, but others have already been recognized as valid.
He is also following the track of several cryptids, including the famous White Throated Black Jaguar, a large cat that has long been reported by natives but has evaded scientists for a long time, as well as a tree-dwelling relative to the Giant Anteater.

Even if these creatures are never found, I am pretty sure that the Amazon still has many surprises and secrets to reveal.

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

I would keep an eye on the Amazonian rainforest. It's very old, very large, and parts of it are still unexplored. New animals, including big ones, are reported every year there. Not so long ago, a potential third species of peccary was found (the giant peccary, Pecari maximus- not a monster but substantially larger than its relatives):



By the way, Marc van Roosmalen, the biologist who discovered the Giant Peccary has also discovered several other new species in the Amazon, including the dwarf or pigmy manatee Trichechus pygmaeus, which at 1.30 meters long is the smallest sirenian, as well as several kinds of monkeys.
Van Roosmalen has a VERY controversial story and some scientists don´t agree with him with some of his identifications of new species, but others have already been recognized as valid.
He is also following the track of several cryptids, including the famous White Throated Black Jaguar, a large cat that has long been reported by natives but has evaded scientists for a long time, as well as a tree-dwelling relative to the Giant Anteater.

Even if these creatures are never found, I am pretty sure that the Amazon still has many surprises and secrets to reveal.

Zoologist David Oren beleives the giant sloth still resides there and has collected over a hundred reports so who knows.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Zoologist David Oren beleives the giant sloth still resides there and has collected over a hundred reports so who knows.

I knew a guy who was in the Venezuelan rainforest and mentioned both giant sloths and Smilodon (!!!) as being still alive. According to him, natives have always known this and consider them to be normal jungle animals, although feared because of their rarity and dangerousness.

I for one love the idea

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

I knew a guy who was in the Venezuelan rainforest and mentioned both giant sloths and Smilodon (!!!) as being still alive. According to him, natives have always known this and consider them to be normal jungle animals, although feared because of their rarity and dangerousness.

I for one love the idea

Yes when you hear natives talking about things it really puts a new spin on it. The above Marc van Roosmalen is particularly keen to talk to the natives of any new region he enters. He puts down his high discovery rate to listening to the natives.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes when you hear natives talking about things it really puts a new spin on it. The above Marc van Roosmalen is particularly keen to talk to the natives of any new region he enters. He puts down his high discovery rate to listening to the natives.

Agreed. Science could make amazing discoveries by doing simply that. You know, in some parts of India and Siberia, natives claim that tigers can mimic the sounds of deer to attract them to an ambush. Scientists usually say it's a myth.
However, recently in (where else) the Amazon rainforest, some scientists found that the Margay (Leopardus wiedii) could imitate the sounds made by baby monkeys in distress, to attract the worried adults into an ambush. If Margay can do this, then surely Tigers may do it as well.

I think if scientists listen to more native "myths" they may found really cool stuff. Hey, maybe jaguars DO use their tails as lures to fish! Maybe Fossas do hunt in packs during mating season! Maybe Giant Forest Hogs do eat people sometimes! Who knows?

Mothman

Off SW coast

I think this is an example that there is much to discover in waters...even close to home

mgwhelan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5726yg7-5js

Mickeroo

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes indeed there was and chances are It could be a different species of coelacant. Another more recent creature discovered was the megamouth shark which new evidence suggests could be related to the basking shark which was until recently thought to be the only member of its genus!

Where was that shark discovered? When I looked at the pic I thought it was just a basking shark, any idea what differentiates it from basking sharks?

I seem to remember reading somewhere that it's thought there could be lots more populations of Jaguar scattered around the globe than anyone realises since they're such reclusive cats and some known species have barely,if at all, ever been filmed. They even suggested that the supposed sightings of big cats in the UK could be brief glimpses of indigenous populations. It's probably not true of course with regards to the UK.

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

Where was that shark discovered? When I looked at the pic I thought it was just a basking shark, any idea what differentiates it from basking sharks?

I seem to remember reading somewhere that it's thought there could be lots more populations of Jaguar scattered around the globe than anyone realises since they're such reclusive cats and some known species have barely,if at all, ever been filmed. They even suggested that the supposed sightings of big cats in the UK could be brief glimpses of indigenous populations. It's probably not true of course with regards to the UK.

That pic IS a basking shark.

This is the megamouth shark:







It was first found in Hawaii but has been seen (rarely) in many parts of the world. Most of what we know about the megamouth shark comes from dead specimens washed ashore or accidentally caught in nets; it usually lives in deep water so live ones are really rare to find. It is, by the way, an incredibly ancient creature, with members of the same genus known from the Cretaceous period.

As for the big cats, there's lots of mysterious species around the world, including some that MAY be surviving sabertoothed cats, but the ones sighted often in the UK and US (and even Australia) and described as black panthers are probably just that- panthers (leopards) and other known big cats escaped from circuses, zoos and private collections, or purposedly released by irresponsible owners. Big cats are perfectly able to survive anywhere as long as there's prey animals and a water source.

steddyeddy

Mickeroo wrote: »

Where was that shark discovered? When I looked at the pic I thought it was just a basking shark, any idea what differentiates it from basking sharks?

I seem to remember reading somewhere that it's thought there could be lots more populations of Jaguar scattered around the globe than anyone realises since they're such reclusive cats and some known species have barely,if at all, ever been filmed. They even suggested that the supposed sightings of big cats in the UK could be brief glimpses of indigenous populations. It's probably not true of course with regards to the UK.

Yes indeed that pic is a basking shark I was trying to illustrate the other member of the basking shark's genus, the megamouth. Previously the megamouth was thought to be the only surviving member of that genus. I havent heard about jaguars existing outside south america but I have heard of mystery cats around the world such as the onza in south america.

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

That pic IS a basking shark.

This is the megamouth shark:







It was first found in Hawaii but has been seen (rarely) in many parts of the world. Most of what we know about the megamouth shark comes from dead specimens washed ashore or accidentally caught in nets; it usually lives in deep water so live ones are really rare to find. It is, by the way, an incredibly ancient creature, with members of the same genus known from the Cretaceous period.

As for the big cats, there's lots of mysterious species around the world, including some that MAY be surviving sabertoothed cats, but the ones sighted often in the UK and US (and even Australia) and described as black panthers are probably just that- panthers (leopards) and other known big cats escaped from circuses, zoos and private collections, or purposedly released by irresponsible owners. Big cats are perfectly able to survive anywhere as long as there's prey animals and a water source.

I am in contact with a cryptozoologist called Scott Marlowe who is one of the main investigators of black panther sightings. Scott thinks surviving remnants of the american lion (Panthera atrox) are responsible for the sightings. Incidentally there is no such thing as a panther! When people talk about panthers they usually mean a melanistic jaguar or leapard!

Mickeroo

Adam Khor wrote: »

That pic IS a basking shark.

D'oh my bad

steddyeddy wrote: »

I havent heard about jaguars existing outside south america but I have heard of mystery cats around the world such as the onza in south america.

Yea I meant Leopard, always confuse the two. Apparently there's still a population of Jaguar in Arizona but that's the only one outside central/south America.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

I am in contact with a cryptozoologist called Scott Marlowe who is one of the main investigators of black panther sightings. Scott thinks surviving remnants of the american lion (Panthera atrox) are responsible for the sightings. Incidentally there is no such thing as a panther! When people talk about panthers they usually mean a melanistic jaguar or leapard!

That's why I said "panthers (leopards)". Panther and leopard are the same thing; a black panther is a melanistic leopard. Calling a black jaguar a "panther" shouldn´t be encouraged, really, cuz it blurs the distinction between both species; most experts prefer to use simply "black jaguar" and keep "panther" for leopards. And although some people (especially in the internet) will tell you that "panther" can also mean a "melanistic cougar", truth is no melanistic cougar has ever been recorded. The only cougars usually called panthers are those living in Florida, which are a distinct subspecies, the "Florida panthers".

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes indeed that pic is a basking shark I was trying to illustrate the other member of the basking shark's genus, the megamouth. Previously the megamouth was thought to be the only surviving member of that genus. I havent heard about jaguars existing outside south america but I have heard of mystery cats around the world such as the onza in south america.

Actually, Mexico is considered part of North America, and it still has a considerable jaguar population (relatively speaking). The jaguars that appear once in a while in Arizona come from northern Mexico.

As for the onza, it is not from South America but from Mexico, where it was known even since the time of the Aztec; they called it "cuetlamiztli" which means "wolf-cougar", due to the onza having pointed ears and a very thin body, reminiscent of a wolf. The last emperor of the Aztec is said to have kept wolf-cougars along with jaguars and cougars in his private zoo.
The Spaniards also reported that onzas would attack camps even during daylight. Unfortunately, if the cuetlamiztli was a species of its own, it is likely to be extinct by now. The onzas shot in Mexico in recent times were nothing more than small cougars.

steddyeddy

Good post! I dont think the "panther" sightings are a melanistic cougar due to the amount of hunters who have claimed to have seen one. They likened it to a large black lion! The flordia panther is a fantastic example of how rewilding can work. Yes some onzas were shot and dna tests have indeed confirmed its a genetic variant of the cougar. I dont know why but I never studied anything about mexican wildlife! I had no idea the arizona jaguars were anything but a myth, thanks for telling me otherwise!

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Good post! I dont think the "panther" sightings are a melanistic cougar due to the amount of hunters who have claimed to have seen one. They likened it to a large black lion! The flordia panther is a fantastic example of how rewilding can work. Yes some onzas were shot and dna tests have indeed confirmed its a genetic variant of the cougar. I dont know why but I never studied anything about mexican wildlife! I had no idea the arizona jaguars were anything but a myth, thanks for telling me otherwise!

Well, anything u want to know about Mexican wildlife, ask away

Actually, Arizona jaguars have even been photographed:

But like I said, these jaguars come from northern Mexico, are usually males looking for new territories, and are very, very rare to encounter. The jaguar populations that were actually native to the US are now extinct.

They were also thought to be extinct in many parts of Northern Mexico but camera traps have proved otherwise. Also, recently, the belief that black jaguars weren´t found in Northern Mexico was disproved when a melanistic female was photographed near the border with the US:

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

Well, anything u want to know about Mexican wildlife, ask away

Actually, Arizona jaguars have even been photographed:

But like I said, these jaguars come from northern Mexico, are usually males looking for new territories, and are very, very rare to encounter. The jaguar populations that were actually native to the US are now extinct.

They were also thought to be extinct in many parts of Northern Mexico but camera traps have proved otherwise. Also, recently, the belief that black jaguars weren´t found in Northern Mexico was disproved when a melanistic female was photographed near the border with the US:

Ill have to do more reaserch Adam thanks again! My favouraite locations to spot wildlife were all in the coniferous temperate forests of the pacific northwest, specifically British columbia!

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Ill have to do more reaserch Adam thanks again! My favouraite locations to spot wildlife were all in the coniferous temperate forests of the pacific northwest, specifically British columbia!

No prob

British Columbia... one of my dreams is to go kayaking in those orca watching trips there

Adam Khor

Like I said, the Amazon... a new monkey species (genus Callicebus) has just been found there:

Birdnuts

Potential new monkey species found in Sri Lanka:)

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/node/336713

Adam Khor

Just announced to be a separate species from the common bottlenose dolphin, the genetically distinct Burrunan dolphin (Tursiops australis) lives in the southern coast of Australia.



Also, in India's Western Ghats (where a yet-to-be-described big cat is said to roam), twelve new species of frog have been found, thus rising the number of amphibian species known in India to 317.

Adam Khor

Was going to start a thread for this but, I think it fits here. A group of people are actively hunting for the yeti/snow man not in the Himalayas but in the Kemerovo region of Siberia, where the creatures are said to roam too.

I believe the expedition hasn´t been out for long but they already claim to have found "evidence" of the creature's existence- namely footprints and hair samples, as always. Never a good picture or a carcass, unfortunately.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8818086/Yetis-do-exist.html

In other news, the Nile crocodile has been confirmed as being actually two different species- DNA studies show that the smaller crocodiles living in western Africa are actually a separate species (Crocodylus suchus) and that, in fact, both species are only distantly related, with the true Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) being closer to American crocs than to C. suchus!

The most amusing part of the story is that the Ancient Egyptians knew this, according to Herodotus; the smaller and more docile Crocodylus suchus was the one they seemingly kept in their temples, that's why some have suggested the common name "sacred croc" for the "new" species.
Took science 3.000 years to figure out what the Egyptians knew without any DNA technology... :P



Crocodylus suchus

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

Was going to start a thread for this but, I think it fits here. A group of people are actively hunting for the yeti/snow man not in the Himalayas but in the Kemerovo region of Siberia, where the creatures are said to roam too.

I believe the expedition hasn´t been out for long but they already claim to have found "evidence" of the creature's existence- namely footprints and hair samples, as always. Never a good picture or a carcass, unfortunately.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8818086/Yetis-do-exist.html

In other news, the Nile crocodile has been confirmed as being actually two different species- DNA studies show that the smaller crocodiles living in western Africa are actually a separate species (Crocodylus suchus) and that, in fact, both species are only distantly related, with the true Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) being closer to American crocs than to C. suchus!

The most amusing part of the story is that the Ancient Egyptians knew this, according to Herodotus; the smaller and more docile Crocodylus suchus was the one they seemingly kept in their temples, that's why some have suggested the common name "sacred croc" for the "new" species.
Took science 3.000 years to figure out what the Egyptians knew without any DNA technology... :P



Crocodylus suchus

I heard about the yeti thing to. As regards possibility of a unknown living in siberia its quite possible. Wouldnt surprise me at all. As you say though Adam hair and territory markers dont cover it in terms of proof. Its not a yeti though as far as I know the local tribes, the Yakuts and Tungus call it the Chuchunaa or mulen (which means raider).

The croc is interesting and it seems like another case of the scientists playing catch up with the natives. The ancient egyptians also described the okapi thousands of years before we discovered it in 1901.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

I heard about the yeti thing to. As regards possibility of a unknown living in siberia its quite possible. Wouldnt surprise me at all. As you say though Adam hair and territory markers dont cover it in terms of proof. Its not a yeti though as far as I know the local tribes, the Yakuts and Tungus call it the Chuchunaa or mulen (which means raider).

The croc is interesting and it seems like another case of the scientists playing catch up with the natives. The ancient egyptians also described the okapi thousands of years before we discovered it in 1901.

So many similar cases

I think one of my favorites is the earliest form of Western "dragon". To the classic civilizations like Greek and Roman, and even during the Middle Ages dragons were nothing else than huge constricting snakes. They were even described as being "serpents born from other serpents" which started out small and then became "as large as tree trunks" and killed their prey not with venom but by "crushing" them with their coils. They were also tellingly said to live in Africa and India.
Even the word dragon comes from Greek for serpent...

Which basically means a lot of people keeps "dragons" as pets today XD