Cynops chenggongensis

looks like livinguderworld has suddenly adopted the same picture if i were to guess a light female c.orientalis maybe...
 
It's definitely not orientalis, it's in the cyanurus group. C. chenggongensis is supposed to have stripes of yellow-orange spots from the shoulder to the tail much like some C. ensicauda ensicauda have.

I do know the animals seen at LivingUnderworld have been shown to Zhao Ermi in China, and he has confirmed them as C. cyanurus cyanurus.
 
now i see where your coming from similar to c.e.yunnanensis.

but you never know maybe it really is a chenggongensis and next week they will be giving away free Cynops wolterstorffi with every purchase.
biggrin.gif
 
Nate,
Did you contact Dr. Zhao Ermi personally or you got the comment from someone else? There is one important thing I want to add to your comment; according to him, there is no Cynops chenggongensis in China; chenggongensis is cyanurus. The Cynops chenggongensis is just a fake species some scientists make up for their flame! Also, according to Zhao, the C. cyanurus is so variable, appearance is not a key factor to identify them.
Furthermore, new species come out from every field trip in China. It could be a new species that Zhao not even know. China is so big and a lot of new species are just waiting to be discovered. Sometimes, it is hard to identify an amphibian to species or even subspecies standard from China; paramesotriton is a good example.
 
Hi Angus,

so what we need are Yunnan Cynops with exakt known origin, to make a genetically analysis, and to describe the species and subspecies new!

Paul
 
Hi! Paul.

The genetic analysis test is already being arranged and I will be informed when the result come out.
 
Oh! One more thing for the record.
Teratoscincus roborowski is originated from China, but our smart China's scientists still think they are just the same as Teratoscincus scincus.
Not until 1994, Lui Wai make a change and the new latin name is T. roborowski which is accepted internationally.
 
Hi Angus, no I do not speak Chinese and was not able to communicate with him personally, but rather a friend of mine did. About chenggongensis being cyanurus...I suspected as much as offspring from the same parents have been showing characteristics of both cyanurus subspecies. I bet genetics confirms this.

As for it being a new species, that's always possible, but the photo in question sure doesn't look like anything other than a cyanurus. It doesn't fit the original description of chenggongensis either. It is interesting to note though, that you know that chenggongensis is not considered real, yet you have them on your website anyway. Why's that?
 
Well, very simple, I don't trust Zhao at all and I know who your friend is. Your friend didn't contact Zhoa personally either, Zhao was on a field trip when I and your friend discuss on this topic.
 
oh! Also, where did you get your original description of chenggongensis? From the "Atlas of Amphibians of China"?
 
Ah, I see.

So why don't you believe Zhao? The animal in question does not resemble chenggongensis at all from the original description other than looking similar to cyanurus. Any other reasons to suspect they are different from cyanurus that aren't readily apparent in the photo?
 
Well, when I say "original description" I mean the original description as presented by Ye, Fei, and Hu 1993; Fei 1999; and Rafaelli 2000.

I have not read Kou and Xing's original Chinese paper.
 
I don't believe him because I have so many Chinese Cynops (properly more than Zhao has even seen in his whole life) and I did spend many hours on studying the difference between the two cyanurus subspecies and chenggongensis. From the study, I find many differences in my study group. The tail, color, the color of center line, length of toes, even the smell. It is really hard for me to say it all here. Can you tell me where you got your original description of chenggongensis?

(Message edited by AngusLee on September 24, 2004)
 
Angus, I can understand suspecting they are not like other cyanurus based on those reasons, but not labeling them as "chenggongensis". How about "suspected new species"?
smile7.gif


Should be interesting to see the genetic results for sure.
 
I must agree with Nate here, if the original description of chenggongensis does not fit your animals they should definitely not be sold as chenggongensis.
If you believe that you have found a new species go ahead and publish an article, we would all be delighted. I really don't get it, if the original description doesn't fit this your own description of your cyanurus-like animals why do you call them chenggongensis?
I'd really like more info on these cynops you have.
 
Well, I believe what I have here is Chenggongensis. I also believe I have some new species in my collection too. China is like Amazon. You will never understand how it is like to be here.

Hey! Nate. Do you mind to have your original description post here, I mean the original one, not the translated one. It is in Chinese, right?
You can scan it and post it here, so we all can see.

Jesper, have you read the original description? or you just repeat what nate said? Has anyone here see a chenggongensis before, even a picture? Also, as matter of fact, I never offer any chenggongensis for sale! They are only sold on request. I believe no beginners will accept my high price for chenggongensis and thus they are the experienced newt keeper who also believe they are buying chenggongensis. They see the pictures too.

Genetically analysis result is interesting to see, but can it provide if it is chenggongensis or not?
 
Angus, I do understand China has undescribed species, particularly in Paramesotriton and Pachytriton. This is easy to see as animals often look much different than any known species. I cannot say that about your chenggongensis photo, it looks just like cyanurus. I have no reason to suspect it is anything else and that's why I've asked you these questions.

Have you not read the description? I don't have the original Chinese in my possession, but I do have Thorn/Rafaelli's 2000 description handy, which was taken from Kou and Xing's 1983 original paper:

"Diffère de C. cyanurus par les caractères suivants: Taille légèrement plus importante, peau lisse, taches sur la queu des femelles; chez plupart des exemplaires, une ligne de taches juane-orange sur les flancs, allant de l'épaule à la base de la queu."

Are you suggesting that this is in error? Do you have any animals with these stripes?

Of course genetic analysis will tell us if they are chenggongensis, assuming chenggongensis even exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    There are no messages in the chat. Be the first one to say Hi!
    Back
    Top