The phylogeny of Cynops

M

marcus

Guest
Just wanted to ask around if anyone here knew if a phylogenical studies have been made on the Cynops genus? I am to write a small paper on conservation of Cynops, but when I talked discussed it with my instructor it got out of hand. She has done research on aposematic colours and was immediately fascinated by the different Cynops species.

So now I´m supposed to write a little about everything and have been looking for any phylogenic stuides, with little success..
If anyone knows if any such studies have been made and in that case were to look for them, I would be very grateful for a hint!

Cheers
Marcus
 
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&safe=off&q=phylogenetic+studies+cynops+genus&spell=1

at least 3 papers right there...
happy.gif


(Message edited by newtron on February 27, 2005)
 
Oh!
I tried to find information using Science citation database and stuff like that. Didn´t occur to me to use google scholar.. "OUCH"!(hitting myself).

Thanks!
 
Anybody know what the Wikipedia entry for Cynops at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynops is talking about here?
-----------------------------------------------
<font size="-2">(begin quote)</font>
Taxonomic controversy
The genus Cynops is due for a split. The Chinese species will be placed in a separate genus from the Japanese ones. The species Cynops cyanurus is at the centre of all this. There is much debate about the validity of Cynops cyanurus and Cynops chenggongensis. All the known captive animals could be something different to cyanurus as they do not entirely match the original description of the species. the only known animals that match that are animals originating from Chemnitz Zoo but the problem is that they have not been able to get the F2 animals to breed well, which could suggest that they are infact a hybrid of cyanurus and chenggongensis or an undescribed Cynops species. There have even been suggestions that the animals thought to be cyanurus in collections is infact chennggongensis. There is still much to be learnt from this genus, and only further analysis will clear it up.
<font size="-2">(end quote)</font>
--------------------------------------------
I've never heard that the genus is due for a split before. Any basis?

(Message edited by tj on December 07, 2005)
 
i remember Nate telling me about Cynops coming under review, can't remember the details, but i think that the Wikipedia account is right in saying that the Japanese species and chinese species would split.
 
Hmmm, the "cyanurus" I have seem to breed quite well.....

Ed
 
Tim,

I have cyanurus from Chemnitz which breed quite well too.

Eike
 
Well I wonder who wrote that Wikipedia account. I tend to agree with it.

Will: At the very least, it looks likely that cyanurus will be split from pyrrhogaster and ensicauda. There's no mention yet where orientalis and orphicus fit into all this.

Eike: do you have photos of these animals? I've not heard of anyone breeding the F2 Chemnitz animals (or at least not getting fertile eggs). Are you absolutely sure they are from Chemnitz?
 
That sure is intriguing. I'd sure like to hear more about it
biggrin.gif


In passing, here's a link to a photo of a visitor space in the Chemnitz Zoo's Vivarium:

http://www.zoolex.org/zoolexstat/pictdir//707/2.jpg

Any links to pics of Chemnitz cyanurus?

Alan, looking at the history of that entry, this guy Ahoerstemeier doesn't seem to be the person who wrote it, just a Wikipedia editor, and the person who wrote it is merely identified by an IP address
wink.gif


(Message edited by TJ on December 09, 2005)
 
After looking into the matter myself (though I would have preferred to have somebody point the way), here's the relevant reference I finally found:

"Our molecular data show that C. cyanurus is deeply differentiated from all other samples lowest K2p is 13.2% to C. pyrrhogaster) and that it is basal to the remainder of the Asian taxa examined here. We were not able to secure molecular sequences for C. wolterstorffi...but morphological features of the species ally it with C. cyanurus; both species are highland forms that live in the same general region. Should the paraphyly of Cynops be confirmed, an appropriate taxonomic resolution would be to recognize the genus Hypselotriton (Wolterstorff, 1934) as a valid taxon containing at least cyanurus and wolterstorffi."

Source:
Relationships of the Salamandrid Genera Paramesotriton, Pachytriton, Cynops Based on Mitochondrial DNA Sequences
LAUREN M. CHAN, KELLY R. ZAMUDIO, AND DAVID B. WAKE
Copeia, 2001(4), pp. 997�E009
 
Furthermore, though I've misplaced my Studies on Chinese Salamanders (by Zhao, Hu, Jiangm & Yang, 1988) it has these relevant sections that I'm now anxious to read:

* Taxonomic status of Hypselotriton

* Partitioning of species groups of the genus Cynops

(Message edited by TJ on January 04, 2006)
 
In the document mentioned in the post just above this, Zhao and Hu conclude from anatomical analysis that wolterstorffi should be included in Cynops as their osteological features are "not significantly different." Still, it is remarked how C. cyanurus is more similar to C. wolterstorffi than to C. orientalis, which itself is differentiated from Japanese Cynops.

It divides Cynops into three species groups based on morphological and geographical characteristics:

1) C. pyrrhogaster and C. ensicauda
2) C. orientalis
3) C. wolterstorffi and C. cyanurus

No mention of C. chenggongensis but then there's no mystery as to which group it'd belong to (the 3rd) if indeed it were a valid species (and Zhao is said to not recognize it as such).

Zhao and Hu conclude by saying, "We predict that further differentiation of this genus will be recognized."
 
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