[ad_1]
Analysis: found in a laboratory and not on an expedition, the Popa langur is already a critically endangered species
By Tracie McKinney, University of South Wales
Scientists recently announced the discovery of the Popa langur, a medium-sized leaf-eating monkey found in central Myanmar. There are an estimated 200 to 250 of these monkeys, which probably means that the new species is classified as “critically endangered.”
This finding was announced just a week after two new species of greater glider, a glider marsupial, were identified in Australia. But what do scientists mean when they announce the discovery of “new” species of mammals? Were these animals really unknown to science?
We need your consent to upload this YouTube content.We use YouTube to manage additional content that may set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Review your data and accept it to load the content.Manage preferences
From the German Primate Center, how researchers found the Popa langur in Myanmar and how it is already facing extinction
While discoveries like the langur and gliders are certainly exciting, it’s important to clarify that these were not never-before-seen species discovered by some intrepid explorer. Rather, these animals have been identified as a genetically distinct group within an already known population. In fact, the local population has been living with these animals for generations and has their own ways of identifying and classifying species. When academics announce a newly defined species based on genetic evidence, it generally means that they have elevated an already defined subspecies to the species level.
The species are not as clear cut as they seemed when we learned about them in school. Most scholars use the “biological species concept”, which is based on whether animals are capable of producing fertile offspring together, but there are many other ways to define a species. Like most other recently described primates, the Popa langur has been identified using genetic information or the concept of phylogenetic species. This is based on how animals relate to other groups in evolutionary terms, essentially defining a species as the smallest group that can be genetically distinguished from another species but still shares a clear ancestor.
Elevation from a subspecies to a new species based on genetic information can be controversial. Some scholars dismiss these findings as “taxonomic inflation” and are concerned that changing classifications could confuse conservation efforts. Others point out that without a name and a reliable population estimate, these small pockets of genetic variation could easily go extinct without warning, and that raising them to species level ensures that funding and conservation efforts are directed at these at-risk groups. Wherever it is found, it is worth noting that the idea of a species, by any definition, is a human construct to explain variation in the natural world, and no definition will be a perfect representation of biological variation.
Identify a new species
The recently described Popa langur was discovered through a phylogenetic study that sought to better understand the evolutionary relationships between the 20 known species of the genus. Traquipiteco – informally known as langurs, lutungs or leaf monkeys. The scientists used fecal samples from wild langurs and tissue samples from museum specimens to clarify taxonomic relationships across the genus.
A group of langurs stood out: genetic evidence showed that there were distinct western and eastern varieties, but that a central population did not fit into either of them. The western and eastern varieties, formerly called subspecies of Phayre langur, were later elevated to species level (Phayre langur or Trachypithecus phayrei and the Shan State langur o T. melamera, respectively). The remaining population was called Stern trachypithecus – the Popa langur, after the nearby Monte Popa. This newly defined species lives in four distinct populations and is at risk of extinction due to its small numbers, deforestation, and the effects of agriculture and logging.
It may be surprising to learn that a newly discovered species is in danger of extinction, but this is often the case with genetic reclassifications. The two previously named subspecies from which the Popa langur was identified were already classified as “endangered” according to the official criteria of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list, which means that these animals Already threatened they now have an even smaller population than previously believed. Both subspecies, the Phayre langur and the Shan state langur, now species in their own right, will need to be reassessed for risk of extinction. The Popa langur has not yet been classified, but the study authors suggest that it should fall into the category of “critically endangered” due to its small and fragmented population and limited habitat.
Genetic reclassifications can be an important reminder to focus conservation efforts at higher taxonomic levels. For example, the aye-aye, a strange nocturnal primate found in the forests of Madagascar, represents a monospecific genus, a genus with only one living species. There is no living creature like an aye-aye, so its extinction would be a great loss of genetic, ecological and behavioral diversity. The Popa langur, by contrast, is one of approximately 20 species in the genus langur. Traquipiteco, who share a relatively recent evolutionary history.
However, identifying each new species of primates tells us a little more about the diversity of this fascinating order of mammals. By understanding that the Popa langur is genetically distinct from neighboring populations, we can better prioritize conservation efforts for this group of animals. This new classification will be vital to generate conservation funds to protect this rare monkey and its environment.
Tracie McKinney is Senior Lecturer in Human Biology at the University of South Wales. This article was originally published by The Conversation.
The opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the opinions of RTÉ
[ad_2]