Talk:Red deer/Archive 1

message: There's a link to "Shou" on here that redirects to "Sho", which is an article on japanese musical instruments.  Maybe i'm missing something, but that can't possibly be right. Archtemplar 03:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Tibetan Red Deer

message: 66.167.253.84 20:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See my comment/question above relative to this. Billlion 07:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

text: *Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography of red deer ( Cervus elaphus ) (2003)
20:07, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better organized mess 

message: Hi folks,  Yesterday I grouped together all of the subspecies information and moved it down below the fold.  I also removed unnecessary articles from the subheadings so that "in Europe" instead read "Europe".  I edited the disease section for factual content.  I made these changes without discussion.  OK, someone liked the previous version and reverted; so be it.  I lack the time to play competing edits.  
I did however reedit the disease section.  To say that 'Chronic wasting' disease is also known as 'mad cow' disease is misleading.  I refer readers to the excellent page on prions to clarify this.  Choose whatever format you like but let's have the factual content as correct as possible.
:I apologize for reverting. I didn't review your edit carefully enough. Reorganizations of articles should be accompanied by an edit summary and a comment on the talk page in most cases if only to make it easier to follow the edit history of the article. Thank you for the fix on CWD. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your graciousness. We should all do so well. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing/reverting

message: Kudos to User:Billlion, the article reads pretty nicely!  I'm adding a Clean template here as the soundclip is some format that needs to be recast into some widely distributed standard (say, a WAV file) rather than whatever an OOG file is (Scientific???).  Never heard of it as an Electrical Engineer, and certainly doesn't play under standard PC software.
{Cleanup|date=March 2006}
:<B>Fra</B>nkB 04:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for a very late reply to this. Thanks for the praise, but it was a team effort and its good to see lots of people fixing it. By the way Ogg (or Ogg-Vorbis) is the standard for open-source non-patent encumbered sound files. Many digital duke boxes (ie "mp3 players") support it as well as sound recording and playing programs. Wikipepedia commons does not allow patent-encumbered sound file formats  like wav. See Billlion 20:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean Template

message: I have moved this page to "Red Deer (animal)" so that a query for "Red Dee" links to a disambiguation page. There are other significant articles with the same name. The city of Red Deer is a fairly major city in Alberta, Canada and I don't know if it is appropriate to assume that most people searching Red Deer are interested in the animal in this case. --Arch26 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely and totally disagree.  Take a look at the "What links here" page for the disambiguation .  There's maybe a dozen city links and then about 200+ animal links.  I don't think that justifies having a disambiguation page.  Metros232 14:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I concur with Metros232. Pointless move GraemeLeggett 15:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved page

message: This page could do with a mention of embryonic diapause as red deer are one of the main examples of this biological phenomena.... do you think it should be put in the rutting section??12:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Embryonic Diapause

message: Red Deer (animal) → Red deer (or Red Deer) – move of 3 May and creation of disambig has left many, many articles about the animal pointing to the disambig instead (copied from the entry on the WP:RM page) GraemeLeggett 15:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support. The other things that are named after it should be disambiguated, not the deer itself. Kafziel 15:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Add any additional comments
As an interim solution I've made Red deer redirect here. The disambiguation page is still linked from the top of this article. Blisco 15:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support. The other things that are named after it should be disambiguated, not the deer itself. Kafziel 15:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Add any additional comments
As an interim solution I've made Red deer redirect here. The disambiguation page is still linked from the top of this article. Blisco 15:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: I did not know this! I wish I could have know that before. --Mitternacht90 02:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Deer is Elk?! 

message: Should I add humans to the list of predators?  Humans have been hunting deer since ancient times and maybe even before recorded history.  I will add it if no-one objects in 24 hours.  --JesseG88 22:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add humans to list of predators 

message: I have an extensive section on elk in one of my books, which has input from Valerius Giest, and my own research. If you want me to add it here I will do so, provided there is a copyright notice and citation stating it is from the book. If this appears to be okay, someone contact me. TRMichels@yahoo.com
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.106.19.217 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 1 October 2006.
:Citing reliable sources is strongly encouraged on Wikipedia. However, extensive quotation of copyrighted sources is discouraged unless the content is licensed under one of the Wikipedia copyright licences. You may find more on using quotations at WP:QUOTE and a guideline on external links at WP:SPAM. More on using talk pages may be found at WP:TALK. Thank you for your interest. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding content from copyrighted sources

message: This article needs a lot of cleanup, and I'll be working on it as I have tiime, and hope others will too. Please don't remove the cleanup tag until it's cleaned up. The intro is one sentence, the article doesn't cite references well, the information is off a bit...there are too many images...you name it.--MONGO 20:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK Mongo, go ahead and clean. Sorry I was going back through previous comments (see above) and noticed the tag was added when the ogg file was mistakenly deleted. I didn't notice you had just addeded it again. Sorry.Billlion 21:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup tagged

message: Article is looking good.  Though, I noticed a problem with the gallery tag, making all the references and everything after the gallery disappear.  This is reported as a bug in Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28technical%29#Gallery_tag_messes_up_references, so I tried moving the images into the article and removing the gallery.  Please rearrange the images as necessary.  Hopefully the bug will be fixed soon. --Aude (talk) 15:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the info about the galleries. I was going to remove it, just hadn't gotten around to it yet. The article is missing something...can't figure out what it needs, but several areas still need enhancement. Thanks again.--MONGO 15:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is pretty much outside my area of expertise, though when working on Banff National Park article, I came across something that said Red Deer (elk) are non-native species and introduced into the park in 1917.  The source states "This importing of Wapiti has badly upset the balance of nature in the flora and fauna of the Park".  - see chapter, "Wildlife in Rocky Mountains Park", pages 16-17.  Maybe the article needs more about their indiginous habitat versus where they were introduced, and their impact on ecology in such places.  Chronic wasting disease seems to be another important topic  that maybe needs more discussion.  That's all I can think of now. --Aude (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. I had thought the Elk were indegenious to Banff, and this demonstrates that reintroduction isn't always the best thing. We can definitely expand on the diseases issue. I wonder if a map showing historic and current natural ranges would help.--MONGO 18:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gallery tag

message: The red deer of Europe and the elk are indeed two different species, a rather recent clarification based on a re-evaluation of the genetic record. 
This is Dr. Geist's appended draft. It's in a conference proceedings, but will be much upgraded for publication in a journal. According to Dr. Geist, you will get the gist of it.
Geist, V.
Sept 3rd  2006 Draft
Taxonomic classification by adaptation versus descent: mitochondrial DNA analysis of cervid phylogeny and a resolution of the taxonomy of “red deer”. 
Do “red deer” comprise one species, Cervus elaphuss Linnaeus 1758, or must the North American wapiti and the Siberian maral be placed into a separate species Cervus canadensis, Erxleben 17777?  The failure to resolve the long-standing uncertainties in the classification of “red deer”, placed by current consensus into one species, Cervus elaphus Linnaeus 1758, can be traced to a general failure in defining rigorous criteria of taxonomic classification, a lack of relevant data and too uncritical a conception of the “biological species” definition. This is exemplified in the most recent and detailed study of the problem by Bart O’Gara (2002), although the uncertainties in the taxonomy of this group of deer have a very long history (Geist 1998). The consensus of including all red deer in one species, Cervus elaphus was bases on the assumption that red deer from Europe to North America formed a continuous circumpolar cline of populations, and thus related east to west by degree, and on the hybridization in New Zealand of its most extreme members, the European red deer and the American wapiti. To be meaningful the “biological species concepts” can only be applied to two forms meeting under natural conditions, which include their predators. This condition is not fulfilled in New Zealand, as the test of genetic compatibility is the ability of hybrids to survive predation as well as the parent forms. In the absence of predation, when under human care, hybrids with incompetent anti-predator adaptations can survive, as exemplified most strikingly by hybrids of mule deer and white-tailed deer (Lingle). 
However, the problems of determining valid taxonomic criteria, as well as the actual classification of the “red deer” group of deer can now be both resolved thanks to detailed information on molecular genetics. The most important paper here is by Ludt et al. (2004) and Ludt and Kuehn (this volume), which generated of a phylogeny model based on the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene of 37 cervid populations. While there are other papers dealing with molecular phylogeny of cervids , the analysis by Christian Ludt and collegues is most significant because of the criteria used to select subspecies of red deer. The taxonomic identity is precise and based on a rigorous and uncompromising application of differences in the nuptial coat and antler patterns of old breeding males only, with all specimen coming from free-living populations with precisely identified geographic locations. The determinations and collections were done by Christian Oswald of the Christian Oswald Cervid Museum in Ebersberg, Germany. The criteria of classification for red deer subspecies are the same as in Geist (1998). The data used by Ludt and colleagues is thus not contaminated by samples form zoo or farmed specimen, or from old museum specimen of uncertain affinity. 
The first significant finding of Ludt et al is the close parallel between differences in coat patterns and genetic distances. Specimen close in coat and antler characteristics were also close genetically, and vice versa. This verifies that differences in nuptial coat patterns are a valid taxonomic criterion. This is the first demonstration of this relationship, which gives hope that other mammalian species breaking up into externally well-differentiated populations can also be validly classified by the same criteria. Although I here emphasize nuptial coat pattern and markings, these go hand in hand with differences in the rutting vocalizations of males, while differences in the smell of urine soaked rutting males to the human nose suggest an olfactory social segregation as well. This requires investigation.
The taxonomic problems with red deer however, do not reside at the subspecies, but at the species and higher taxonomic levels. Currently, the consensus is to place all subspecies of red deer into one species, Cervus elaphus Linnaeus 1758. The alternative long-standing proposal was to segregate wapiti from European red deer into a separate species, Cervus canadensis Erxleben 1777. This places one into a conundrum where to place the diverse Asiatic subspecies, that is, where to draw the boundaries between C. elaphus and C. canadensis. Moreover, if one applies the species classification as practiced by biologists interested in caprids, that is, by clustering closely related subspecies into species, then there are three species of red deer, the European red deer, the central Asian mountain and riparian-adapted red deer, and the advanced maral/wapiti red deer of Asia and North America. In this classification the species is merely a collection category without biologically meaningful criteria. This is compounded by attempts at taxonomic classification by students of molecular genetics. Clearly, a biologically meaningful sorting out of species is required. Such a solution is at hand. To illustrate it on the example of “red deer”, not only the data from molecular genetics is required, but also an understanding of Pleistocene history and evolution and cervid ecology. Only then can one recognize what happens when one classifies by decent (molecular data) as opposed to adaptations (ecological roles). 
The data by Ludt et al (2004) shows that probably well before the Pleistocene, the gene pool of primitive red deer progenitors split into a western and an eastern segment. The western segment retained its identity, and, because of it gave rise to one form and one form only, the classical European/Asia Minor red deer. This gene pool must have been mixed with every one of the 18 plus glacial advances during the Pleistocene. Today this form has relatively weakly differentiated subspecies, but an exceedingly long history of independent evolution. Consequently, subspecies must be all of recent origin, which is supported by the data of Ludt et al. 2004. The body shape of this form is that of a saltatorial/cursorial runner with exceedingly great adaptability to all sort of landscapes. This is a generalist species in contrast to the specialist speciation that took place in the eastern gene pool (see below). There is no difficulty naming the European red deer a species, based on the adaptive syndrome of a slatatorial/cursorial form and applying to it the old species designation Cervus elaphys L. 1758. This comes into clear focus when looking at he fate of the eastern gene pool, for it had a very different fate.
The eastern gene pool was not cohesive, but split deeply into four distinct and more specialized “body forms”:
1.	The primitive original parent form, the sika deer, a classical saltatorial runner, with a four- pronged antler plan, a long tail and an erectable, long-haired rump patch. This form occupies moderately cool, temperate climates with short winters and low snow-levels. This form is classified as a different subgenus and species from European red deer, namely Cervus [Sika] sika (even though in the absence of predation these two species may hybridize and produce a hybrid flock with incompetent anti-predator adaptations). Note, this is a segregation at the subgenus, let alone species levels!
2.	The advanced, large-bodied, specialized saltors, adapted to steep and high mountains whose slopes are also covered with willow and rhododendron shrubs, requiring extraordinary ability at jumping, and ascending steep hills. This requires a specialized  saltatorial morphology, with large, well-muscled haunches. These deer have a five-pronged antler in that a very large bez tine has been added to the sika’s four-pronged antler plan. The tail and rump patch are totally different from the sika conditions. This body form is found in cold climates, with long winters. Examples are the Macneill’s stag, the Kasmir stag and the shou.  A branch of this body form is found in lowland deserts in the dense riparian vegetation which follows desert rivers. These are the Buchara and Lop-Nor subspecies.
3.	The very large deer with highly evolved cursorial body form and six-pronged antlers architecture. Again all these deer are different in rump patch and social characteristics from the preceding and succeeding deer. These are the maral/wapiti subspecies of central Asia and North America. These are cold adapted mixed feeders with a pronounced tendency to graze. They reach beyond the Arctic Circle. Their body plan evolved in response to life in open landscapes. The most highly evolved subspecies here is the Siberian and North American wapit, adapted as fast runners on open plains. Their body plan is cursorial and second only to the reindeer or caribou. Both were bested as advanced runners only by the Irish elk (Megalocers, see Geist 1998).
4.	The specializes cursor/climber with highly advanced antler plan, but missing the bez tine, adapted to the highest of mountains and found on the highest alpine meadows and hills, but is capable of rapid climbing in cliffs as well. This form is the white-lipped deer (Cervus [Przewalskium] albirostris). This form is also so specialized and different from the others, that is segregated at the sub-generic level. 
Please note that the eastern gene pool segregated into four distinct, specialized body forms while the western gene-pool evolved a fifth, but generalized body shape, namely that of the saltatorial/cursorial runner (Geist 1998).  Each of the five body plans reveals a somewhat different approach to escaping the pursuit of predators, with the saltatorial being the most primitive and the cursorial the most advanced. That is, when we classify by body plan we classify by adaptation, which is the only way in which we can classify taxonomically. Note, this not a classification by descent, but independent of it! The differences in body plans reflect firstly differences in anti-predator adaptations. That is, red deer species are segregated primarily by anti-predator adaptations – as are all deer species. This reinforces the hypothesis that predation segregated deer ecologically and taxonomically as I pointed out as general rule for cervids in Geist (1998). Each species is also marked socially in a distinctive manner. Each species is thus an adaptive syndrome. Moreover, each of these adaptive syndromes (body plans) breaks up into a number of subspecies. A cluster of subspecies thus represents the same adaptations, and each adaptive syndrome is different from other clusters. We can therefore recognize as a species each cluster of subspecies with the same basic adaptations. The so-called Far Eastern red deer, are thus similar to European red deer only via convergence, which is, admittedly, a very powerful evolutionary process (Geist 1978). The red deer species as currently agreed to, Cervus elaphus ,is thus not monophyletic, but polyphyletic. Consequently, it is no species at all. We can thus label each distinct body form a species with its attending subspecies. We have consequently: 
1. Cervus elaphus in Asia Minor and Europe, (saltatorial/cursorial, generalist)
2. Cervus affinis in the eastern Himalayas, eastern Tibet and western China, (saltatorial, advanced, specialist)
3. Cervus canadensis in central Asia and North America (cursorial, specialist)
4. Cervus albirostris as the high elevation specialist. (cursorial/climbing, specialist)
5. Cervus sika from temperate zoned China (slatatorial primitive)
This classification fits the evolutionary species concept as practiced by the IUCN Caprid specialist group. . The caprid biologists were right: each sheep species is an “adaptive syndrome”! Note that the species adaptive syndromes which arose from the eastern gene pool are more specialized and distant from one another, than either is from the generalist adaptive syndrome of the European red deer, despite being more closely related via mtDNA.
The molecular data also shows why Cervus canadensis is closer related to Cervus sika, than to Cervus elaphus, a previously puzzling finding which was dicussed by Harrington (1985).
The eastern gene pool was thus able to retain the primitive parental form, the sika deer, probably because on the Asiatic mainland sika deer could move southward with each glaciation, following milder climates and moist forested landscapes, while evading long, cold winters, deep snow and open landscapes. This opportunity to withdraw geographically to suitable forests was denied to members of the western gene pool, due to extensive desert formation about the Mediterranean basin with each major glacial advance. They survived probably as relict populations in the mountains of Asia Minor, from which they radiated into Europe with each interglacial.  
The eastern gene-pool gave rise early to a form, highly evolved in body shape, antlers and social characteristics, which occupied the highest of mountain plateaus, the white-lipped deer. Central Asia is characterized by huge areas of high mountain elevations and such are retained during interglacials. Consequently, a high mountain specialist, the white-lipped deer, could maintain itself through out the Pleistocene. These extended high-elevation plateaus are not found in Europe or Asia Minor.  The huge area of mountains and their high elevations insure that during glacial cycles the same habitat survives during glacials and interglacials.
Because high mountain plateaus are surrounded by large, steep slopes well vegetated with tall shrubs in the sub-alpine levels, the Himalayan/Tibetan deer (Cervus affinis) split sharply form all other groups as they specialized in dealing effectively with the vagaries of steep, long, shrubbery-covered slopes. Their body form differs consequently from both the cursorial body form of the plains runners, and the saltaorial/cursorial body form of European red deer. Again the huge area of mountains and their high elevation insure for habitat continuity during glacial cycles.
The same goes for the wide-open plains to which the cursorial Asian/North America forms (Cervus canadensis) have adapted. They have well developed appendages and bodies specialized for fast running over short grasses and feature the largest antlers, an adaptation to the open plains in the service of neonatal survival (see Geist 1998, 1991, 1986).  Judging from Chinese fossils, these deer are quite old.
The body forms and adaptive syndromes of the wapiti/maral species and that of the Tibetan and riparian  “jumping deer” species are more divergent, than are either from the European red deer. Each of these species is characterized not only by distinct antler form, but also by highly distinct rump patches, double patch with long tail in European red deer, small white rump patch in jumping deer, large single patch in wapiti/maral species, both with a short tail. The antler plan in the Tibetan deer is five-rponged, in the wapiti, maral group six pronged, and in the European red deer, five pronged with enhanced terminal branching.
The “red deer” in the consensus species Cervus elaphus thus represent a polyphyletic group, which can be split into three good species. Parallel and converging evolution from the same gene pool resulted in considerable similarity between the European reed deer, the Tibetan and desert deer and the maral/wapiti group. There was some meeting of eastern and western species as shown by the mitochondrial DNA of the western-most subspecies of Tibetan deer, the Kashmir stag. It clusters with the Buchara and Lop Nor deer.
References
Geist, V. 1978. Life Strategies, Human Evolution, Environmental Design. Springer Verlag, New York.
Geist, v. 1986. The paradox of the great Irish stags. Natural History  94(3) 54-64.
Geist, V. 1991. Bones of contention revisited: did antlers enlarge with sexual selection sd a consequence of neonatal security strategies?  Applied Animal Behaviour Science 29: 453-469.
Geist, V. 1998. Deer of the World. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, Pa.
Harrington, R. Evolution and distribution of the Cervidae pp. 3-11 P. F. Fentress and K. R. Drew (eds). Biology of Deer Production. The royal Society of new Zealand, Bulletin 22, Wellington. 
Ludt, C. J., Schroeder, W., Rottmann, O., Kuehn, R. (2004) Mitochondrial DNA phylogeny of red deer (Cervus elaphus). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31 (3) 1064-1083.
.--dlc_73 21:21, 30 October 2006
Good job...now we have figure out what of the above can be added to the soon to be split articles...is this simply his thoughts or is it going to be part of a published paper. If it is going to be published, then we have to ensure each passage is referenced to the source and quoted or reworded to avoid a copyviolation. Obviously, there is an official" upcoming announcement that the Red Deer species are to be divided into several species and this is agreed by those in the scientific community? Regardless, with Dr. Geist and the DNA study mentioned in the article, that is all the proof we need that we are dealing with two to three species and that each one can have their own article. We also need ot make it clear of the similarities of each species in each article and dicuss the history of the identification of these types.--MONGO 05:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am happy with Common name (binomial name) format. European Red Deer is Ok with me as a European. Just as European Hare is alright although for us the 'archetypal' Hare. I don't think binomial names should be the article title were there are common name(s) (and I thought this was a policy?) Billlion 17:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Three species of red deer: European Red Deer (''Cervus Elaphus''), Himalayan/Tibetan Red Deer (''Cervus Affinis''), East Asian Red Deer/Wapiti (''Cervus Canadensis'')

message: The articles on Ursus arctos are instructive.  The Grizzly and the Brown Bear (and the Kodiak for that matter) all have different articles even though they are one species.--Counsel 22:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, that is kind of in the happening...if you could give it a day or two.--MONGO 22:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example of the Division of Articles on US/European split