|
|
Post by Melanie on Dec 14, 2005 0:21:57 GMT
The Ceylon gaur, smaller than the Indian, was reported by several British writers writing from the island from as early as 1681. These were said to have grazed in the highland Horton Plains. Leg bones and teeth of gaur have been found in the Ratnapura area in some number, but it was the discovery in 1962 of a skull with two horns that led Deraniyagala Senior to identify the Sinhala gavara as the gaur. Sri Lankan legend has it that "the courage of the King's bodyguards was annually tested by pitting them against gaurs kept in the royal preserves for this purpose," wrote Deraniyagala Senior. www.lankalibrary.com/geo/india-lanka.htm |
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Dec 14, 2005 16:26:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sebbe67 on Dec 17, 2005 16:32:22 GMT
shouldent it be treated as a subspecies?
|
|
|
|
Post by Melanie on Dec 17, 2005 16:45:08 GMT
That is difficult to say as we have only a few information.
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Dec 17, 2005 17:12:59 GMT
Tennent's Ceylon - 1860 VI. RUMINATA. The Gaur.—Besides the deer and some varieties of the humped ox, which have been introduced from the opposite continent of India, Ceylon has probably but one other indigenous ruminant., the buffalo. 40 There is a tradition that the gaur, found in the extremity of the Indian peninsula, was at one period a native of the Kandyan mountains; but as Knox speaks of one which in his time "was kept among the king's creatures" at Kandy 41 , and his account of it tallies with that of the Bos Gaurus of Hindustan, it would appear even then to have been a rarity. A place between Neuera-ellia and Adam's Peak bears the name of Gowra-ellia, and it is not impossible that the animal may yet be discovered in some of the imperfectly explored regions of the island. 42 I have heard of an instance in which a very old Kandyan, residing in the mountains near the Horton Plains, asserted that when young he had seen what he believed to have been a gaur, and which he described as between an elk and a buffalo in size, dark brown in colour, and very scantily provided with hair. lakdiva.org/tennent/v1_p2_c01.html |
|
|
|
Post by sebbe67 on Dec 17, 2005 17:18:16 GMT
other common name: Sri Lankan Gaur.
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Dec 17, 2005 17:31:43 GMT
other common names are Sri lanka / Ceylon dwarf or pygmy guar
|
|
|
|
Post by Bucardo on Dec 17, 2005 17:42:33 GMT
Is Bibos a valid genus? Or are included in Bos?
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Dec 17, 2005 17:58:21 GMT
It seems to be valid as there is no reference to Bos sinhaleyus
|
|
|
|
Post by Melanie on Dec 17, 2005 18:06:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Dec 17, 2005 18:18:41 GMT
thanks for the info Melanie and source
|
|
peej2
Full Member
Posts: 118
|
Post by peej2 on Mar 5, 2006 15:26:13 GMT
Is there any more info on this notorious animal? like the date of extinction perhaps?
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Mar 5, 2006 18:06:02 GMT
Is there any more info on this notorious animal? like the date of extinction perhaps? What you see here is all at present - not much on web at present as you can see. |
|
peej2
Full Member
Posts: 118
|
Post by peej2 on Mar 9, 2006 22:57:35 GMT
So this animal was studied by Europeans during 1681? So it was around after prehistoric times?
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Mar 10, 2006 12:31:21 GMT
So this animal was studied by Europeans during 1681? So it was around after prehistoric times? Yes, as previous entrys state. |
|
peej2
Full Member
Posts: 118
|
Post by peej2 on Mar 10, 2006 15:14:07 GMT
That is very interesting. To bad there isn't a painting or some old drawing of it. But if it is a pygmy of the indian gaur then i'm guessing that it would look quite similar just smaller?
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Mar 10, 2006 23:38:19 GMT
yes that would be right a small version of the mainland species.
|
|
peej2
Full Member
Posts: 118
|
Post by peej2 on Mar 11, 2006 1:29:53 GMT
In a way, like the pigmy hippopotamus to the common hippopotamus is the ceylon gaur to the "mainland gaur"? Why is it then that there is so little information on this "subspecies" if Europeans have studied it a long time ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by another specialist on Mar 11, 2006 6:45:37 GMT
they didn't really study it they knew of its existence but i guess didn't register that it was a species of its own. They just thought it was the same as the others i guess. This all changed due to recent studies and now its been errected as a species.
|
|
peej2
Full Member
Posts: 118
|
Post by peej2 on Mar 11, 2006 14:03:53 GMT
Ahhh...I see. That makes sense now. To bad there is not that much information, or a decent image. But at least there is some information.
|
|
