I just received a number of photos a friend has sent me from a hunt in South Africa.

He shot a number of animals, including several eland.

Looking at these, and eland posted by other hunters who have hunted South Africa, they seem to look totally different from the eland we shoot every year in Tanzania.

The eland from Tanzania seem to have an enormous black main on their foreheads, the South Africans do not.

In fact, we do not shoot any eland bull that even remotely looks like the ones being shot in South Africa.

This got me wondering if these are of different races??

The ones without the dark forelock are youngsters. Eland don't get old in the RSA.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
The ones without the dark forelock are youngsters. Eland don't get old in the RSA.

This is rather surprising if true.

Because looking at kudu, South Africa produces some fantastic trophies.

The eland, on the other hand, do look just like cows instead of being bulls.

Saeed, I could be mistaken but I believe the eland you shoot in the Selous are all Livingstones Eland, whereas the ones in South Africa are all Cape Eland. Two different sub-species.

I was told by my PH in Zim that only one in ten develops the dense hairy forelock and it’s genetic. My friend shot one by chance. It’s uncommon to see a well developed one in Kalahari Kgaligadi TP or Drakensberg.

The Eland species classification in in dispute.
Years ago I did Zoology with Prof Rae Smithers who wrote the epic work Mammals of the Southern African Subregion. ( Rowland Ward published sets of signed prints of the artwork for this book )
All Eland in Southern and East Africa are basically Southern or Common Eland with 3 disputed subspecies, the Cape, the Livingstone's which is found in Zimbabwe and the Eastern or Pattersons.

My experience as well in terms of looks and size but that may well be due to epigenetic factors.
The Cape way smaller than the Zimbabwean specimens.

These differ from the Giant or Lord Derby Eland of which there are two subspecies

As I understand it:

Cape Eland (not sure if this is really a species) are those shot in South Africa and Namibia and desert area farms in Botswana.

Livingston’s Eland are Zimbabwe, eastern Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique and perhaps southern Tanzania (although SCI calls everything in Tanzania “East African” Eland.

Patterson’s Eland are pretty much north and east of the Livingston.

The giant or Lord Derby are in central Africa (CAR and Cameroon hunting wise) north of the equator.

It's all about genetics ! The Common Eland is a different species to the Giant Eland and the controversy regarding the subspecies arises from the fact that there is genetically no difference between the 3 subspecies

The Cape Eland tends to be lighter with fewer stripes.
Eland certainly get old in South Africa too.

I have seen many Eland with a dark ruff in SA......

.

I would like to see DNA tests done on all the area eland. We used to think that Grizzly and Brown bears were a different species but not the case. Identical DNA. Same with Mule deer and Blacktail deer. Identical. Maybe DNA tests have been done on Eland and we have not seen published results.

I would have thought that the really broomed horns would indicate age. Plenty of those in the SA safari photos here.

Is the forehead ruff anything to do with breeding season? Like fallow deer get swollen necks in the rut. Is there a change to the neck dewlap as well? Just wondering.

With regard to subspecies and race of mammals, a lot of the controversy is just petty rivalry among academics and regional chauvinism. JMHO

For example, the chital deer in India is just one species. You find 100 kg animals in central India with 40+ inch antlers and you also see 40k kg animals in the south west with 24 inch antlers.

Look at tigers from India, SE Asia and Siberia. They range in size of big males - from 150kg in Thailand or Indonesia to 500kg in Siberia. The Sumatran male tiger has a really prominent mane that is not so obvious among other races.

Buzz commented on my recent hunt that in his experience the eland in the Zambezi Valley rarely if ever have a thick, dark ruff.

Eland are my favourite plains game species to hunt! In the areas I hunt eland in SA I find quite a big variation in appearance of the bulls even within the same property.

We've hunted very old bulls with prominent white tips and also hunted some old ones with no white tips. We shot a few last year with very prominent stripes, almost like Livingstone Eland. On others, you can barely notice the stripes.

I like the fact that their physical appearance varies so much. I think the most important factor is to try and hunt the oldest bull you can. The characteristics that define a bull from a cow become more prominent as they get older. If you can't tell a bull from a cow with your naked eye at first glance there are probably no old bulls in the herd. Below are some photos of some hunted on the same property.

I kind of wonder about the DNA tests that folks talk about.

The statement that the DNA is the same would mean that all of the members of the species involved are identical twins. That is obviously not true.

So then one is left with how much difference is there between species and within? That’s a decision that some scientist made- if humans are 95% the same as baboon, then the 5% is a drastic difference.

Frankly, DNA testing methods are very crude at this point. You chop up the DNA with enzymes and then run the fragments on (usually gas) chromatography and measure the resulting concentrations of fragment size. While DNA match on that level is a tool, it’s hardly down to the last molecule specific. How different is horse, mule, and donkey DNA? If you want to go to a complete gentetic map level, it takes years for one individual... so extrapolation for species is probably a bit premature to say the current DNA data is the end all.

What is species variable expression vs subspecies differentiation is probably a pretty open field right now if you get down to it with a research scientist. They are currently using a theory that defines how much is species vs same species I suspect.

Thanks Doc. Great post.

Now scientists have confirmed that the forest elephant in the Congo region are a separate species. But the Dwarf forest buffalo are not!

Same with Indonesia. The Clouded leopard on Borneo is a very distinct species compared to the one found from India to far East. But the stunted "Pygmy" elephants that have been isolated on Borneo for millennia are the same species as the mainland giants!

We can go on about the Red deer and Elk or Brown bear found all over the world - supposed to be one species with several sub species / races.

Killer whales are supposed to be at least 5 distinct species.

Go figure.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I kind of wonder about the DNA tests that folks talk about.

The statement that the DNA is the same would mean that all of the members of the species involved are identical twins. That is obviously not true.

So then one is left with how much difference is there between species and within? That’s a decision that some scientist made- if humans are 95% the same as baboon, then the 5% is a drastic difference.

Frankly, DNA testing methods are very crude at this point. You chop up the DNA with enzymes and then run the fragments on (usually gas) chromatography and measure the resulting concentrations of fragment size. While DNA match on that level is a tool, it’s hardly down to the last molecule specific. How different is horse, mule, and donkey DNA? If you want to go to a complete gentetic map level, it takes years for one individual... so extrapolation for species is probably a bit premature to say the current DNA data is the end all.

What is species variable expression vs subspecies differentiation is probably a pretty open field right now if you get down to it with a research scientist. They are currently using a theory that defines how much is species vs same species I suspect.

Guys,

I've taken all the varieties of eland that SCI recognizes. The only appreciable difference I could see between them was with the Lord Derby which is notably different in coloration and horn size. I think given bulls of the same age class the Paterson's, Cape or Livingstone's is going to look about the same.

Mark

There are two recognized species of Eland the Common Eland (Tragelaphus oryx) and Lord Derby's Eland (Tragelaphus derbianus).

The three accepted subspecies of the Common are the Cape, Livingstone's, and the Patterson's. All would share common DNA to the Common Eland with slight variations. PCR testing is used often for tracking genetic distribution in wildlife and is both accurate and simple to employ. This is the same technology used to track your DNA for genealogy studies. It is +99% accurate.

So at the end of the day, the three subspecies would have similar genetic and appearance differences just as human populations do ie. Japanese vs Dutch. However, if cross breeding were allowed, the genetic differences along with the physical characteristics would be muted over time. Geographic isolation has kept the three subspecies intact. Thankfully the SA breeders haven't screwed that one up... yet.

Is the forehead ruff anything to do with breeding season?

Is broomed horn an indication of age, like in buffalo?

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Guys,

I've taken all the varieties of eland that SCI recognizes. The only appreciable difference I could see between them was with the Lord Derby which is notably different in coloration and horn size. I think given bulls of the same age class the Paterson's, Cape or Livingstone's is going to look about the same.

Mark

Opus

What do you mean by “99%+” accurate?

PCR involves amplifying a sample to achieve an adequate amount to test. Usually some standardized concentration. It is then ran through gas chromatography and the resultant sample tagged and analyzed for a pattern of broken chain sizes for a result.

While it has produced reasonably reproducible results, it really has little to do with actual individual genes. It’s not like they are comparing every gene on a genetic map.

It’s a methodology that has some holes in it, certainly from a theoretical standpoint. Human results are rather skewed due to the sampling done to determine base comparisons not being universal enough. Something like 23 and me does not check for medically relevant point issues, like the BRCA 1-2 mutations.

I can almost guarantee that this will continue to “evolve” (read change) as time goes on. As Naki pointed out, there have been some surprises here. The definition of species involves if breeding can produce fertile offspring. Is a Cape Eland able to breed with a Livingston’s? If so, are they subspecies/races or just geographically separated populations of the same animal? One or two genes depending on what base pair you are talking about changing could make no difference in the current PCR type test result or drastic differences- all depending on what enzyme to split used and it’s fragmenting differences.

It’s all if you are a “splitter” or a “lumper” from a scientific end.

You said 99+% accurate. My question is what exactly is the question that the test answered?

crbutler - Agreed that you cannot take a single sample from the three assumed subspecies and make any assumptions. It would take matching thousands, if not tens of thousands of samples from each subspecies to form a genetic map.

DNA/PCR sampling is being used widely to track genetic distribution for lion research. The DNA testing is used in conjunction with visual and satellite tracking to develop highly accurate distribution maps. Pretty easy to follow the genetic tree though various prides of lion for instance. This has also quashed to notion that "desert lion" and "desert elephants" are subspecies to Panthera leo and L. africana respectively.

I would not be at all surprised if the Cape, Livingstone's, and the Patterson's can crossbreed. We've seen Mountain and Burchell's zebra crosses quite often in Namibia (where there is no geographical barrier) and I believe that Bontebok and Blesbok also cross.

Kind of my point. The test methodology they are using is not capable of producing a genetic map. It’s a different test altogether.

It’s not sensitive or specific enough.

What you seem to be saying is that it is 99% capable of separating family groups within a species..is that right?

In humans, forensic testing can say this looks like there is a 99.9995% chance this sample is the same, or that it is 85% chance that this subject is a parent of this child.

It cannot say this person had blue eyes and a predisposition to gout.... it can’t even definitively say if someone is black, white, or .... Given these limitations, I find it difficult to believe it is that specific in animals.

Naki,

I've shot 6 eland. I can't address the connection between breeding and the ruff but can tell you an old bull could have quite short horns and the ridges can be pretty smooth. An eland uses his horns as a tool to bend a tree down and snap it over. This allows him to feed on the leaves so his horns get more worn as he gets older.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:
Eland are my favourite plains game species to hunt! In the areas I hunt eland in SA I find quite a big variation in appearance of the bulls even within the same property.

We've hunted very old bulls with prominent white tips and also hunted some old ones with no white tips. We shot a few last year with very prominent stripes, almost like Livingstone Eland. On others, you can barely notice the stripes.

I like the fact that their physical appearance varies so much. I think the most important factor is to try and hunt the oldest bull you can. The characteristics that define a bull from a cow become more prominent as they get older. If you can't tell a bull from a cow with your naked eye at first glance there are probably no old bulls in the herd. Below are some photos of some hunted on the same property.

Those are magnificent bull Mr.Watson

I understand that the East African eland are Livingstone’s.

The good, older bulls I have seen in southern Tanzania and northern Mozambique, and the one I killed in northern Mozambique, all had several vertical white stripes along their bodies. They had ruffs on their foreheads, too.

I don’t think there were any stripes on the Namibian bulls that I’ve seen and chased, but they did have ruffs.

I think the ruffs must be universal among the subspecies.

Yes those are great bulls. The horns are long ans sharp. Not as broomed as most we see in hunt reports. But the terrain is also much more open and not forested like other areas. I wonder if there is a correlation - less brooming in open country and more brooming in wooded country with larger trees.

I did eat some Eland at Vic Falls Boma in 2014

Thank you Victor.

These are very nice eland bulls, especially the second and third.

A contrast to so many we see being shot in South Africa.

I have shot the same in South Africa, but similar bulls we see in Tanzania we pass on and do not shoot at all.

The following is a link I used not long back researching for an article:

https://everipedia.org/wiki/Taurotragus/

To say the taxonomy is in dispute is an understatement, especially at subspecies level.

Every time one of the gates to Hell is left unguarded a taxonomist or two escape and wreak havoc.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Yes those are great bulls. The horns are long ans sharp. Not as broomed as most we see in hunt reports. But the terrain is also much more open and not forested like other areas. I wonder if there is a correlation - less brooming in open country and more brooming in wooded country with larger trees.

I did eat some Eland at Vic Falls Boma in 2014

Those were shot quite high, near or above the snow line and the vegetation is less. This area gets 2/3 snow falls a year. There’s quite a bit of thick woodland in the valley. You’re correct though, the less thick vegetation, the less they’re likely to wear their horns down. There are quite a few old bulls with worn down horns on the property. I believe it’s an individual trait, some bulls will just wear down their horns more than others.

The older the bull becomes, the more prominent and darkening of the ruff and skin.

An old bull will be dark grey with a heavy neck and hanging dewlap, a thick, almost black ruff often caked with mud and in most instances, thick but worn horns.

That's what a trophy Eland looks like in Tanzania.

In a herd, he will stand out like a sore thumb among the younger bulls.

East African Eland will also likely have scarring on their body. I shot an old warrior one year that was missing most of his right ear from an old injury. They are battle tough.
Like Fulvio said, the bulls stick out like a sore thumb.

Its all about genetics and nutrition..You think its complicated you ought to be in the horse business, they started with 3 toes...Ive seen those black ruffs all over Africa over the years, I think they all grow them then rub them off just like bears, and like Buffalo smooth out their bosses as they age..Ive done the same thing with my hair..

Here's an interesting research paper on eland

https://www.researchgate.net/p...cts_Tragelaphus_oryx

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:
Here's an interesting research paper on eland

https://www.researchgate.net/p...cts_Tragelaphus_oryx

Many thanks for posting the link. As far as my scientific knowledge enables me to judge, which some will argue is not very far, the info given by Deon is, as can be expected from a man of his calibre, spot on and reliable.

Eland, particularly young definately non-trophy bulls, is my alltime favorite hunting animal. Not only challenging hunting, but also lots and lots of wonderful tasty venison!

Eland is number one on my list to hunt. With that said, I really cannot tell the difference other than the Lord Derby's. If we are discussing genetics, I suggest we get some with shorter legs so they don't walk so far.....

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
The ones without the dark forelock are youngsters. Eland don't get old in the RSA.

That is the key! Old Eland bulls have the large dark forehead hair, and the necks are usually much larger than the ones with no hair ruff on the face.

………………………………………………………………... Mac