User talk:Shyamal/archive9

Archives

Archive1

Archive2

Archive3

Archive4

Archive5

Archive6

Archive7

Archive8

Dear Shyamal

On the subject of A O Hume's birthplace, which is of course a trivial detail, I was intrigued to see you quote Ed Moulton on the point. I cannot find my copy of his edition of the Wedderburn book right now, which is I suppose what you were referring to? Anyway just to say that I was at a meeting just over a year ago when Ed spoke on this very point, in response to a question, and when he said very clearly that he believed St Mary Cray was Hume's birthplace. And of course Ed wrote the DNB article which repeats this view. It would be odd indeed to think that you were quoting Moulton in opposition to himself! It is true however I think that there is no direct evidence so who knows what the truth may be.

Keep up the good work.

regards Graeme Lyall

Thanks. I rechecked, Montrose, Forfarshire is given by Encyclopaedia Britannica. Moulton's Petronia paper does not mention his birthplace. Any chance of getting a wiki-licensed photograph of Hume ? Shyamal 03:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I would have to check what Wiki allows ... but I do for instance have a copy of the portrait of Hume which appears in his "The Nests and Eggs of Indian Birds, 1875" if you think that would be okay.

1875 is definitely ok, since it is public domain. Shyamal 08:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer. I found the image on the book scan on the Million Books project at www.archive.org ! Shyamal 14:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Shyamal

Do you know of my grandfather Sidney Dillon Ripley?

From his works yes ! Note on your talk page as well. Shyamal 11:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Lionel de Nicéville

Did a bit, perhaps overdoing the Viceroy stuff.What do you think?. Need some more refs before I can add more- the obits I've seen so fararen't that great. Anybody else you'd like something on ? Not much time but I'll do my best. Regards from Ireland Notafly

Please help improve the articles related to Asiatic Lions when you have some time

Hi Shymal

Please help improve the articles related to Asiatic Lions whenever you have some time, here are the links. For the Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary we also need a map, it also has a forest belt of greater then 3000 sq kms around it, which could be included in the Santuary in the years to come. I will try to attach more external links to this article when I find some time as they will help in researching the subject including Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project there.

• Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary is the chosen site for re-introducing and establishing the world's second completely separate population of the wild free ranging Asiatic Lions in the neighboring state of Madhya Pradesh, India
• Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project
• Asiatic Lion
• Gir Forest National Park in the state of Gujarat, India
• Reintroduction
• in-situ conservation

Happy New Year 2007

Atulsnischal 09:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, will try although my priority is for lesser known species. The amount of crank editing on popular species like Tiger, Elephant is a major deterrent. Shyamal 02:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Charles Donovan

Very many thanks.Added him to my Irish entomologists.I am looking at Parnassius at the moment. We have a very large collection here (Ulster Museum, Belfast) -Many from India Bingham Notafly

Photos of Parnassius

Yes of course. But I don't have so much time and I'm not proficient at this. I will do my best though.Bset wishes from Ireland Robert.(Notafly).

Frank Ludlow

Hi ! Alcippe ludlowi is correct according to Beolens and Watkins, and Bhutanitis ludlowi (Gabriel 1942) looks like right time, right place. All the best. Smallweed 20:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Robert Templeton

Hello again Did you see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Templeton. I have high resolution scans of some six or so Templeton watercolours of Ceylon butterflies which I can send by e-mail (Send this to me).. I'm not sure how to put these into Wikipedia Commons but would be very pleased to see them thereNotafly

Indian Lepidoptera

I have here Seitz great work Macrolepidoptera etc .Out of print and out of copyright.I can scan relevant plates if you wish.Notafly

Grum-Grshmailo etc.

That was quick.How do you do that?.These English and sometimes French multiple versions of Russian names are a real problem but silly of me not to remember he is usually abbreviated Gr.Grum. .Also I need the Russian name in Cyrillic (this was a huge help in tracing Hymenoptera literature for Type catalogues). However finding Cyrillic presents many name (priority) problems, especially if works were translated much later. I will rewrite this stub which was prompted by needing another Russian for my Timeline.I also need a Japanese.Do you know of any prominent Japanese entomologists whose details can be found in English? And Indian of course. Very impressed Notafly

Peafowl

I can't really cite the pages to the notions about the Green Peafowl being several species or the Indian Peafowl having a new subspecies because the sources are often labelled as unreliable (see my user page for links). I can, however, confirm that Kermit Blackwood has many photos of poultry on the web and that "K" (same guy) is writing a book on this subject. I think Kermit is the one quoted in the Red Data Book about theb 4th subspecies. Frankyboy5 05:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The Red Data book cites a "K. B. Woods". If one sees the kinds of exotic breeds that exist of domestic fowl, it is easy to call them each a species. They are all of course of the same species Gallus gallus, but it is a good example to explain that most species definitions are not merely based on just the existence of colour differences. Shyamal 02:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

K. B. Woods is Kermit/K. He said so in the forum. Get it? Kermit Black Woods. Sounds like Kermit Blackwood to me. And he was adopted so it can be slightly way off. Those are domestic fowl, not wild. Frankyboy5 04:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Let us not divert the topic to the person or what they said. The species concept is what is in question. Most ornithologists would look for distribution data, information on the isolation factors and sequence data to support whatever you are adding and this is typically usually well researched and published in Journals. Such journals are cited for other bird species on wikipedia see for instance Common Teal, where there is a wide distribution, isolation, problems with the use of reproductive isolation as a concept and other fundamentals which you obviously know as a student of biology. Reared birds especially in the Galliformes and Anseriformes orders show really wide variations in plumage and colouration. They are often monogenic traits. Pheasant breeders like plant breeders (who use the word cultivar) use variety names. These should not be confused for terms used for populations (subspecies) in the wild, which are generally researched by local researchers. There are numerous ornithological researchers in India who have studied Indian Peafowl and there must be many in Java, Indonesia and South Asia. What you are citing from WPA is possibly out of context and refers to varietal traits in captivity, but you seem to be taking these objections personally. What you have added to the Green Peafowl article is not "verifiable" information in the scientific sense, you have of course given verifiable information in the sense that what you have added is indeed what is present on the links that you have provided. cheers. Shyamal 04:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe Delacour's taxonomy was very misleading (see my user page's conclusion). He had a skin of a strange golden Green Peafowl and he thought it was just an mere "individual variation" when the strange plumage occurs in many peafowl of Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand. That bird also had a very blue head. Delacour relied on very unreliable methods of recognizing a new sub/species. He thought that any green-coloured peafowl should be considered conspecific. I cited the Common Teal to try to prove appearances of a "species" can be misleading. Many now think the North American race is more related to the Speckled Teal.

Wolfgang Mennig is one of the most foremost authorities on Green Peafowl. He is very strong-minded about conservation, saying hybridisation with the Indian Peafowl is "damned". I agree. Many breeders are cheating by saying they have pure Greens when they have Emerald Spaldings and stuff like that. Frankyboy5 06:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, what can I say? You need only look up, quote and cite Journals, textbooks or widely cited publications about any new species/subspecies or their identity and distributions. J. Delacour is a rather dated reference and nobody serious would spend time critiquing such a work these days when research is based on molecular phylogenetics, distributional and field studies. There are also numerous new ornithological works for the region such as [1], [2] etcetera based on actual field studies. Let us see what bird experts with access to references for the region like User:Stavenn have to say. Shyamal 06:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Shyamal, thank you for your message. Regarding Green Peafowl, I can't find any distinct geographic color variant, "new subspecies" or "new species" in any of literature/publications (local nor english). I also tried to contact Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) on their website asking if there's any update about recent status of Green Peafowl, since most of Indonesian science-related book are issued by them. No reply from them so far. I doubt it though, if there's new species of peafowl. Peafowls are well studied. Nobody mentioned if there's "new" subspecies or species but one member of German WPA (In German language, I wish there's an english translation and to noted above comment: Wolfgang Mennig is one of the most foremost authorities on Green Peafowl -> the comment is misleading, all I know that he is a breeder and private conservationist, not authorities), Kermit guy and one Wikipedian. If there's new information about Green Peafowl, I'll give you an update. For now, all I know that there are 3 subspecies of Green Peafowl (not 4, 5, 6 or 10). Regards --Stavenn 00:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, your info tallies with the results of my research, but I find it hard to convince User:Frankyboy5 about the lack of veracity of the sources being mentioned. Shyamal 03:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It may be true that he is a private conservationist, but Wolfgang Mennig is part of the WPA. The WPA is very strong-minded about conservation -they reintroduced the Green Peafowl back into Malaysia. Kermit will write a book about Peafowl, publish it and then create an encyclopedia about Galliformes. And it's not the birds of Indonesia that should be researched, but the Imperators of indo-china. I see key differences in the birds mentioned in the gallery, the blue head of the annamese, the differences of the Javan from Malay Pahang. Anyway, as I always go about controversies: "There is no evidence that there isn't several distinct species of Green Peafowl". Frankyboy5 05:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Madge and McGowan,Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse ISBN 0-7136-3966-0 lists Indian Peafowl as monotypic with many variants in domestication, of which nigripennis, "Black-Shouldered Peafowl" is of interest because it breeds true. It lists three ssp of Green Peafowl; possibly extinct spicifer, imperator and the Javan muticus. It adds that the Yunnan birds may possibly merit ssp recognition. I have no other major reference for this group. It is my preference to stick to a widely accepted taxonomy rather than go out on a controversial and speculative limb. Perhaps if the issues, despite good faith, cannot be resolved here, it should be widened to ToL discussion. Jimfbleak.talk.07:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Here is a translation of Wolfgang Mennig (not by Google but a person). Shyamal 02:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

“ The green peafowl was once native to the whole of south east Asian region from Northeast India to West China, through Bangladesh, Burma, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, whole of Malaysia, and occurred also in isolated cases in the island of Java. Today the population of this wonderful bird has gone down. In some original habitats it has already become extinct, for e.g. in bangladesh and Malaysia, in most other areas it is in danger. According to official counts only 5000 to 10000 specimens exist in the wild today. Reasons are shrinking habitat, and hunting. It resides in half open country forest and bushy land, mostly in wide river valleys, the areas important to humans also for the same reasons! Observations of wild green fowl have shown that the bird leaves and does not return to areas where it encounters humans. Its just a question of time before this bird becomes extinct in the wild. In the past scientifically the families of green fowl was subdivided in three subspecies: Pavo muticus muticus ( Malaysia, Java ), Pavo muticus imperator ( South Asia with Thailand, Laos, Coambodia, Vietnam ) and the Pavo muticus spicifer ( Bangladesh, Burma ) Today this broad classification is not considered correct and sufficient by the specialists. It has been established that there are or were atleast 10 subspecies of Pavo muticus, some of which are already extinct. Just the Pavo muticus muticus in its two variations viz. the Malaysian and the Javan verieties was considered genetically identical and was grouped under the scientific name Pavo muticus muticus. This is not the case anymore. The two varieties are genetically different and the Javan variety even has two genetically different varieties of its own, the (Udjon-Kulon-Form /south western Java Baluran-Form /eastern Java). ”

I think the WPA (I have to laugh because Wolfgang Mennig works for the WPA!) accidentally published wrong information about the two being identical. Then reintroductions back to Malaysia began. KIermit Blackwood also confirms the difference between the two, and confirmds the Baluran form being different. The person who translated this did not translate the part about the annamensis, yunnanensis. Frankyboy5 09:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Me and Wolfgang Mennig were talking about it (latest to earliest messages):

“ Hello Frank !

Finally the contact raises up to a form I really like. We can try to exchange informations everyway. You´re welcome. So, you are a young boy, very interesting. I appreceate your wish for studying Green Peafowl very much and hope you will be successfull.

But let me calm down in that direction WPA and reintroduction. That case that seems to exite you most.

I know, because I was involved from the beginning first day, that the birds send to Malaysia were not Javanese birds. All birds were DNA tested before and compare material, called "reference markers", were skin and feather parts from birds of the Museum of Natural History in Tring / England and Raffles Museum / Singapore. I have all those markers here at home to start a new DNA research here in Germany this time. These markers are proovable all from birds collected near 1900 in Malaysia, f. e. in Sungkai, Korhan Trang, Wimpong or Ulu Pahang. All those skins are of that age and collected by hunting, so we can be sure that nothing was mixed before in humans hands. That this DNA control had been done before transporting birds to Malaysia was the most importing thing for the WPA, because that would be a large fault to reintroduce birds of wrong ancestors, a noncorrectable fault. I am member of the WPA and have a very critical eye on this project, believe me. Caused by that I have not only friends there, but the project is too important to let it go unwatched. So, all parental birds of the sended material were DNA tested as being pure Malaysian birds, my own birds and those from GB. They were not taken uncontrolled and send to Malaysia, as you might think. The Malaysian Government, the Department of Wildlife and National Parks and the WPA, had set up these regulations before starting the project. You can´t imagine what efforts the WPA did make to have this project running. There were hired many rangers to be responsible in person for each single bird sent there. Aviaries were build and the whole agriculture was changed by the Malaysian government, especiallly for this project. Isn´t that some kind of honourable by the WPA ? I see this positive, expecting the project will work.

Regarding the Pavo muticus muticus, it´s fact, that those from Malaysia (extinct now since the 1960s) and those from Java are different. There are even some differences easy to see for nonspecialists, the shape and keeping of the crest is one. But please note that a bird might look different on a photo, the colours green, blue and golden, are always in relation to the existing light and if the photo was taken it might show those in change. These colours are caused by breaking the light into coloured spectrums on the feathers surface, and changing the photographical position very little can bring a complete different view of the colour. For example, sometimes the head colour looks very blue, and after turning around it looks complete green, the same is at the wing covers and the neck colour. What I want to say is, that it is very complicated to rate a bird by photos. You must see it in nature.

That might cause many mistakes by persons who rate birds after having pictures of them. No picture is able to show the real colours of Green Peafowl. And the lack and shine of special parts of the body will contain often the subspecies. It is not fact, that annamensis is having a more golden neck as muticus. I had many Annamensis skins in my hands, Muticus too, and was surprised how near they come to Muticus in the colour of the neck. I think for most people there will be no difference between both. I have hundreds of pictures from Museum skins, and many of annamensis too, but I think you would not be able to find differences. Much more differences are sightable in the skulls shape. The shape of the head is very different, it goes from rounded upwards (annamensis) to a straight upper headline (imperator) and even to downwards wincled surface from top of bill to crest at others.

The yunnanensis anstonished myself in having a very golden neck and breast, most of all I saw. And as it seems, it has a longer back toe as others. I could not take measures, because this one bird was enclosed as mounted exemplar, but had this optical impression. All skin pictures on Kermit´s page are of my researchings in Museums, except those from Spicifer and Salween. I know Kermit for years, he is a good friend and we work together as good as possible.

No, the old Malay birds in my breeding are not dead. I have them in the breeding program every year in best health and condition, though the eldest is more that 16 years. I expect ages over 20 if nothing happens by accidents. Indeed, the eldest is the most elegant and beautiful bird we own, he is producer of many pretty hatchings until now.

Regards Wolfgang

Frank Lin <[email protected]> schrieb: Hello, Wolfgang Mennig,

I'm not trying to stay undercover. My E-mail tells all (Frank Lin). I am actually quite a young boy, yet through research, I know so much about Green Peafowl. I want to study them when I grow up. I am from Canada. I have only seen Green Peafowl at zoos. I know how good reintroducing them is, but you even said in a German PDF that the Java and Malay were not identical.

I used a translator and got this from your paper:

"The Malaysian and the Javan varieties were considered genetically identical and were grouped under the scientific name Pavo muticus muticus. This is not the case anymore. The two varieties are genetically different and the Javan variety even has two genetically different varieties of its own, the (Udjon-Kulon-Form/south western Java Baluran-Form/eastern Java)."

If the birds being reintroduced into Malaysia are the original Malay muticus (Javan is not muticus, it's javanensis), then that is great. I am just concerned that it is different, because of that genetic research you mentioned pointing out they are different, but WPA UK claimed that the Java and Malay were one and the same, which is not true. I received all the information from you in that German paper. I'm not trying to be negative to you, you are a foremost authority on the Green Peafowl, but I hate the false information from the WPA UK saying that the two were identical.

One of your birds is a Malay. He is so beautiful. I think he was an old one and may already be dead. I do think all your birds are beautiful, even the dull spicifers. Your photo of a muticus displaying is said by some to have some bit of Bokor (Annamese annamensis) in it, as in it is actually a hybrid. I have already sent another E-Mail saying this as well as all the species. You were the one who published the paper, so you should know. I am not trying to criticize you, but there are some who think some of your birds are hybrids.

You also mentioned this in your paper as well:

"The subspecies of the Pavo muticus imperator is divided into 4, or if the one that lives in west China yunnanensis counts, 5 different subspecies. Pavo muticus imperator whose range is from central Thailand to Myanmar, annamensis, or vietnamensis within the coastal range of Vietnam from north to south, and angkorensis from Cambodia and the laotius in central Laos."

I will tell you some more info. These are all distinct species, not subspecies of muticus. Kunming Imperator P. imperator yunnanensis is different from P. yunnanensis. The annamensis has a golden sheen, especially obvious in the females. The male has a bluer back and a bluer head. You also need to be aware that annamensis is also found in Yunnan and that the Cambodian form might be a distinct species (P. bokorensis).

The several comments on the forums were to Kermit Blackwood (the person who said that the Green Peafowl is really several species), how did you know about that?

I strongly believe there are several distinct species of Green Peafowl, most having their own subspecies. Only the Malay and Kra forms should be called muticus (Kra being further divided into P. m. malacense). All my research is from Kermit Blackwood, who you should be aware of as another researcher of Green Peafowl, studying their behaviours (being monogamous, imitating pit vipers in looks), ecology (different habitats, connection with Lophura pheasants), and obviously the taxonomy.

I'm not trying to criticize you, I'm trying to criticize Delacour's version of the taxonomy (calling Cambodian Annamese form a mere "individual variation"? Not true!).

Regards, Frank Lin AKA Mario

---

Original Message ----

From: Wolfgang Mennig <[email protected]> To: Frank Lin <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2007 4:42:32 PM Subject: RE: Green Peafowl

Hello Mario !

Very pleasant to me that you wrote this time with your email, so discussion will be possible. Thank you for that.

I found several comments of you in net forums regarding subspecies of green peafowl and in most cases you critisize parts of our work for conservation of pure subspecies. Further you used the guestbook of my HP as base to place your anonymous comments. In principe I would appreceate comments anyway if some details would be cleared.

First of all I would like to know who you are and where you are located. I can see at your email that you write from Canada. Are you canadian ? What is forcing you to stay undercover ? I am having problems to cooperate with anonymous writers. So please take this first step. You know everything about my person, so please let me get those informations about you too. As it seems you should have basical knowledge about subspecies of Green Peafowl. From where did you receive your informations ? Are they self owned by experiences or did you find out something by using others comments ? This should be no negative rating, but as I found some comments of you, that forces me to believe that they were adopted by you.

Let me tell you some informations about me. I´m 52 years old and german pheasant breeder since my age of 9. In my life I´ve seen hundreds of Green Peafowl in wildlife and captured birds too. I´m working intensively to find and separate subspecies of them for decades of years. I don´t believe that there will be many other persons who did researchings on that large numbers of museum skins and live birds around the world as I did. And additionally I had several chances to get pure birds in 3 subspecies from southeast asia, what were the base of my private conservation project in breeding them. Today I gathered a large group of friends and breeders around me, who are cooperating with me in doing this work. The final tip of this private project was set some years ago by the WPA international in founding the socalled Focusgroup Green Peafowl, that forces aims in international strains that were only private before. Now we have the chance to work worldwide for conservation of Green Peafowl, even reintroducing them.

And that should be negative ?

As you wrote, I should mix up subspecies, or there would be the wrong birds reintroduced in Malaysia, that hurts me hard. Where did you get informations for this from ?

Are you scientist and studied biology, or do you own birds of Green Peafowl in that subspecies, so you are able to comment like this ? I think you have never seen birds of my breeding, or those send to Malaysia. So, why do you comment like this ? Did you have chances to see and research wildlive birds in Java or somewhere else ? I did, and doing this permanent furthermore, it´s a part of my private work. I think you don´t have to call my attention on several subspecies of Green Peafowl because I am part of that international specialist group for years, that is working to publish statements you found about subspecies.

Many of those informations were based on my work.

So please keep back with unfounded criticism and try to help in the same direction if possible. I would appreceate very much to have those questions answered by you. May be we could have same interests and find a way to cooperate.

Regards Wolfgang Mennig

Frank Lin <[email protected]> schrieb: The Green Peafowl should be split into several distinct species. Kermit Blackwood said so. The reintroductions into Malaysia are bad - that's the wrong form. The Javan form and the Malay are not identical, you said, but you should also know that both forms have an additional race - subspecies inside a subspecies. For the Javan it is Pavo (muticus) javanensis baluranensis, for Malay it is P. m. muticus malacese. There are also the different yunnanensis and annamensis forms which differ from the imperator form.

Mario (that was me)

”

So it does confirm that Mennig is friends with Kermit and the right birds were introduced into Malaysia. Frankyboy5 23:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Join Wikipedia: WikiProject Protected areas of India

Pls. join newly created the wikiproject on Wikipedia: WikiProject Protected areas of India. Amartyabag (Talk) 13:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Image of Asiatic Lions mating needs cleaning with the help of Photoshop software

Hi Shyamal if you get time please request somebody knowledgable to clean the black line digitally in the following image of Asiatic Lions mating on the Asiatic lion page. Chandraandmoti.JPG Thanks Atulsnischal 00:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Might be easier to get better photographs though ! Shyamal 11:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Tikader

Right - I just wanted to emphasize that he worked primarily with En, NEn and SEn (A&N) taxa. BTW, beautiful Avian drawings !! And do consider joining the Wikiproject PAs of India - I see that Amartya has invited you already. We are in short supply of editors there as we kick off Feb 1 (today). ray 07:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Science Collaboration of the Month

You voted for Natural selection and this article is now the current Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article.

NCurse _work 16:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Explain

Hi Shyamal, Would you please explain this revert please? Thank you. --Ragib 01:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ragib, I have just written on the talk page of Bengal monitor. Shyamal 02:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Great. Thanks for your reply. --Ragib 02:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Common Indian Monitor Lizard and its rock climbing abilities

Hi Shyamal

I have seen lot of Monitor Lizards in the field, like other cold blooded reptiles they have to bask in the sun in the morning to warm their blood to get active. For this you can see them clinging to verticle rock faces to get maximum exposure from the morning sun rays, have seen also on old fort walls and such. I have seen them run up old fort walls etc when disturbed, they also climb trees easily.

As for Tanaji and Sinhagad episode it is not a myth, it is history, if you do find out which I am sure you will in due course please change words like LEGEND or MYTH etc. abouth the episode and the capabilities of Common Indian Monitor, also it was mentioned that cattle herders of the time in the area trained it for taking the rope up to help them climb, there must be some mention of this tradition too in the history pages.

In the long term I and sure you will be able to find credible sources

Thanks

Atulsnischal 15:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Here is great scientific explanation from cold blooded page on Wikipedia

Types of temperature control

Examples of temperature control include:

• Snakes and lizards sunning themselves on rocks.

Hope this helps, thanks again Atulsnischal 15:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Atul. The photograph of the monitor on the article is an individual that I know well and yes, I am aware of the habits of basking and that of poikilothermy, neither of which are in contention. The use of monitor lizard for scaling walls is unverifiable and much closer to what is termed an urban legend. Yes, it has been said and written about Shivaji and there is even a title Ghorpade which is derived from the monitor. (We even have some naturalists with that name!) The grip of a monitor is however vastly over-rated and larger individuals are not very arboreal. There is no evolutionary advantage for a species like that to be able to cling on to a wall and support the weight of even an additional 30kg load (a boy) leave alone Shivaji's men or an elephant as I found on website supporting this theory. Shyamal 16:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

There is no evolutionary advantage for a species like that to be able to cling on to a wall ????

I am sure there must be MANY, they evolved to bask in sun and climb for food. In the field they are seen on vertical rocks and cliffs spread out to catch the early morning sun all the time and anyways it is not for us to "decide", for and on behalf of all mankind, we should rather just study and make new discoveries.

Tanaji using a Monitor to climb a vertical giant rock face on which the Sinhagad fort sits (I have trekked all around this Sinhagad fort wall, the back of the fort facing away from Pune City is just a giant boulder, no fort wall) and this incident is a part of Well documented HISTORY, we all just have to find correct reference and not make comments on how other scientists think, on our own without talking to any reputable scientist studying Monitors or their capabilities.

There are many skeptics plaguing the scientific fields, their fast held "Mental Blocks" do more disservice to Mankind then their contributions.

sincerely Atulsnischal 06:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Atul, please don't misquote me. There is an evolutionary advantage to being able to climb trees and rocks, but not to take additional loads of the kind being suggested. In addition the musculature of reptilian limbs is not suited for the kind of gripping of walls as suggested. I can think of scenarios by which it may indeed be possible to climb a fort, but there are many other reptiles that can do it. As I know it, there are no modern examples of this application of Monitors in the fashion in which Monkeys are used for gathering coconuts. All the historic evidence merely states that it is said to have happened (in other words hearsay). For instance see

The chief of Mudhol belongs to the Bhonsle family of the Maratha caste or clan, descended, according to tradition, from a common ancestor with Sivaji the Great. This name, however, has been entirely superseded by the second designation of Ghorpade, which is said to have been acquired by one of the family who managed to scale a fort, previously deemed impregnable, by fastening a cord around the body of a ghorpad or iguana. All that is authentically known of the history of the family is that it held a high position at the court of Bijapur, from which it received the lands it still holds. The Mudhol chiefs were the most determined opponents of Sivaji during his early conquests ; but on the overthrow of the Muhammadan power they joined the Marathas, and accepted a military command from the Peshwa.

— Imperial Gazetteer of India v. 18, p 12

Science does indeed involve a good deal of cautious scepticism, whatever else you might term it. I encourage you to consider writing to scientists who may know more, and in the end, yes, it is about getting the best possible evidence regardless of the results. Wikipedia verifiability is about whether one can find the statements in a suitable primary reference. Scientific verifiability is about whether the possibility exists and whether it is repeatable or falsifiable. The statement as it stands is a good compromise between the two.Shyamal 06:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Check it out! New External Links I added to Bengal Monitor Page:

• Two fighting Common Indian Monitor Lizard males make the cover of "Sanctuary Asia Magazine"
• The Story behind the Picture - "Monitor Lizards Combat" from the website of Jayanth Sharma's "WILDLIFE TIMES"

Atulsnischal 14:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Need of your help ! :)

Look Talk:Robert Swinhoe. Best regards.--Valérie75 09:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Environment barnstar

I have created a barnstar for Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment. Please visit the talk page to vote for the barnstar since there are no votes for 2 months. OhanaUnited 20:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 13:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Kaiser I Hind Many thanks

Yes. Lovely work.I was just about to write and thank you. Soon I must explore Photoshop. Seitz- Yes I see. Hope you saw the Agrias images.One is named for my wife Gillian.Also Troides.I hope to get more pics appropriate to India next week together with Parnassius glacialis. I'll add the T.imperialis data later today.Now I'm going to put in two old pics showing the curious hind wing colour interference in Troides magellanus.Cheers Robert Notafly

I did see the new images. Would have loved a career in a library/museum ! Perhaps what drives me to Wikipedia ! A pity but I must restrict myself geographically. many thanks. Shyamal 02:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Melanophidium bilineatum

Beautiful serpant, isnt it. Thankyou friend.--Praveen 07:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)