Flag for Taxon: European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| manschuwa | European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) |
it is not endemic in the Mediterranean https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57657057 |
Feb. 27, 2021 17:46:16 +0000 | philodendronjoe |
changed to native |
Comments
i don't know who as set it "endemic" (anyone can change the origin of distribution), but must have been done recently because i don't remember it was there a while ago... i agree that endemic is not the right definition here, i'll change it to native
I did change it to endemic because it is endemic to the Iberian peninsula (and southwestern France). It has been then widely introduced in Europe, North Africa, and worldwide. There is no native population outside the Mediterranean. It is therefore endemic from the Mediterranean.
Thank you for answering, i get the reason and using the term endemic makes sense in context, but when something is set as endemic iNaturalist shows a badge which says "occurrs here and nowhere else" and despite the other populations not being native i feel like this could be misleading... so i think native works better in this case
anyway i appreciate the discussion and if you think setting it as endemic is the right choice feel free to put it back
In my understanding "endemic" species are animals or plants that you can only find today in one geographical region, for example the Lemur catta or other Lemuriformes in Madagascar. Oryctolagus cuniculus might have been endemic to Iberia and Southern France in the time of the Roman Empire but surely not in modern times.
I guess if you set Oryctolagus cuniculus as "endemic" you have to set a lot of other species as "endemic" as well.
@manschuwa : Yes this is a definition issue.
From an evolutionary biology and conservation point of view, the definition of endemic as "all the native populations are restricted to this specific place" makes more sense as this translates the species evolutionary history. Also, the populations of this species occurring in the place of endemism have more genetic diversity and should be prioritized for conservation.
On the other hand, from an "animal watcher" point of view (i.e. someone interested in where he can observe a particular species whatever its establishment means), the definition "occurrs here and nowhere else" makes more sense.
However, the problem with the second definition is that more and more endemic species will have at least one introduced population. You cited the Lemurs for instance; should they be considered no longer endemic to Madagascar because one species has been introduced in the Comoros?
With the second definition, you could also state that the Asian Cheetah is endemic to Iran, because today it only occurs there, but only because it has been hunted down everywhere else.
I guess if you set Oryctolagus cuniculus as "endemic" you have to set a lot of other species as "endemic" as well.
Actually not that much for the Mediterranean, maybe a few trees like Aesculus hippocastanum, Cedrus atlantica, etc.
@naturalist: Well, as you said, it is first and foremost a question of definition. But maybe we agree that whatever definition iNaturalist uses it should be used for the whole platform in the same way. At least the explanation "occurs nowhere else" is misleading.
I'm not sure what you mean by endemic here -- the usual meaning I've seen attached to the word is "found only in". If that's the case, then you're right, it isn't, and I can't find any point at which it's being considered to be so. If you're using the epidemiologist's approach to endemic, the term "native" might work better. Although this is one of those species that I don't think I'd rule out appearing just about anywhere, since I would expect that most domesticated rabbits are descended from these.