Quarantine entry #86 - June 15

Obligatory disclaimer: real life sucks, which is why I wanted to revisit our friends the moles today – but then I came across a mention of a Madagascar cat, and it stuck.

What is a Madagascar cat? Technically, it is an incorrect name for the fossa, (also known as fosa), which does belong, technically speaking to the same suborder of the carnivorous mammals’ family as the true cats do, but otherwise? It belongs to the mammal family Eupleridae, which is more closely related to the mongooses instead.

Why the fossa is called a Madagascar cat? It is superficially similar to a cat, but only that. You may see it, for example, on Sir David Attenborough’s ‘Life of Mammals’, where the fossas are shown mating and hunting lemurs on Madagascar – until humans had arrived on that island and introduced their animal companions as well, the fossa was the biggest carnivorous mammal in that ecosystem. Being the size of a small mountain lion, (about 70-80 cm long), and weighing about from 5.5 to 8.5 kg, it is a formidable-looking mammal, but only that; the real puma itself isn’t very dangerous to humans, and the fossa actually avoids humans (and their dogs) for as long as possible; yes, it hunts lemurs, which are fellow primates to the human beings, but the modern lemurs are very different primates from the modern humans, so there’s that.

Anything else? First, unlike the true cats, a fossa’s claws are only semi-retractable – i.e., they can extend, but cannot fully retract back into the paws. Secondly, while the fossa itself belongs to the genus Cryptoprocta, (it is a monotypic genus that consists only of the fossa itself), the term ‘fossa’ is also used in the scientific world as the title of another monotypic genus, a genus that consists of only the relative of the ‘true’ fossa – Fossa fossana, known in the English language as the Malagasy civet, also known as the fanaloca.

At 47-50 cm in length, (plus another 20 cm to the tail), and at 1.5-2.0 kg in weight, it is a much smaller animal than the ‘true’ fossa is, and physically it resembles the ‘true’ civets & genets of Africa and Eurasia. For a while, it was even classified with the banded (palm) civet of South-East Asia, until it was discovered that it was more closely related to the carnivorous mammals of the Eupleridae family, see above. At about the size of a small fox, (and with a similar behavior), it is the second largest native carnivorous mammal of Madagascar.

Both the fossa and the Malagasy civet are considered to be Vulnerable, (according to IUCN), both because of human (and dog) harassment, and habitat deterioration on Madagascar. Of course, that affects all of Madagascar’s wildlife, including its’ native carnivores of the Eupleridae family, which consists of two subfamilies: one that contains the fossa, the Malagasy civet, and two species of the so-called falanoucs, and the second that contains their cousins – the various species of mongooses and vontsiras of Madagascar. Despite the fact that their common name of some of them contains the word ‘mongoose’, these Madagascan mammals are proportionally more closely related to the fossa and the Malagasy civet, than to the ‘true’ mongooses of Africa and Eurasia. Anything else?

Sadly, no. The second subfamily of the native Madagascan carnivores may be more numerous out of the two, but its’ members are much less ‘charismatic’ than the fossa, the Malagasy civet, and the falanoucs are. Consequently, less is known about them, than, say, about the fossa itself – sadly, the small carnivores are not very popular unlike the large ones… That is real life. It sucks.

…Well, this is it for now, though. Discussing the fossa and its’ relatives was fun; maybe we should do something similar soon. See you later!

Quarantine entry #65 - May 25

Obligatory disclaimer: real life sucks. Sometimes nothing goes your way, and you just have to accept it. What next?

Let us talk voles. Despite their similar-sounding names, they are not related to the moles, but rather are distant cousins to some of the mouse-named rodents, and close relatives to the hamster-named ones. Pause.

Yes, we have talked about moles in the recent past, and we did mention voles – maybe – when we have talked about mice much earlier. While voles and mice are similar-looking – both are small rodents with long, hairless tails, the voles are less likely to be found inside human homes; they prefer open spaces instead. Mice like those that surroundings that are cramped, with plenty of nooks and crannies to hide in; voles – not so much.

…On the other hand, despite them not being related to moles and shrews, (remember, we have talked about them?), voles prefer to dig tunnels to get around, while mice – not so much. Consequently, despite being roughly the same size, voles are stockier than the mice are; their eyes, ears and noses are smaller than those of the mice; the shrews, since we’re talking comparisons here, also have small eyes and ears, but their noses and snouts are skinny and elongated, almost like proboscises, instead. That is not surprising – shrews, moles and co. do not have much in common with rodents like mice and voles, aside from the latter being eaten by the former, if the opportunity presents itself.

…However, just like moles, voles prefer to dig tunnels to get around, as we have said above. Hence, the smaller eyes, ears and noses than those of mice. That is not too surprising – the vole branch of the rodent family also features such master diggers as the hamsters, which dig out impressive burrows and tunnels underground. The marmots and the ground squirrels, though, are precisely that – ground-dwelling cousins of the tree squirrels; even the chipmunk, which looks like a small squirrel with a shorter tail, is a very good digger – but then again, most rodents are.

Now the element of water – this gives most rodents some pause. Not so the muskrat, which is also a vole cousin, and is the biggest aquatic rodent after the beaver in the Northern Hemisphere. Of course, given just how much bigger the beaver is, that is a relative second… not to mention that the actual biggest rodent on the planet, the capybara, dwarfs both the beavers, (there are two species of them – one American, the second European/Eurasian), and the muskrat. Anything else?

Taxonomy, I suppose. The vole genera – and there are quite a few of them – belong… well, yes, to the Cricetidae family, as do the New World mice, rats, and similar rodents. The aforementioned hamsters belong to a different subfamily, however – Cricetinae, while the voles belong to Arvicolinae; the muskrat and the lemmings also belong to it.

Of them, the voles of the genus Arvicola deserve a mention, as they’re called ‘water voles’ for a reason – they’re aquatic, even if they’re only distantly related to the muskrat. They are the size of small rat, but are chubbier-looking, and are better swimmers than the rats are, which is not surprising – rats are generalists, while the water voles are specialists. There are animals that are called ‘water rats’ instead, but the European species is the European water vole in question, while the rest of those rodents live… mostly in Australia and Papua New Guinea, having few things in common with the ‘true’ mice and rats, but some species live in Africa as well as the New World. Of them, the Florida water rat/round-tailed muskrat, (Neofiber alleni), deserves a special mention, as it is too a cousin of the voles & the ‘true’ muskrat, but, again, it belongs to its’ own ‘tribe’ in the Arvicolinae subfamily.

…In the South America, the rodents that took to the water are also members of the Cricetidae family, but they are more closely related to the hamsters than voles instead. Are not evolution and rodents exciting?..

…Well, this is it for now – see you all soon!

Quarantine entry #57 - May 17

Obligatory disclaimer: real life sucks. Sometimes it isn’t so bad, as yesterday we went on a nature trail, and-?

And nothing, and everything, and all things in between. The nature trail, (actually, plural, as there were three of them, of which we completed one, and half-completed another), isn’t that different from the park back home… the park has just a paved path and as such, it is easier to get through.

…But what about the authenticity! – one can just hear the cry. True, but what authenticity? The nature trail may look real – as in wet, swampy, hard to get through, (especially for younger children), but it is largely safe, (provided that parents are there to prevent the children from getting too far into the water, period).

To elaborate: the wildlife there is safe – there are songbirds, (a cage bald eagle, raised in captivity, or two), chipmunks, (also squirrels, probably), waterfowl, (at this time of the year it were ducks), frogs, and snakes – as in garter and water snakes, naturally. The trail itself was peppered with children-friendly log piles, teepees, what else have you, so that the children wouldn’t get bored – and I doubt that there were any poisonous plants either, because children tend to put everything into their mouths, so poisonous plants are a no-no, parent supervision or not. What else?

Enter honeybees. I do not know if the Asian giant hornets were involved – we are on East coast right now, and so far, the giant hornets were found only on West coast instead – but the local honeybees were swarming, or doing something similar: a swarm of theirs was buzzing and flying around a hollow in a conifer tree.

…Honeybees, in particular North American honeybees, are not as aggressive as the Asian giant hornets, let alone the Africanized ‘killer’ bees, but when they are riled up, they can be quite aggressive on their own, especially when children are involved – hence I reckon that they won’t be around that nature trail for too long… or they will be, as the buildings were closed, and the staff appeared to be gone, period. The nature trails remain currently unsupervised, which raises, (for me), a question – how long until life finds a way and the nature trails will need to be reset? I have no idea… and this brings me back to our own park. It’s actually more dangerous than this nature trail complex, because aside from waterfowl, songbirds, squirrels and rabbits, our park also has hawks, (ok, they will never attack humans, unless the latter are bothering their nests, which is unlikely, given a number of factors), red foxes, (which can attack people, if provoked, cornered, or sick), and coyotes, (same as red foxes, but as larger animals that are more dangerous to humans, proportionally). Is it bad? Yes, but this is how nature is – it is not always safe for humans, period. What next?

Today I actually wanted to talk about pandas instead. There are two species of them – the giant panda, which is a ‘true’ bear, just the most ancient one of the modern species, and the red panda, which is a bear cousin, but has its’ own family. It is the size of a small racoon or a large marten, but just as the giant panda, it feeds on bamboo, and has false thumbs on its’ forepaws to better grip and handle the bamboo.

Pandas are not the only mammals that have false thumbs – so have the ‘true’ moles, for example, only their false thumbs have evolved to make their forepaws better digging shovels instead.

…The latest edition of Luke Hunter’s guide to the ‘true’ carnivorous mammals of the world that I had access to claimed that there are two species of the red panda rather than one, but most other sources id them as subspecies instead. There are also two subspecies of the giant panda, (aka the panda bear) – the well-known black-and-white one, and the more obscure cinnamon-brown-and-white one, which is found only in China. Isn’t real life surprising? In addition, sometimes, it does not even suck!..

…Well, this is it for now, I think. See you all soon!

Quarantine entry #54 - May 14

Obligatory disclaimer: real life sucks, and odds that the U.S.-Canadian borders will not open until mid-summer or so are quite high. What will result from that is anyone’s guess, so let us talk something different. How about… moles?

Now, the word ‘mole’ has several meanings, but we are talking here about the animal ‘mole’. As it regularly happens in the animal kingdom, of course, the word ‘mole’ covers several different groups of animals, so let us begin.

First, the word ‘mole’ is the name of mammals in the Talpidae family of the Eulipotyphla order, and if the latter sounds familiar, you are absolutely right. We have talked about this mammalian order when we have discussed hedgehogs in the recent past; they, shrews, and the ‘true’ moles of Eurasia and North America are related to each other, though the moles are less derived than the hedgehogs and the shrews are, apparently. The solenodons, which also belong to the Eulipotyphla order make the other branch of this order, alongside the now extinct West Indian shrews, (apparently they were a separate family from the other mammals that are called ‘shrews’), so let’s not talk about them.

Now, as it was discussed, shrews look rather like mice, albeit with proboscis-like snouts, while moles look like themselves: their feet are tiny as are their arms; their hands are huge, and have an extra false thumb for digging; their eyes are almost non-existent, but their snouts are long and sensitive. The star-nosed mole (Condylura cristata) of North America deserves a special mention, as its’ snout is not just sensitive, but is equipped with multiple tendrils that make the star-nosed mole’s snout a unique touch organ, giving the star-nosed mole an almost alien look, (especially when seen from the front.

This animal is atypical among the moles, (both ‘true’ and otherwise) in that it is also the most aquatic mole, (there are aquatic shrews, but they don’t count here), as it can hunt in the water as well as underground; and in that it has an unusually long tail by mole standards, making it almost look like a desman.

…A desman is the name of two species of mammals that also belong to the mole family, Talpidae, but live in the water, not underground, and look more like giant shrews rather than moles. This brings us to the shrew moles and the mole shrews.

A shrew mole is a mole that resembles a shrew. Most of such mammals are found in China, but two live in Japan, and the third – in North America. Such mammals look like shrews, with long snouts, long slender tails, (in true shrews they can be quite short, actually), external ears and feet that are not adapted for digging. However, unlike shrews and like the other moles, their skulls have full zygomatic arches, (aka cheekbones), which the true shrews lack.

By contrast, the mole shrews are, well, shrews that resemble moles. They consist of representatives of two shrew genera, Anourosorex, which are found in Asia, and Surdisorex, which are found in Africa, (Kenya). They – and especially the Asian species – look more like moles than shrews, but, apparently, they lack the moles’ cheekbones in their skulls, (see above).

The mention of Africa brings us to the golden moles. In many ways, they are similar to the ‘true’ moles, but they are covered in golden-colored fur, (‘true’ moles are much more drab, usually black or dark brown), and they belong to the Afrosoricida order, which includes them and the tenrecs of the Madagascar, instead.

…From the ecological P.O.V., however, they are very much like true moles, save that their arms and especially hands are tougher, because they burrow not through soil, but sand. Consequently, they do not leave visible tunnels, mounds and molehills as ‘true’ moles do. They are also even more sight-deprived than the true moles are, (I think), because sand in the eyes is even more of an irritant than plain old earth is. Anything else?

Australia is a continent apart, which means that it has its own, marsupial moles, which are – proportionally – more closely related to the koalas and kangaroos that we have discussed earlier than to either ‘true’ moles or golden moles. However, these animals, (there are two species of marsupial moles, FYI), belong to their own order, Notoryctemorpha, within the Australian marsupial superorder; all of their true relatives are extinct. Of all the ‘moles’ mentioned here, these strange little marsupials may be the most adapted to a subterranean lifestyle; they are eyeless, while their noses and the fronts of their faces have shovel-like patches on their faces, for better digging through the sandy soil as well. (The African golden moles have them as well).

Pause. The mole may not look like much, and it does not appear in fiction very often – the best case is Andersen’s fairy tale ‘Thumbelina’, where it is a protagonist of sorts. (Was it Disney or someone else who made it into an animated movie in the 20^th century? The Soviets had made it into a cartoon adaptation instead, much more basic out of the two). In non-fiction, moles usually appear in various guides or, more often, in instructions of how to get rid of them from your lawn. Considering that the moles – like their relatives the hedgehogs – are insectivores that usually eat insect pests, this state of affairs is somewhat sad, but that is real life for you. It sucks, (just look at COVID-19).

…Well, this is it for now – see you all soon!

Quarantine entry #48 - May 8

Obligatory disclaimer: real life sucks. The situation with relief regarding the COVID-19 lockdown has grown more vague, as no one knows for real as to how it will occur: every country, (even the next-door neighbours U.S.A. and Canada), is following its’ own schedule and so things are falling apart further.

What things are that? The ‘global village’ dream/utopia of the 2000s/2010s. Yes, things will not go back to the Cold War level either, but whatever will emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic will be a very different world from the Pax Americana that had been building since the Cold War ended. Do the Yankees understand that? I have no idea, and the elections-2020 need to be surpassed anyhow, Putin & RF paranoia or not. What next?

…The Asian giant hornet hysteria has died down – apparently, professionals, scientists, etc. have figured out something similar to what we have talked yesterday: that the Asian giant hornet threat may be exaggerated by the COVID-19-related hysteria and paranoia, so let us talk about hedgehogs instead.

Why hedgehogs? My family and I encountered one live back in the old country, before we moved to Canada. It was a medium-sized feral park or a mini-forest – the two concepts are not always as clear-cut in Russia as they are in the West, (especially Europe) – and there we saw it. A good old-fashioned hedgehog, rolled into a spiny, prickly ball not far from some raspberry bushes.

Usually wild hedgehogs roll into spiny, prickly balls as a last means of defense – their spines are shorter, vertical, less barbed than a porcupine’s are, and so, some predators are able to get through them: the eagle-owl’s talons are long, sharp, and hard enough to pierce through the entire hedgehog, while a red fox is cunning enough to bypass the hedgehog’s means of defence – but at that moment in time, there were no predators but us, and the hedgehog wasn’t feeling defensive: it was just asleep. It was curled into a ball and it was snoring. The hedgehog was in the open, it was broad daylight, and so I am guessing that it was either inexperienced or just cocky… or maybe there weren’t any predators in this particular forest, I don’t know; what I do remember is that it took us a few moments to recognize the rolled-up hedgehog for what it was, and then we picked it up.

…If you think that something went horribly wrong then and there, you’d be incorrect: pound for pound, a hedgehog is much smaller and lighter than most Old World porcupines are, as well as the North American porcupine, and much less inclined to use its’ spines for active defence – it uses its’ teeth for that.

…Actually, make it ‘them’ – there are five genera of hedgehogs, and between them, they number about 17 species, less than two dozen. All of them are small to medium mammals that are active mainly at night; they have poor vision, but keen sense of smell, and are anti-social. If porcupines are rodents, then the hedgehogs are insectivores… only now, that mammal order is defunct, and the hedgehogs, in particular, belong to the Eulipotyphla order, which also contains their closest relatives – the shrews and the gymnures.

…Most people know what a shrew looks like – broadly. It looks like a mouse, but with a shorter tail on one end, and a long, proboscis-like snout on the other. A gymnure, on the other hand, looks like… a shrew, but is a bit larger, about the size of a large rat… or the North American, (Virginia) opossum: they are rather obscure mammals and so not much is known about them.

What is known, however, that the mammals of the Eulipotyphla order are a rather primitive bunch: aside from the hedgehogs, shrews, and gymnures, there are several extinct families, as well as the obscure-known venomous mammals called solenodons, and the moles and their relatives, (such as the desmans). Aside from the hedgehogs, (and to a lesser extent – the moles, but we will talk about the moles some other time), they all look like one another, with the shrews being the most basic example.

…As for venom, the solenodons are venomous, and so are some of the shrews at least: their saliva is toxic, maybe not to humans, (though I am fully unsure about the bigger solenodons), but to their prey: all of the mammals of the Eulipotyphla order are meat-eaters.

The hedgehogs, it should be noted, aren’t venomous at all, but they, (or at least, the wild hedgehogs), got a big attitude and a mouthful of sharp teeth to back it up, so if you want to have a pet hedgehog, you should really get one from a special pet store or pet farm or similar – not go and catch one in the wild, especially if you live in the New World, where there are no wild hedgehog species, period.

As for ‘our’ hedgehog, after we caught it and looked at it for a while, (people do not encounter hedgehogs very often, especially in the wild), we just let it go, and away the little critter went, into the raspberry bushes, and we never saw it, or any other hedgehog, again. (As an OT, like their shrew cousins, hedgehogs do not live for very long – they grow up quickly and die almost as quick. Sad, that is).

…Well, this is it for now. See you all soon.