5 ms·
I think the numbers went from 15% to 33%, with 91 being the number of female elephants in the sample group. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/female-ele
by wahern 3y ago
I think the numbers went from 15% to 33%, with 91 being the number of female elephants in the sample group. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/female-elephants-are-evolving-to-go-tuskless-but-may-be-killing-males-180978938 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/female-elephants-a... Per that article, tuskless male elephants don't survive, usually not even to birth.
- jonhohle 3y agoSorry, the number I had was 51% from New Scientist - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2294549-female-african-elephants-evolved-to-lose-tusks-due-to-ivory-poaching/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2294549-female-african-...
- wahern 3y agoAh. TIL male African elephants must have tusks to be viable, but male Asian elephants can be tuskless, and in some regions up to 90% of male Asian elephants can be tuskless (per https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/asian-elephant https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/asian-elephant). Regarding the female African elephant percentage discrepancy, both of which seem to be pulled from the same paper, it seems 33% refers to new born and 51% refers to all females.