Corrections for Toy Animal Wiki

This red AAA crab: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/File:AAA-crab-pg.jpg cannot be a Dungeness crab. Notice the last pair of legs are paddle-like for swimming. This means it is in the family Portunidae, not Cancridae. It should probably be moved to 'Unidentified True Crabs'

By the way, this 'unidentified true crab' by Safari: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Safari_Toob_100308_Crab is a repeat of the Sally lightfoot crab from the Galapagos TOOB and can probably moved to that species.

Also, I have tentatively identified this 'unidentified true crab': https://toyanimal.info/wiki/File:KM_tube_coralreef_crab.jpg as the batwing coral crab (Carpilius corallinus) based on its color and association with coral reefs (the theme of the set).

bmathison1972 wrote:

This red AAA crab: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/File:AAA-crab-pg.jpg  cannot be a Dungeness crab. Notice the last pair of legs are paddle-like for swimming. This means it is in the family Portunidae, not Cancridae. It should probably be moved to 'Unidentified True Crabs'

By the way, this 'unidentified true crab' by Safari: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Safari_Toob_100308_Crab is a repeat of the Sally lightfoot crab from the Galapagos TOOB and can probably moved to that species.

Also, I have tentatively identified this 'unidentified true crab': https://toyanimal.info/wiki/File:KM_tube_coralreef_crab.jpg  as the batwing coral crab (Carpilius corallinus) based on its color and association with coral reefs (the theme of the set).

Thanks Blaine for identifications and tips. It is good to have someone to help sorting crabs.
I opened a new page for swimming crabs - moved the Safari toob figure to the species page you suggested. The batwing coral crab seems quite plausible but it is needing a new species page. I will do it tomorrow or so.

This Yujin fish: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Paradise_gouramis is actually M. ocellatus. When Yujin first released this, they did indeed market it as M. opercularis, even though the morphology is that of M. ocellatus. Yujin recognized their mistake and in later release(s) of the collection, they changed it to M. ocellatus. So, in the end, the species is M. ocellatus and not M. opercularis.

bmathison1972 wrote:

This Yujin fish: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Paradise_gouramis is actually M. ocellatus. When Yujin first released this, they did indeed market it as M. opercularis, even though the morphology is that of M. ocellatus. Yujin recognized their mistake and in later release(s) of the collection, they changed it to M. ocellatus. So, in the end, the species is M. ocellatus and not M. opercularis.

Undoubtfully, Blaine. I recycled the existing page and it is now in this link.
I also opened a page to the batwing coral crab. Thanks!

I have the brown version of this figure: http://toyanimal.mywikis.net/wiki/AAA_Conch_Shell,_White,_Large

mine is marked 'tuba false fusus' which implies Hemifusus tuba

You have the Play Visions helmet crab as Corystes: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Helmet_crab

it is actually Telmessus cheiragonus

bmathison1972 wrote:

I have the brown version of this figure: http://toyanimal.mywikis.net/wiki/AAA_Conch_Shell,_White,_Large

mine is marked 'tuba false fusus' which implies Hemifusus tuba

bmathison1972 wrote:

You have the Play Visions helmet crab as Corystes: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Helmet_crab

it is actually Telmessus cheiragonus

The job is done

By the way, the CollectA page has a "Other prehistoric animals" and a "CollectA Prehistoric Marine Life" sections: They are the same and I can't find a "CollectA Prehistoric Marine Life" on the CollectA website.
Is there a reason to open two sections ?

Thanks Blaine for pointing out these identifications and Christophe for fixing them.
About the CollectA section newly opened I got as much surprised as you when I’ve found it some time ago. That is one of the reasons why I haven’t completed the Nautylus page. I was just waiting to find a 2020 CollectA catalogue to check the way the company grouped these models on it. I thought two of them were part of the prehistoric series while the extnt was part of the sea life series but better check first, I guess.

From History it looks like the sections were created by Susanne, perhaps ask her?

The Clairet Crocodile open mouth isn't a Clairet. I don't know the brand alas.

Safari hare: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Safari_233529_Hare

Being in the North American line, this is probably not a European hare (even though it has been introduced into parts of the northeast for game). Not sure what it could be, maybe the summer form of the snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus ???). Honestly, Safari probably didn't do their research and mad a hare to counter their rabbit(s)...

bmathison1972 wrote:

Safari hare: https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Safari_233529_Hare

Being in the North American line, this is probably not a European hare (even though it has been introduced into parts of the northeast for game). Not sure what it could be, maybe the summer form of the snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus ???). Honestly, Safari probably didn't do their research and mad a hare to counter their rabbit(s)...

So, what to do ?

I also think Safari made a generic looking hare without caring with the exact species.
It is hard to identify it with an exact North American species.
We have made an effort to find a species page for many other unidentified hares and rabbits but I agree an European hare is not a logical option.
Likely it will go to a section of unidentified Leoporidae.

Roger wrote:

I also think Safari made a generic looking hare without caring with the exact species.
It is hard to identify it with an exact North American species.
We have made an effort to find a species page for many other unidentified hares and rabbits but I agree an European hare is not a logical option.
Likely it will go to a section of unidentified Leoporidae.

I think opening a snowshoe hare page is a better option. This is the only American species close to it. Since it can’t be another American hare...

As you and Blaine suggest the snowshoe hare as the closest, there’s no objection on my part. The figure does not present anym markings typical of the species but it is surely the result of the simplification of the painting. Though, it is the closest, I agree.

Well for me it is even more than the closest, it is the only choice among North American hare species, the others are really too different.

Probably the Authentics hare needs to go together with the Safari NAW hre. Authentics are even more difficult to identify but the set has an elk, the dark legs and under parts show it is undoutfully an elk. So, the lynx is probably a bobcat.

To my knowledge the Authentics Collection does not specifically say North America ;-) - so you may have more freedom there...

Roger wrote:

Probably the Authentics hare needs to go together with the Safari NAW hre. Authentics are even more difficult to identify but the set has an elk, the dark legs and under parts show it is undoutfully an elk. So, the lynx is probably a bobcat.

bmathison1972 wrote:

To my knowledge the Authentics Collection does not specifically say North America ;-) - so you may have more freedom there...

I agree with Rogerio, it makes sense.

I don't think the Play Visions pangolin is a tree pangolin.
Those animals have very long and thin tail, at least longer than the head and body. The PV looks morevlike a Cape or Malayan pangolin.

I see what you mean about the pangolin, Christophe. As I’m not in my pc, I can’t confirm if I have a note about what is marked in that figure. Though, I am convinced it is marked tree pangolin. Andreas is the current owner of that figure although the picture is from when it was in Sergey’s hands. Maybe Andreas can check it again. We also suspect it is from a set of African animals with an aardvark, a forest buffalo and a few more. Actually the shape would work better for a ground panglin than for a tree pangolin.

Roger wrote:

I see what you mean about the pangolin, Christophe. As I’m not in my pc, I can’t confirm if I have a note about what is marked in that figure. Though, I am convinced it is marked tree pangolin. Andreas is the current owner of that figure although the picture is from when it was in Sergey’s hands. Maybe Andreas can check it again. We also suspect it is from a set of African animals with an aardvark, a forest buffalo and a few more. Actually the shape would work better for a ground panglin than for a tree pangolin.

Yes, marked as tree pangolin. And i also believe it is from a set of a central african national park.

Thanks for confirming it again Andreas! :)

I propose the Kitan Club planarian (http://toyanimal.mywikis.net/wiki/Nature_Technicolor_Planaria) is Dugesia japonica since it is the most common freshwater Asian species and is the most common used in regeneration experiments. The color and head shape is also more supportive over Girardia tigrina, which is what it is called now (with reservation, I noticed).