Corrections for Toy Animal Wiki

The magazine is the reliable source.  I can't wait to know, whatever the result 

Kikimalou wrote:

The magazine is the reliable source.  I can't wait to know, whatever the result 

Dirk sent me a photo of the magazine title and apparently Kaiyodo didn't distinguish. They list the genus and both species T. osimensis and T. muenninki; so it must be left up to the collector?

I don't know if the text is more specific, but the front cover of the magazine lists both species.

bmathison1972 wrote:

Kikimalou wrote:

The magazine is the reliable source.  I can't wait to know, whatever the result 

Dirk sent me a photo of the magazine title and apparently Kaiyodo didn't distinguish. They list the genus and both species T. osimensis and T. muenninki; so it must be left up to the collector?

I don't know if the text is more specific, but the front cover of the magazine lists both species.

As I suspect the species can't be identified, maybe the most correct is to list the figure as Ryūkyū spiny rat which is the common name for genus Tokudaia or just let it as it is now.

We will put the model with both, since it’s Kaiyodo choice

Kikimalou wrote:

We will put the model with both, since it’s Kaiyodo choice

Why not? Apparently that's the goal.
I have been thinking about a deratization of the Rodentia page on TAW. So many murids listed already, however, the group as a family is not very suggestive. Maybe dividing it into subfamilies is the best choice. Though, it is not sooo important.

More info from one of Brett's clients:

"The magazine cover lists it with two scientific names, Tokudaia osimensis and Tokudaia muenninki. Those are two species, the Ryukyu spiny rat and Muennink’s spiny rat (a.k.a. Okinawa spiny rat). They are found on Amami Ōshima and Okinawa Island, respectively. Wikipedia lists a third species in the genus, Tokudaia tokunoshimensis, the Tokunoshima spiny rat, found on Tokunoshima Island (in between the other two islands). A map in the magazine has three separately colored ranges on these three islands, but only the two scientific names are shown." [Blaine's comment: T. tokunoshimensis wasn't described when the figure was made]

So, it looks like Kaiyodo decided to leave it at the genus level.

Well, the third species wasn't describe when Kaiyodo produced the NT series. I modified the page to match with Kaiyodo booklet but we still can change it to a unique genus page.

https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Kimura_spider

TAI has this as Heptathela kimurai, but the paperwork translates to 'Okinawa Kim Ryuthela', which is Ryuthela nishihirai.

Also, it makes more sense it is Ryuthela nishihirai, since that species is endemic to Okinawa (the theme of the set), whereas H. kimurai is endmic to Kyushu

Let's talk about Ibexes: Lahl, Starlux, Straubolin and Timpo. We put them on the Alpine ibex page but they are obviously not Alpine ibex. If I listened to myself, I would call Siberian ibex the Lahl, the Straubolin and the Starlux. As for the Timpo, I would position it as a Nubian ibex by default. Your idea, ladies and gentlemen?

Lahl, Starlux, Straubolin and Timpo

I would love to know what to do with the spider Blaine mentioned. If it should be corrected, I'd be glad of doing the job.

About ibexes, it is important to notice those are very old models and all these species were for a long time considered subspecies of the Alpine Ibex. I don't know if the designs were inspired in book illustrations or Zoo animals but they also look Siberian ibexes to me and I don't have an opinion about the Timpo model.
Alpine ibexes do not show those extremly long and curved horns, they are more like the Schleich models.
I think their identification as Alpine ibexes is because most of these figures are presented in Woodland series with the focus on European fauna and when the exact species is not provided, we tend to introduce it according with the commonest species. Look at the hedgehogs there are loads of similar species and when we don't know it, we introduce it as a common hedgehog and the common ibex is the Alpine ibex.
Shortening, I think these models were sculpted to represent Alpine ibexes but they were clearly designed after Siberian ibexes.

Here similar horn layouts from zoo specimens.

Nikolaev Zoo




Odessa Zoo

Is the Kaiyodo "Great egret"

https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Kaiyodo_ChocoQ_Animatales_11_Great_egret

not a little egret?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_egret#/media/File:Little_egret_(Egretta_garzetta)_Photograph_by_Shantanu_Kuveskar.jpg

because the beak is black not yellow

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_egret

Very clearly a great egret by shape, feathers, face colour etc besides the bill. But bill colour of great egrets depends both on subspecies and on season (breeding vs. non-breeding). The subspecies present in Japan is Ardea alba modesta and this one changes the bill from yellow to black during breeding season (as well as the face and legs colours). The Kaiyodo figure is a very faithful figure of a breeding individual of this subspecies.

Pardofelis wrote:

Very clearly a great egret by shape, feathers, face colour etc besides the bill. But bill colour of great egrets depends both on subspecies and on season (breeding vs. non-breeding). The subspecies present in Japan is Ardea alba modesta and this one changes the bill from yellow to black during breeding season (as well as the face and legs colours). The Kaiyodo figure is a very faithful figure of a breeding individual of this subspecies.

Thank you

the recent hedgehog thread made me realize the three hedgehogs here are incorrect. These are four-toed hedgehogs, not Amur hedgehogs. Kaiyodo did make an Amur hedgehog in the original Chocoegg/Choco Q line, however

https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Amur_hedgehog

bmathison1972 wrote:

the recent hedgehog thread made me realize the three hedgehogs here are incorrect. These are four-toed hedgehogs, not Amur hedgehogs. Kaiyodo did make an Amur hedgehog in the original Chocoegg/Choco Q line, however

https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Amur_hedgehog

As I was not the editor of those pages, I am always hesitant to change it and it requires some work because the word Amur is everywhere in this set.
I see those figures were just marketed as hedgehogs, I don't know from where the Amur hedgehog identification comes. Why are you positive about their identifications as an African pygmy hedgehog? Is it because they're common pets or is there a source?

Roger wrote:

bmathison1972 wrote:

the recent hedgehog thread made me realize the three hedgehogs here are incorrect. These are four-toed hedgehogs, not Amur hedgehogs. Kaiyodo did make an Amur hedgehog in the original Chocoegg/Choco Q line, however

https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Amur_hedgehog

As I was not the editor of those pages, I am always hesitant to change it and it requires some work because the word Amur is everywhere in this set.
I see those figures were just marketed as hedgehogs, I don't know from where the Amur hedgehog identification comes. Why are you positive about their identifications as an African pygmy hedgehog? Is it because they're common pets or is there a source?

I honestly can't remember, I think I got the information from the source I bought it from. I do remember doing thorough review so I didn't buy the species twice (as I also have the Choco Q Amur hedgehog).

bmathison1972 wrote:

Roger wrote:

bmathison1972 wrote:

the recent hedgehog thread made me realize the three hedgehogs here are incorrect. These are four-toed hedgehogs, not Amur hedgehogs. Kaiyodo did make an Amur hedgehog in the original Chocoegg/Choco Q line, however

https://toyanimal.info/wiki/Amur_hedgehog

As I was not the editor of those pages, I am always hesitant to change it and it requires some work because the word Amur is everywhere in this set.
I see those figures were just marketed as hedgehogs, I don't know from where the Amur hedgehog identification comes. Why are you positive about their identifications as an African pygmy hedgehog? Is it because they're common pets or is there a source?

I honestly can't remember, I think I got the information from the source I bought it from. I do remember doing thorough review so I didn't buy the species twice (as I also have the Choco Q Amur hedgehog).

This topic is telling me that you are right so I believe our crazy macaque won't kill me if I fix it.

I believe that the club earth and wing mau kingsnakes (which are currently on the page for the eastern kingsnake L. getula and are labelled desert kingsnake (which would be L. splendida)) are actually Grey-banded kingsnakes (L. alterna). The colors do not match with eastern or desert king snakes at all, but certainly resemble the grey-banded kingsnake much more closely.

endogenylove wrote:

I believe that the club earth and wing mau kingsnakes (which are currently on the page for the eastern kingsnake L. getula and are labelled desert kingsnake (which would be L. splendida)) are actually Grey-banded kingsnakes (L. alterna). The colors do not match with eastern or desert king snakes at all, but certainly resemble the grey-banded kingsnake much more closely.

The identification of this kingsnake is not consensual. On Blaine's topic we can see they come in different color variations.

As a striped hyena... I have to tell you that it “hurts my eyes” to see that my vintage distant cousin is located in Chialù...

The one in the picture is Elastolin or Pfeiffer... I'm afraid it doesn't have the Italian imprint...

Stripedhyena wrote:

As a striped hyena... I have to tell you that it “hurts my eyes” to see that my vintage distant cousin is located in Chialù...

The one in the picture is Elastolin or Pfeiffer... I'm afraid it doesn't have the Italian imprint...

What are those TAW editors doing with your distant relatives?
It was @Tiermann who uploaded the picture but I'm not sure it belongs to him. Maybe it is better to know first from him why it is placed there.

Well, it's no drama... Hahaha (hyena laugh), but I was surprised because Chialù is such a "branded" brand....

Wildlife Artists Strawberry Poison Dart Frog... I would go for a Sira poison dart frog  




Schleich and Eikoh "Giant pangolins" (Smutsia gigantea)... For me they are both Ground pangolin (Smutsia temminckii).

The Giant pangolin is known to have a long snout, perfectly showned on the Safari Ltd pinecone.




Schleich and Eikoh ones have a classic snout, nothing noticeable like Ground pangolins.





I think the mistake comes from Google, a lot of pics supposed to show a giant pangolin are Ground pangolin pics because both are African and from the same genus Smutsia. It hitched me each time I look at the pangolins page on TAW

Please let me change this... Say yes

that's a rather soft feature for interpreting in figures of that size. I don't know about Eikoh, but Schleich specifically called it a giant pangolin, both when it was released individually and in a current 'wildlife set'. I think it's safe to keep at least the Schleich one as a giant pangolin (at least I will in my collection and any posts I make of it)

bmathison1972 wrote:

that's a rather soft feature for interpreting in figures of that size. I don't know about Eikoh, but Schleich specifically called it a giant pangolin, both when it was released individually and in a current 'wildlife set'. I think it's safe to keep at least the Schleich one as a giant pangolin (at least I will in my collection and any posts I make of it)

This isn't a so soft feature I think, the main difference between the two species is the elongated snout for the Giant pangolin. I understand Schleich called it like that (after they first called it pangolin) but the brand also called a King penguin an Emperor penguin then changed, a Cuvier's gazelle a Thomson's one then change...

As a synoptic collector you could have a Giant pangolin and a Temninck panolin