Talk:Canidae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Dogs
Dogs Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

The Falkland Island wolf is called the Falkland Island fox on the fox page. Which is it? Do me need a redirect? (after someone writes an article, of course!) Rmhermen 15:45, Nov 8, 2003 (UTC)

Both names are in use, but in its appearance this animal is rather a fox than a wolf. I will change it on this page from "wolf" to "fox". If anybody should ever write an article about this animal, a redirect would be a good idea. -- Baldhur 20:52, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Vandal

Theres "I ROCK YALL STINK" on the top of this page (right above contents box) and I cant find it in the wiki code. Should be removed User:Mdavidbaird Mdavidbaird (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Found it and removed... Mdavidbaird (talk) 00:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Carolina Dog

Anyone know whether the Carolina Dog has been determined to be its own species or subspecies, a la dingos, vs simply a feral line of domestic dog? Elf | Talk 23:56, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

And how about New Guinea Singing Dog? Thanks again. Elf | Talk 00:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I believe both are feral dog lines, but dingo's are as well, and they are placed in a seperate subspecies. So I do not know what the best is for singing and carolina dogs. DaMatriX 17:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I think I remember reading something about the Carolina dogs (I'm a relatively new resident in N.C.), and I believe that while there may be some feral dogs of that breed (there certainly are plenty of other feral dogs that were probably bought at a pet shop and then turned loose to fend for themselves, breed among themselves, etc.), there are also plenty of them that live nice domestic lives. Maybe Googling them would turn up some responsible reporting on where they came from, how long them have been a recognizable breed, etc. I've seen pictures of them and seem to recall that they are generally yellow or light brown, of medium size, and carry their tails arching over their backs. I've never heard of them being a problem anywhere in North Carolina, and I got the feeling from the newspaper article that people generally like them. P0M 05:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I did a whole bunch of googling and wasn't able to find a good answer. Maybe someone else with cleverer search criteria would have more luck. Elf | Talk 18:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] THE PAGE NEEDS HELP!

There are a lot of words in there I don't recognize that are not linked. Since I majored in biology (environmental - evolutional) that's a bad sign. I am so out of time or I would certainly do it.

--John Meghly ("Magely")Xgenei 04:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Syntax help also needed

The current text has:

The Domestic Dog is listed by some authorities as Canis familiaris and others (including the Smithsonian Institution and the American Society of Mammalogists) as a subspecies of the Wolf (i.e., Canis lupus familiaris); the Red Wolf may or may not be a full species; and the Dingo, which is variously classified as Canis lupus dingo, Canis dingo and Canis familiaris dingo

What is the end of the clause about the Dingo supposed to be? It could be, "is extinct," or maybe "is meaner than a bear." Those are probably guesses, but readers should not be forced to guess. Whoever wrote it should finish the job. P0M 05:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Photo of dogs copulating

I removed this link (some anon removed it once before)

I didn't think that linking to an individual picture seems apropriate, someone should upload the picture instead (although the license on that photo is questionable) This website derives income from ads, and the deep linking avoids the popups and banners (WHICH IS GOOD IMHO!), but the site owners probably do not appriciate it. - Trysha (talk) 05:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

That photo, incidentally, has been around the 'net a couple dozen times. The license is beyond "questionable"; it's simply impossible to identify an original source now. For what it's worth, though, the image is rather fuzzy. Perhaps someone with proper license to a good sequence of photos could kindly donate them to Wiki? --Zetawoof 11:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vulpini

While I know this is an encyclopedia, and thus has no room for opinion, I have a deep interest in the connection between Canines and Vulpines. I personally believe that foxes and dogs are related, but not as closely as sharing the family of canidae. Are Vulpines a subdivision of Canidae? How recent is the research into the clades of Canini and Vulpini? Please, if anyone has any information, please update! AKismet 05:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

The dog genome paper (Lindblad-Toh et al., 2005, Nature 438:803-819) contained a dog phylogeny that had three clades of dogs. The first contained Urocyon, the second the classic foxes, and the third contained two subclades. The first of these subclades contains the South American dogs and the other Canis dhole, and cape hunting dogs. Raccoon dog and bat-eared fox are a bit enigmatic, but represent fairly early splits tied to either grey or Vulpes foxes. --Aranae 03:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
The Canidae family split into three major branches about 40 mya: Hesperocyominae (40-15 mya), Borophaginae (34-2.5 mya) and Caninae. The first two are extinct, so it is more proper to refer to the Caninae lineage. Foxes, jackals, coyotes and then dogs all branched off from Caninae. The subfamily Caninae started with Leptocyon, an ancestral species the size of a small fox. It first appeared in the early Oligocene (34–32 mya) and persisted through the late Miocene (12–9 mya). Wolf-like canids, including domestic dogs, gray wolves, coyotes, and jackals; red-fox-like canids of the Old and New World, including red foxes, kit foxes, bat-eared fox and raccoon dog (all have a long, separate evolutionary history), but the fossil record and genetic distances indicate that their divisions began about 10-7 mya (Wayne, 1993). By the late Miocene (9–5 mya), fox-sized species had a wide range in North America after the extinctions of all small Borophagines. The true fox clade, Tribe Vulpini, emerged at this time and diversified into both Vulpes and Urocyon (their extinct relatives). Vulpes species were widespread in Eurasia during the Pliocene (Wayne, 2004). Dogs evolved from Caninae wolves about 10 mya but then bred back to wolves more than one time throughout their history as they sometimes do today. There are at least four major dog clades. See: http://www.nhm.org/expeditions/rrc/wang/documents/Wangetal2004canidclassificationCAP_000.pdf
Vulpines are a subdivision of Canidae but more proper, a subdivision of Caninae. Phylogenetic chart at: http://www.nhm.org/exhibitions/dogs/evolution/Canid%20evolution_files/Phylogenetic%20tree.htm Valich 17:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Canines

Some time ago I posted a note at Category talk:Canines that the category should probably be called Category:canids instead since it's in reference to the family Canidae not the subfamily Caninae. Recently there has been a bit of a resurgence of discussion there so I thought I'd mention it here. --Aranae 03:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Like I also said on that talk page, I strongly support the proposed change too. --Arny 21:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Urocyon as basal taxon

Should Urocyon really be lumped in the same 'tribe' as the true foxes?

See:

Lindblad-Toh et al., 2005, Nature 438:803-819

Wayne, Robert K., “Molecular evolution of the dog family”, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, v. 9, 1993

i think this is still pertinent. Uther, you revised per MSW3 -- what say ye? is Urocyon considered Vulpini? - Metanoid (talk, email) 18:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Relationships between North American Canis species

DNA studies show that the Red and Eastern Candian Wolves are related to each other, forming a two-species clade. Genetics have yet to reveal to relationships among the Gray Wolf and Coyote.

Wilson, P.J., S. Grewal, I. Lawford, J. Heal, A. Granacki, D. Pennock, J. Theberge, D. Voigt, B. Chambers, P.C. Paquet, G. Goulet, D. Cluff and B.N. White. DNA profiles of the eastern Canadian wolf and the red wolf provide evidence for a common evolutionary history independent of the gray wolf. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78: 2156-2166.

Which DNA studies, published where? — Catherine\talk 19:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Some of the Red Wolves are hybrid species. The same with coyotes. Male wolves sometimes interbreed with female coyotes, but not vice versa because the male coyotes are smaller than the female wolves. Valich 17:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Transfer a portion of the article?

I think that the section of this article concerning copulation should be moved to the 'Notes on Particular Species' portion of Non-human animal sexuality. There's no reason to go into such graphic detail here; I can't find another family article that does it. --JesseBHolmes 06:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Agree. I'm sure it was put here as some kind of joke, a subtle(?) form of vandalism. I'm moving it. --Shyland 18:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

...I'm not sure the information is totally accurate anyway, at least for some species of dogs. The penis seems to be WAY too far forward on the underside of many dogs I've seen, to allow them to get ass-to-ass. But I'm transferring it unchanged just the same.--Shyland 18:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: The sections on different animals in the Animal Sexuality article were about observed sexual behavior (gay/straight, sex-related behavior etc.) not mechanical details. So this information didn't seem like a good "fit" (haha.) So the net result is this section is deleted, not transferred. You can find it in History if you can think of a good place to put it. --Shyland 18:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Text retrieved and merged into canine reproduction. The information is relevant to canids, and seems accurate, it's not a "joke" as such. Will put into edit summary format though; not essential to have it in depth here. FT2 (Talk | email) 02:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New photo(s)?

The only photo with this article is currently a "head shot" of a coyote. It could use more, at least a picture showing the animal's full body. --Shyland 19:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CTVT: Species of Single Celled Canines... ?

There was a study published this year that proved that the cancerlike canine disease canine transmissible venereal tumour (CTVT) is actually single cancer cells from some ancestral canid that left that individual and now exist as single-celled parasitic organisms using other canids as hosts:


http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn9713


So, in my interpretation, this can only represent a newly discovered animal species which is genetically a type a canine and should be included in the canidae phylogeny.

That it is a chordata with no spinal chord, a mammal with no milk, and reproduces asexually, incidentally, means the entire concept of animal classes has to be reworked so that things like spinal chords are only an optional alternate phenotype for chordata, milk is optional for mammals, etc., and all these classes can alternately exist in a single celled variant (just as bluegreen algae can exist monocellularly or colonially).

Hmmmmm.

The article you cite is about the possible genetic transmission of cancer cells in dogs. The Wiki Canidae article does not address dog health, although there is an article on Canine cancer detection where reference to this information might be appropriate. The above article states that the CTVT cancer "probably originated from a cancer in a single wolf, or a dog closely related to a wolf, which lived between 250 and 1000 years ago." No new Canidae species has been identified. Valich 17:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dogs eaten in Canada?

Under the 'Classification' heading, the first line reads thusly:

Note that some dogs in canada are being eaten right now...

Excuse me? The fact that Canada should be capitalised aside, I really don't see how this is relevant to the classification of Canids! Ailahusky 05:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism; fixed. Zetawoof(ζ) 07:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chupacabras

Why was my edit removed that the chupacabra is a member of the canidae family? If you go to the extremely legitimate chupacabra wikipedia page, it specifically says that the chupacabra belongs to the family (and links to the page). Discuss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.188.240 (talk) 03:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cladogram

Shouldn't the Lycalopex entry in the cladogram actualy be Pseudalopex? DaMatriX (talk) 19:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Updating taxonomy

I will be updating the Canidae taxonomy and common names to match Mammal Species of the World (3rd ed, 2005) as follows:

I will hold off for a few days for comments. Since I'm posting this in multiple places, please contact me on my talk page if you have any concerns. I'll wait a week to give folks time to comment. -