Talk:Eastern Timber Wolf

message: I like the information in the Eastern Wolf page, but I think it would be better merged with Eastern Timber Wolf, which is lacking for information. 
The Eastern Canadian Wolf, canis lycaon, and the Eastern Timber Wolf, canis lupus lycaon, are two different wolf species according to recent research. Eastern Wolf and Algonquin Wolf were both common names being thrown around before "Eastern Canadian Wolf" gained a measure of acceptance and is now used in the majority of scientific research since 2003. The Wolves of Algonquin Park PHVA Final Report, PDF notes many of these changes (pages 5-7 are of particular note). See more information on the Eastern Canadian Wolf on the Red Wolf page. Additionally, the page on the Gray Wolf links to both the Eastern Timber Wolf and the Eastern Canadian Wolf.
I would like to make a special note that this information is going to be particularly fluid for the next 10 or 20 years as taxonomic distinctions are made and it is going to be particularly hard to keep up with research due to the myriad of names that will be used as researchers attempt to distinguish various wolf populations according to genetic testing. This information will change, but we should all try to be diligent in trying to keep up with new research.
--Waterspyder 03:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Merge 

message: If the Eastern Canadian Wolf and the Eastern Timber Wolf are recognized as separate species, then only one of them will retain the lycaon designation.    This would be the one that matches the type.  Based on the papers cited here that looks like it might be the Eastern Canadian Wolf.  The Eastern Canadian Wolf would then require another designations. If it matches canadensis de Blainville 1843 or ungavensis Comeau 1940, then it would adopt one of those names.  Otherwise it stil requires naming and should be designated as Canis lupus ssp. or Canis lupus ssp. indeterminate  in the article.  It might also be a variant of C. l. nubilus.  My point is that both varieties are definitely not named lycaon simultaneously.  The use of lycaon for both in these articles is probably an artifact of multiple editors/sources.  --Aranae 05:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a disputed tag.  There is simply no way that both of these forms of wolves can have the same name and my earlier post does not seem to have been noticed.  --Aranae 16:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the problem is that the scientific community is trying to sort it out. Right now the Timber wolf is Canis Lupus Lycaon (Genus, Species, Subspecies), and the Eastern Canadian Wolf is Canis Lycaon (Genus, Species), these are not the same scientific designation and are unique names for each. The Eastern Canadian wolf is not a Canis Lupus (or a part of the grey wolf family), it is actually closer to the Red Wolf family and therefore "Lupus" appears nowhere in its classification. Lycaon was retain in the name because for close to 200 years, it was thought that the Eastern Canadian Wolf... or Wolves of Algonquin Park, were Timber Wolves. The article isn't perfect, but I am going to remove the tag since the reason the the factual accuracy is not correct.
--Waterspyder 15:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's simply impossible for the reasons I stated above.  ICZN rules do not allow it.  The name lycaon will only go with one of the two, end of story.  This is determined by identifying the type specimen.  If it is a Timber Wolf, then that subspecies will be named Canis lupus lycaon and a new name will be given to the Eastern Canadian Wolf.  If the type is an Eastern Canadian Wolf then that species will be named Canis lycaon and a new subspecies name will be given to the Timber Wolf.  I'm sorry, but without a citation for why both taxa can have the same name, I'm going to have to restore the tags.  Right now we're spreading inaccurate information.  --Aranae 16:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I think a starting point is to determine the authority for both C. lupus lycaon and C. lycaon.  If they are both Schreber, 1775 then there's clearly a problem with priority.  --Aranae 01:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's what it comes down to: species and subspecies are both considered "species-group" names under the ICZN (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature), and within a genus all species-group names must be unique.  This is why you can't have C. lupus lycaon and C. lycaon.  Priority is irrelevant in this case; what matters for the purpose of who gets the name, as noted above, is whether the original description was based on what would now be considered the timber wolf or the eastern Canadian wolf.  Since descriptions of the time usually didn't designate types and may not have the detail necessary to separate them, this may be a problem if it's really decided to be a separate species (although that seems unlikely to me).  KarlM 05:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''lycaon'' priority and accuracy tag

message: Is it true that timber wolves bark a lot?  76.18.92.82 04:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  query 

message: Instead of cluttering up things with the "Disputed tag," I wish people would just fix the problem and put a footnote on it.  That way people don't get distracted while reading the encyclopedia.
WriterHound 04:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed tag