Canis lupus has 40 subspecies currently described, including the dingo, Canis
lupus dingo, and the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, and many subspecies of
wolf throughout the Northern Hemisphere. The nominate subspecies is Canis lupus
lupus. Canis lupus is assessed as least concern
by the IUCN, as its relatively widespread range and stable population
trend mean that the species, at global level, does not meet, or nearly meet,
any of the criteria for the threatened categories. However, some local
populations are classified as endangered, and some subspecies are
endangered or extinct. Biological taxonomy is not fixed, and
placement of taxa is reviewed as a result of new research. The current
categorization of subspecies of Canis lupus is shown below. Also included are
synonyms, which are now discarded duplicate or incorrect namings, or in
the case of the domestic dog synonyms, old taxa referring to subspecies of
domestic dog which, when the dog was declared a subspecies itself, had
nowhere else to go. Common names are given but may vary, as they have no set
meaning. Geographical variations
Wolves show a great deal of polymorphism geographically, though they can
interbreed. The Zoological Gardens of London for example once successfully
managed to mate a male European wolf to an Indian female, resulting in a pup
bearing an almost exact likeness to its sire.
= Europe = European wolves tend to have fur with
less soft wool intermixed than American wolves. Their heads are narrower, their
ears longer, higher placed and somewhat closer to each other. Their loins are
more slender, their legs longer, their feet narrower, and their tails more
thinly clothed with fur. Pelt color in European wolves ranges from white,
cream, red, grey and black, sometimes with all colors combined. Wolves in
central Europe tend to be more richly colored than those in Northern Europe.
Eastern European wolves tend to be shorter and more heavily built than
northern Russian ones. = North America =
North American wolves are generally the same size as European wolves, but have
shorter legs, larger, rounder heads, broader, more obtuse muzzles, and a
sensible depression at the union of nose and forehead, which is more arched and
broad. Their ears are shorter and have a more conical form. They typically lack
the black mark on the forelegs, as is the case in European races. They have
long and comparatively fine fur, mixed with a shorter wooly hair, and are more
robust. Fur color in American wolves ranges from white, black, red, yellow,
brown, grey, and grizzled skins, and others representing every shade between,
although usually each locality has its prevailing tint. There are pronounced
differences in North American wolves of different localities; wolves from Texas
and New Mexico are comparatively slim animals with small teeth. Mexican wolves
in particular resemble some European wolves in stature, though their heads
are usually broader, their necks thicker, their ears longer and their
tails shorter. Wolves of the central and northern chains of the Rocky Mountains
and coastal ranges are more formidable animals than the more southern plains
wolves, and resemble Russian and Scandinavian wolves in size and
proportions. List of subspecies
= Canis lupus subspecies = Subspecies as of 2005:
= Disputed subspecies and species = Two subspecies not mentioned in the list
above are the Italian wolf and the Iberian wolf. The wolves of the Apennine
and Iberian peninsulas have morphologically distinct features from
other Eurasian wolves and each are considered by their researchers to
represent their own subspecies. In 2004, the genetic distinction of the Italian
wolf subspecies was supported by analysis which consistently assigned all
the wolf genotypes of a sample in Italy to a single group. This population also
showed a unique mitochondrial DNA control-region haplotype, the absence of
private alleles and lower heterozygosity at microsatellite loci, as compared to
other wolf populations. In 2010, a genetic analysis indicated that the
single Apeninne wolf haplotype, and one of the two Iberian haplotypes, belonged
to the same haplogroup as the prehistoric wolves of Europe. The
taxonomic reference Mammal Species of the World does not recognize Canis lupus
signatus nor Canis lupus italicus, however NCBI/Genbank does list Canis
lupus signatus and publishes research papers under that name Canis lupus
italicus. In 2007, genetic research indicated that
two haplotypes of the Indian wolf populations located in the Indian
subcontinent may represent a distinct species. Similar results were obtained
for the Himalayan wolf, which is traditionally placed under the Tibetan
wolf. A call for more fieldwork has been made. The taxonomic reference Mammal
Species of the World does not recognize Canis himalayensis nor Canis indica,
however NCBI/Genbank does list Canis lupus himalayensis and Canis lupus
indica. The red wolf is listed above, despite
being considered a distinct species by many other authorities, including the US
Fish and Wildlife Service, the main government authority of red wolves. Some
studies have concluded that red wolves, along with eastern wolves, evolved in
North America between 150,000 and 300,000 years ago independent from gray
wolves in Eurasia. The taxonomic reference Mammal Species of the World
does not recognize Canis rufus, however NCBI/Genbank lists it.
The eastern wolf is also considered a distinct species by the USFWS. However,
this classification is still controversial and a review stated that
it was "not well-supported by best available science." The taxonomic
reference Mammal Species of the World does not recognize Canis lycaon, however
NCBI/Genbank lists it. As of 2005, the African wolf is listed
as a subspecies of the golden jackal by the third and current edition of Mammal
Species of the World. In the early 2010s research disputed this, as mtDNA of
wolf-like canids in various locations in northern, western, and eastern Africa
more closely resemble those of gray wolves than golden jackals. In 2015, a
series of analyses on the species' mitochondrial DNA and nuclear genome
indicated that it was distinct from both the golden jackal and the grey wolf, and
more closely related to grey wolves and coyotes.
In 2009, the Tibetan wolf was found to be genetically distinct enough to
propose a separate species. In 2011, another genetic study found that the
Tibetan wolf might be an archaic pedigree within the wolf subspecies,
however the study defined Canis lupus laniger as the Tibetan wolf distinct
from Canis lupus chanco the Mongolian wolf. In 2013, a major genetic study of
dogs and wolves included the DNA sequences of 2 Tibetan wolves but then
"excluded two aberrant modern wolf sequences from this analysis since their
phylogenetic positioning suggests only a distant relationship to all extant gray
wolves and their taxonomic classification as a member of Canis
lupus or a separate sub-species is a matter of debate." The taxonomic
reference Mammal Species of the World does not recognize Canis lupus laniger,
however NCBI/Genbank lists it as the Tibetan wolf, and separately Canis lupus
chanco as the Mongolian wolf. See also
California Wolf Center List of gray wolf populations by country
References External links
Canis lupus on the ITIS Citations for Mammal Species of the
World, as a PDF Ancient origin and evolution of the
Indian wolf including discussion on naming.
Wolf subspecies list with photos and maps
Animal Corner, UK list of wolves