In 1758, the Swedish botanist and zoologist Carl Linnaeus published in his Systema Naturae the binomial nomenclature – or the two-word naming – of species. Canis is the Latin word meaning "dog",[3] and under this genus he listed the dog-like carnivores including domestic dogs, wolves, and jackals. He classified the domestic dog as Canis familiaris, and on the next page he classified the wolf as Canis lupus.[4] Linnaeus considered the dog to be a separate species from the wolf because of its head, body, and cauda recurvata – its upturning tail – which is not found in any other canid.[5]
In 1999, a study of mitochondrial DNA indicated that the domestic dog may have originated from multiple wolf populations, with the dingo and New Guinea singing dog "breeds" having developed at a time when human populations were more isolated from each other.[6] In the third edition of Mammal Species of the World published in 2005, the mammalogist W. Christopher Wozencraft listed under the wolf Canis lupus some 36 wild subspecies, and proposed two additional subspecies: familiaris Linnaeus, 1758 and dingo Meyer, 1793. Wozencraft included hallstromi – the New Guinea singing dog – as a taxonomic synonym for the dingo. Wozencraft referred to the mDNA study as one of the guides in forming his decision, and listed the 38 subspecies under the biological common name of "wolf", with the nominate subspecies being the Eurasian wolf (Canis lupus lupus) based on the type specimen that Linnaeus studied in Sweden.[7] However, the classification of several of these canines as either species or subspecies has recently[when?]been challenged.
List of extant subspecies
Living subspecies recognized by MSW3 as of 2005[update][7] and divided into Old World and New World:[8]
Eurasia and Australasia
Sokolov and Rossolimo (1985) recognised nine Old World subspecies of wolf. These were C. l. lupus, C. l. albus, C. l. pallipes, C. l. cubanensis, C. l. campestris, C. l. chanco, C. l. desortorum, C. l. hattai, and C. l. hodophilax.[1] In his 1995 statistical analysis of skull morphometrics, mammalogist Robert Nowak recognized the first four of those subspecies, synonymized campestris, chanco and desortorum with C. l. lupus, but did not examine the two Japanese subspecies. In addition, he recognized C. l. communis as a subspecies distinct from C. l. lupus.[1] In 2003, Nowak also recognized the distinctiveness of C. l. arabs, C. l. hattai, C. l. italicus, and C. l. hodophilax.[9] In 2005, MSW3 included C. l. filchneri.[7] In 2003, two forms were distinguished in southern China and Inner Mongolia as being separate from C. l. chanco and C. l. filchneri and have yet to be named.[10][11]
Eurasian and Australasian subspecies of Canis lupus
A small, "desert-adapted" subspecies that is around 66 cm tall and weighs, on average, about 18 kg.[16] Its fur coat varies from short in the summer to long in the winter, possibly because of solar radiation.[17]
Long sharp face, elevated brows, broad head, large pointed ears, thick woolly pelage and very full brush of medial length. Above, dull earthy-brown; below, with the entire face and limbs yellowish-white.[21]
The fur is fulvous, on the back longer, rigid, with intermixed black and gray hairs; the throat, chest, belly, and inside of the legs pure white; head pale gray-brown; forehead grizzled with short black and gray hairs.[23]
Generally 52–60 cm tall at the shoulders and measures 117 to 124 cm from nose to tail tip. The average weight is 13 to 20 kg.[27] Fur color is mostly sandy- to reddish-brown, but can include tan patterns and can also be occasionally light brown, black or white.[28]
The domestic dog is a divergent subspecies of the gray wolf and was derived from an extinct population of Late Pleistocene wolves.[8][31][32] Through selective pressure and selective breeding, the domestic dog has developed into hundreds of varied breeds and shows more behavioral and morphological variation than any other land mammal.[33]
Worldwide in association with humans
Increasingly proposed as the species Canis familiaris but debated[34][30]
aegyptius Linnaeus, 1758,
alco C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
americanus Gmelin, 1792,
anglicus Gmelin, 1792,
antarcticus Gmelin, 1792,
aprinus Gmelin, 1792,
aquaticus Linnaeus, 1758,
aquatilis Gmelin, 1792,
avicularis Gmelin, 1792,
borealis C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
brevipilis Gmelin, 1792,
cursorius Gmelin, 1792,
domesticus Linnaeus, 1758,
extrarius Gmelin, 1792,
ferus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
fricator Gmelin, 1792,
fricatrix Linnaeus, 1758,
fuillus Gmelin, 1792,
gallicus Gmelin, 1792,
glaucus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
graius Linnaeus, 1758,
grajus Gmelin, 1792,
hagenbecki Krumbiegel, 1950,
haitensis C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
hibernicus Gmelin, 1792,
hirsutus Gmelin, 1792,
hybridus Gmelin, 1792,
islandicus Gmelin, 1792,
italicus Gmelin, 1792,
laniarius Gmelin, 1792,
leoninus Gmelin, 1792,
leporarius C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
major Gmelin, 1792,
mastinus Linnaeus, 1758,
melitacus Gmelin, 1792,
melitaeus Linnaeus, 1758,
minor Gmelin, 1792,
molossus Gmelin, 1792,
mustelinus Linnaeus, 1758,
obesus Gmelin, 1792,
orientalis Gmelin, 1792,
pacificus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
plancus Gmelin, 1792,
pomeranus Gmelin, 1792,
sagaces C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
sanguinarius C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
sagax Linnaeus, 1758,
scoticus Gmelin, 1792,
sibiricus Gmelin, 1792,
suillus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
terraenovae C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
terrarius C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
turcicus Gmelin, 1792,
urcani C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
variegatus Gmelin, 1792,
venaticus Gmelin, 1792,
The pelt is generally of a grey-fulvous colour, which reddens in summer. The belly and cheeks are more lightly coloured, and dark bands are present on the back and tail tip, and occasionally along the fore limbs.
A small subspecies with pelage shorter than that of northern wolves and with little to no underfur.[39] Fur color ranges from grayish-red to reddish-white with black tips. The dark V-shaped stripe over the shoulders is much more pronounced than in northern wolves. The underparts and legs are more or less white.[40]
For North America, in 1944 the zoologist Edward Goldman recognized as many as 23 subspecies based on morphology.[42] In 1959, E. Raymond Hall proposed that there had been 24 subspecies of lupus in North America.[43] In 1970, L. David Mech proposed that there was "probably far too many subspecific designations...in use", as most did not exhibit enough points of differentiation to be classified as separate subspecies.[44] The 24 subspecies were accepted by many authorities in 1981 and these were based on morphological or geographical differences, or a unique history.[45] In 1995, the American mammalogist Robert M. Nowak analyzed data on the skull morphology of wolf specimens from around the world. For North America, he proposed that there were only five subspecies of the wolf. These include a large-toothed Arctic wolf named C. l. arctos, a large wolf from Alaska and western Canada named C. l. occidentalis, a small wolf from southeastern Canada named C. l. lycaon, a small wolf from the southwestern U.S. named C. l. baileyi and a moderate-sized wolf that was originally found from Texas to Hudson Bay and from Oregon to Newfoundland named C. l. nubilus.[46][1]
The taxonomic classification of Canis lupus in Mammal Species of the World (3rd edition, 2005) listed 27 subspecies of North American wolf,[7] corresponding to the 24 Canis lupus subspecies and the three Canis rufus subspecies of Hall (1981).[1] The table below shows the extant subspecies, with the extinct ones listed in the following section.
The domestic dog is a divergent subspecies of the gray wolf and was derived from an extinct population of Late Pleistocene wolves.[8][31][32] Through selective pressure and selective breeding, the domestic dog has developed into hundreds of varied breeds and shows more behavioral and morphological variation than any other land mammal.[33]
aegyptius Linnaeus, 1758,
alco C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
americanus Gmelin, 1792,
anglicus Gmelin, 1792,
antarcticus Gmelin, 1792,
aprinus Gmelin, 1792,
aquaticus Linnaeus, 1758,
aquatilis Gmelin, 1792,
avicularis Gmelin, 1792,
borealis C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
brevipilis Gmelin, 1792,
cursorius Gmelin, 1792,
domesticus Linnaeus, 1758,
extrarius Gmelin, 1792,
ferus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
fricator Gmelin, 1792,
fricatrix Linnaeus, 1758,
fuillus Gmelin, 1792,
gallicus Gmelin, 1792,
glaucus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
graius Linnaeus, 1758,
grajus Gmelin, 1792,
hagenbecki Krumbiegel, 1950,
haitensis C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
hibernicus Gmelin, 1792,
hirsutus Gmelin, 1792,
hybridus Gmelin, 1792,
islandicus Gmelin, 1792,
italicus Gmelin, 1792,
laniarius Gmelin, 1792,
leoninus Gmelin, 1792,
leporarius C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
major Gmelin, 1792,
mastinus Linnaeus, 1758,
melitacus Gmelin, 1792,
melitaeus Linnaeus, 1758,
minor Gmelin, 1792,
molossus Gmelin, 1792,
mustelinus Linnaeus, 1758,
obesus Gmelin, 1792,
orientalis Gmelin, 1792,
pacificus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
plancus Gmelin, 1792,
pomeranus Gmelin, 1792,
sagaces C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
sanguinarius C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
sagax Linnaeus, 1758,
scoticus Gmelin, 1792,
sibiricus Gmelin, 1792,
suillus C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
terraenovae C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
terrarius C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
turcicus Gmelin, 1792,
urcani C. E. H. Smith, 1839,
variegatus Gmelin, 1792,
venaticus Gmelin, 1792,
Two forms are known – a small, reddish-brown colored form called the Algonquin wolf; and a slightly larger, more grayish-brown form called the Great Lakes wolf, which is an admixture of the Algonquin wolf and other gray wolves.[66]
The Algonquin form occupies central Ontario and southwestern Quebec, particularly in and nearby protected areas, such as Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario, and possibly extreme northeastern U.S. and western New Brunswick. The Great Lakes form occupies northern Ontario, Wisconsin and Minnesota, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and southern Manitoba. Overlaps of the two forms occur, with intermixing in the southern portions of northern Ontario.
canadensis de Blainville, 1843, ungavensis Comeau, 1940[67]
The Algonquin form is currently (2022) recognized as the species Canis lycaon[68] by the American Society of Mammalogists, but its taxonomy is still debated.[69]
The C. l. occidentalis of Nowak (1995) synonymizes alces, columbianus, griseoalbus, mackenzii, pambasileus and tundrarum, which is the currently (2022) recognized classification.[1]
The second largest subspecies of wolf, second in skull and tooth proportions only to occidentalis (see chart above), with fur that is black, white or a mixture of both in color.[78]
variabilis Wied-Neuwied, 1841.[83] Previously thought extinct in 1926, the Great Plains wolf's descendants were found in the northeastern region of the United States and have become federally protected since 1974.[84]
As of 2022 the classification of the more broadly defined C. l. nubilus of Nowak (1995) synonymizes beothucus, fuscus, hudsonicus, irremotus, labridorius, manningi, mogollonensis, monstrabilis and youngi, in which case the subspecies is extant in Canada (see infobox map).[1]
Has a brownish or cinnamon pelt, with gray and black shading on the back and tail. Generally intermediate in size between other North American wolf subspecies and the coyote. Like other wolves, it has almond-shaped eyes, a broad muzzle and a wide nose pad though, like the coyote, its ears are proportionately larger. It has a deeper profile, a longer and broader head than the coyote, and has a less prominent ruff than other wolves.[85]
Currently considered a distinct species, Canis rufus, but this proposal is still debated.[2] As a species, the red wolf would have the following subspecies:
The largest subspecies of all known extinct and extant wolves from Western Europe. The wolf's long bones are 10% longer than those of extant European wolves, 12% larger than those of C. l. santenaisiensis and 20% longer than those of C. l. lunellensis.[90] The teeth are robust, the posterior denticules on the lower premolars p2, p3, p4 and upper P2 and P3 are highly developed, and the diameter of the lower carnassial (m1) were larger than any known European wolf.[90]
A jet-black subspecies that is described as having been extremely similar to the red wolf in both size and weight.[103] This subspecies became extinct in 1908.[104]
A slender, short-legged subspecies with light, tawny-colored fur. The dark bands present on the forelimbs of the mainland Italian wolf were absent or poorly defined in the Sicilian wolf.
In 2019, a workshop hosted by the IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group considered the New Guinea singing dog and the dingo to be feral dogs (Canis familiaris).[125] In 2020, a literature review of canid domestication stated that modern dogs were not descended from the same Canis lineage as modern wolves, and proposed that dogs may be descended from a Pleistocene wolf closer in size to a village dog.[126] In 2021, the American Society of Mammalogists also considered dingos a feral dog (Canis familiaris) population.[30]
The Italian wolf (or Apennine wolf) was first recognised as a distinct subspecies (Canis lupus italicus) in 1921 by zoologist Giuseppe Altobello.[127] Altobello's classification was later rejected by several authors, including Reginald Innes Pocock, who synonymisedC. l. italicus with C. l. lupus.[128] In 2002, the noted paleontologist R.M. Nowak reaffirmed the morphological distinctiveness of the Italian wolf and recommended the recognition of Canis lupus italicus.[128] A number of DNA studies have found the Italian wolf to be genetically distinct.[129][130] 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.[131] In 2010, a genetic analysis indicated that a single wolf haplotype (w22) unique to the Apennine Peninsula and one of the two haplotypes (w24, w25), unique to the Iberian Peninsula, belonged to the same haplogroup as the prehistoric wolves of Europe. Another haplotype (w10) was found to be common to the Iberian peninsula and the Balkans. These three populations with geographic isolation exhibited a near lack of gene flow and spatially correspond to three glacial refugia.[132]
The taxonomic reference Mammal Species of the World (3rd edition, 2005) does not recognize Canis lupus italicus; however, NCBI/Genbank publishes research papers under that name.[133]
The Iberian wolf was first recognised as a distinct subspecies (Canis lupus signatus) in 1907 by zoologist Ángel Cabrera. The wolves of the Iberian peninsula have morphologically distinct features from other Eurasian wolves and each are considered by their researchers to represent their own subspecies.[134][135]
The Himalayan wolf is distinguished by its mitochondrial DNA, which is basal to all other wolves. The taxonomic name of this wolf is disputed, with the species Canis himalayensis being proposed based on two limited DNA studies.[137][138][139] In 2017, a study of mitochondrial DNA, X-chromosome (maternal lineage) markers and Y-chromosome (male lineage) markers found that the Himalayan wolf was genetically basal to the Holarctic grey wolf and has an association with the African golden wolf.[140]
In 2019, a workshop hosted by the IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group noted that the Himalayan wolf's distribution included the Himalayan range and the Tibetan Plateau. The group recommends that this wolf lineage be known as the "Himalayan wolf" and classified as Canis lupus chanco until a genetic analysis of the holotypes is available.[125] In 2020, further research on the Himalayan wolf found that it warranted species-level recognition under the Unified Species Concept, the Differential Fitness Species Concept, and the Biological Species Concept. It was identified as an Evolutionary Significant Unit that warranted assignment onto the IUCN Red List for its protection.[141]
The Indian plains wolf is a proposed clade within the Indian wolf (Canis lupus pallipes) that is distinguished by its mitochondrial DNA, which is basal to all other wolves except for the Himalayan wolf. The taxonomic status of this wolf clade is disputed, with the separate species Canis indica being proposed based on two limited DNA studies.[137][138] The proposal has not been endorsed because it relied on a limited number of museum and zoo samples that may not have been representative of the wild population, and a call for further fieldwork has been made.[139]
The taxonomic reference Mammal Species of the World (3rd edition, 2005) does not recognize Canis indica; however, NCBI/Genbank lists it as a new subspecies, Canis lupus indica.[142]
Southern Chinese wolf
In 2017, a comprehensive study found that the gray wolf was present across all of mainland China, both in the past and today. It exists in southern China, which refutes claims made by some researchers in the Western world that the wolf had never existed in southern China.[143][144] This wolf has not been taxonomically classified.[10][11]
In 2019, a genomic study on the wolves of China included museum specimens of wolves from southern China that were collected between 1963 and 1988. The wolves in the study formed three clades: northern Asian wolves that included those from northern China and eastern Russia, Himalayan wolves from the Tibetan Plateau, and a unique population from southern China. One specimen from Zhejiang Province in eastern China shared gene flow with the wolves from southern China; however, its genome was 12–14 percent admixed with a canid that may be the dhole or an unknown canid that predates the genetic divergence of the dhole. The wolf population from southern China is believed to still exist in that region.[145]
North America
Coastal wolves
A study of the three coastal wolves indicates a close phylogenetic relationship across regions that are geographically and ecologically contiguous, and the study proposed that Canis lupus ligoni (the Alexander Archipelago wolf), Canis lupus columbianus (the British Columbian wolf), and Canis lupus crassodon (the Vancouver Coastal Sea wolf) should be recognized as a single subspecies of Canis lupus, synonymized as Canis lupus crassodon.[146] They share the same habitat and prey species, and form one study's six identified North American ecotypes – a genetically and ecologically distinct population separated from other populations by their different types of habitat.[147][148]
The eastern wolf has two proposals over its origin. One is that the eastern wolf is a distinct species (C. lycaon) that evolved in North America, as opposed to the gray wolf that evolved in the Old World, and is related to the red wolf. The other is that it is derived from admixture between gray wolves, which inhabited the Great Lakes area and coyotes, forming a hybrid that was classified as a distinct species by mistake.[149]
The red wolf is an enigmatic taxon, of which there are two proposals over its origin. One is that the red wolf is a distinct species (C. rufus) that has undergone human-influenced admixture with coyotes. The other is that it was never a distinct species but was derived from past admixture between coyotes and gray wolves, due to the gray wolf population being eliminated by humans.[149]
^For a full set of supporting references, refer to note (a) in the phylotree at Evolution of the wolf
References
^ abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxNowak, R. M. (1995). "Another look at wolf taxonomy"(PDF). In Carbyn, L. N.; Fritts, S. H.; D. R. Seip (eds.). Ecology and conservation of wolves in a changing world: proceedings of the second North American symposium on wolves. Edmonton, Canada: Canadian Circumpolar Institute, University of Alberta. pp. 375–397.
^ abcAndrew T. Smith; Yan Xie; Robert S. Hoffmann; Darrin Lunde; John MacKinnon; Don E. Wilson; W. Chris Wozencraft, eds. (2008). A Guide to the Mammals of China. Princeton University press. pp. 416–418. ISBN978-0691099842.
^ abcWang, Yingxiang (2003). A Complete Checklist of Mammal Species and Subspecies in China (A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference). China Forestry Publishing House, Beijing, China. ISBN978-7503831317.
^Lopez, Barry (1978). Of wolves and men. New York: Scribner Classics. p. 320. ISBN978-0-7432-4936-2.
^Fred H. Harrington; Paul C. Paquet (1982). Wolves of the World: Perspectives of Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Elsevier Science. p. 474. ISBN978-0-8155-0905-9.
^Matschie, P. (1908). "Über Chinesische Säugetiere". In Filchner, W. (ed.). Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Expedition Filchner nach China und Tibet, 1903-1905. Berlin: Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn. pp. 134−242.
^Mivart, S. G. (1890). "The Common Wolf". Dogs, Jackals, Wolves, and Foxes : A Monograph of the Canidæ. London: E. H. Porter and Dulau & Co. pp. 3–17.
^Abe, Y. (1923). "Nukutei ni tisuit". Dobutsugaku Zasshi Zoological Magazine. 35: 320−386.
^Heptner, V. G.; Naumov, N. P.; Yurgenson, P. B.; Sludskii, A. A.; Chirkova, A. F.; Bannikov, A. G. (1998) [1967]. "Wolf". Mlekopitaiushchie Sovetskogo Soiuza [Mammals of the Soviet Union Vol.II Part 1a. Sirenia and Carnivora (Sea cows; Wolves and Bears)]. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Libraries and National Science. pp. 164−270.
^Fleming, Peter; Laurie Corbett; Robert Harden; Peter Thomson (2001). Managing the Impacts of Dingoes and Other Wild Dogs. Commonwealth of Australia: Bureau of Rural Sciences.
^ abFreedman, Adam H.; Gronau, Ilan; Schweizer, Rena M.; Ortega-Del Vecchyo, Diego; Han, Eunjung; Silva, Pedro M.; Galaverni, Marco; Fan, Zhenxin; Marx, Peter; Lorente-Galdos, Belen; Beale, Holly; Ramirez, Oscar; Hormozdiari, Farhad; Alkan, Can; Vilà, Carles; Squire, Kevin; Geffen, Eli; Kusak, Josip; Boyko, Adam R.; Parker, Heidi G.; Lee, Clarence; Tadigotla, Vasisht; Siepel, Adam; Bustamante, Carlos D.; Harkins, Timothy T.; Nelson, Stanley F.; Ostrander, Elaine A.; Marques-Bonet, Tomas; Wayne, Robert K.; et al. (2014). "Genome Sequencing Highlights the Dynamic Early History of Dogs". PLOS Genetics. 10 (#1): e1004016. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004016. PMC3894170. PMID24453982.
^ abThalmann, O.; Shapiro, B.; Cui, P.; Schuenemann, V. J.; Sawyer, S. K.; Greenfield, D. L.; Germonpre, M. B.; Sablin, M. V.; Lopez-Giraldez, F.; Domingo-Roura, X.; Napierala, H.; Uerpmann, H.-P.; Loponte, D. M.; Acosta, A. A.; Giemsch, L.; Schmitz, R. W.; Worthington, B.; Buikstra, J. E.; Druzhkova, A.; Graphodatsky, A. S.; Ovodov, N. D.; Wahlberg, N.; Freedman, A. H.; Schweizer, R. M.; Koepfli, K.- P.; Leonard, J. A.; Meyer, M.; Krause, J.; Paabo, S.; et al. (2013). "Complete Mitochondrial Genomes of Ancient Canids Suggest a European Origin of Domestic Dogs". Science. 342 (#6160): 871–4. Bibcode:2013Sci...342..871T. doi:10.1126/science.1243650. hdl:10261/88173. PMID24233726. S2CID1526260.
^Serpell, James (2016-12-08). The domestic dog : its evolution, behavior and interactions with people. Serpell, James, 1952-, Barrett, Priscilla (Second ed.). Cambridge, United Kingdom. p. 8. ISBN9781107024144. OCLC957339355.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Serpell, James (2016-12-08). The domestic dog : its evolution, behavior and interactions with people. Serpell, James, 1952-, Barrett, Priscilla (Second ed.). Cambridge, United Kingdom. p. 8. ISBN9781107024144. OCLC957339355.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Young, Stanley P.; Goldman, Edward A. (1944). The Wolves of North America, Part II. New York, Dover Publications, Inc., pp. 427-29
^Wilson, Paul J; Grewal, Sonya; Lawford, Ian D; Heal, Jennifer NM; Granacki, Angela G; Pennock, David; Theberge, John B; Theberge, Mary T; Voigt, Dennis R; Waddell, Will; Chambers, Robert E; Paquet, Paul C; Goulet, Gloria; Cluff, Dean; White, Bradley N (2000). "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 (#12): 2156. doi:10.1139/z00-158.
^Nowak, R.M. 1983. A perspective on the taxonomy of wolves in North America. In: Carbyn, L.N., ed. Wolves in Canada and Alaska. Canadian Wildlife Service, Report Series 45:lO-19.
^Young, Stanley P.; Goldman, Edward A. (1944). The Wolves of North America, Part II. New York, Dover Publications, Inc., pp. 441-45
^Mech, L. (1970). "Appendix A – Subspecies of wolves – North American". The Wolf: The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species. Doubleday. ISBN978-0-307-81913-0. Great Plains wolf; buffalo wolf; loafer. This is another extinct subspecies. It once extended throughout the Great Plains from southern Manitoba and Saskatchewan southward to northern Texas.
^Goldfuss, G. A. (1823). "5-Ueber den Hölenwolf (Canis spelaeus) (About the Cave wolf)". Osteologische Beiträge zur Kenntniss verschiedener Säugethiere der Vorwelt (Osteological contributions to different knowledge Beast of the ancients). Vol. 3. Nova Acta Physico-Medica Academiea Caesarae Leopoldino-Carolinae Naturae Curiosorum. pp. 451–455.
^Ishiguro, Naotaka; Inoshima, Yasuo; Shigehara, Nobuo; Ichikawa, Hideo; Kato, Masaru (2010). "Osteological and Genetic Analysis of the Extinct Ezo Wolf (Canis Lupus Hattai) from Hokkaido Island, Japan". Zoological Science. 27 (#4): 320–4. doi:10.2108/zsj.27.320. PMID20377350. S2CID11569628.
^Nowak, R.M. 1995. Another look at wolf taxonomy. Pages 375-397 in L.H. Carbyn, S.H. Fritts, D.R. Seip, editors. Ecology and Conservation of Wolves in a Changing World. Canadian Circumpolar Institute, Edmonton, Canada.[1] (refer to page 396)
^ abcWalker, Brett (2008). The Lost Wolves of Japan. University of Washington Press.
^Shigehara N, Hongo H (2000) Dog and wolf remains of the earliest Jomon period at Torihama site in Fukui Prefecture. Torihama-Kaizuka-Kennkyu 2: 23–40 (in Japanese)
^ abAlvares, F.; Bogdanowicz, W.; Campbell, L.A.D.; Godinho, R.; Hatlauf, J.; Jhala, Y.V.; Kitchener, A. C.; Koepfli, K.-P.; Krofel, M.; Moehlman, P. D.; Senn, H.; Sillero-Zubiri, C.; Viranta, S.; Werhahn, G. (2019). Old World Canis spp. with taxonomic ambiguity: Workshop conclusions and recommendations, 28th–30th May 2019(PDF) (Report). Vairão, Portugal: IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos. Archived(PDF) from the original on 2020-02-12. Retrieved 6 March 2020.
^Wayne, R. K.; Lehman, N.; Allard, M. W.; Honeycutt, R. L. (1992). "Mitochondrial DNA Variability of the Gray Wolf: Genetic Consequences of Population Decline and Habitat Fragmentation". Conservation Biology. 6 (#4): 559–569. Bibcode:1992ConBi...6..559W. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.06040559.x.
^Randi, E.; Lucchini, V.; Christensen, M. F.; Mucci, N.; Funk, S. M.; Dolf, G.; Loeschcke, V. (2000). "Mitochondrial DNA Variability in Italian and East European Wolves: Detecting the Consequences of Small Population Size and Hybridization". Conservation Biology. 14 (#2): 464–473. Bibcode:2000ConBi..14..464R. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98280.x. S2CID86614655.
^V. LUCCHINI, A. GALOV and E. RANDI Evidence of genetic distinction and long-term population decline in wolves (Canis lupus) in the Italian Apennines. Molecular Ecology (2004) 13, 523–536. abstract online
^Vos, J. (2000). "Food habits and livestock depredation of two Iberian wolf packs (Canis lupus signatus) in the north of Portugal". Journal of Zoology. 251 (#4): 457–462. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2000.tb00801.x.
^Schweizer, Rena M.; Vonholdt, Bridgett M.; Harrigan, Ryan; Knowles, James C.; Musiani, Marco; Coltman, David; Novembre, John; Wayne, Robert K. (2016). "Genetic subdivision and candidate genes under selection in North American grey wolves". Molecular Ecology. 25 (#1): 380–402. Bibcode:2016MolEc..25..380S. doi:10.1111/mec.13364. PMID26333947. S2CID7808556.
^Schweizer, Rena M.; Robinson, Jacqueline; Harrigan, Ryan; Silva, Pedro; Galverni, Marco; Musiani, Marco; Green, Richard E.; Novembre, John; Wayne, Robert K. (2016). "Targeted capture and resequencing of 1040 genes reveal environmentally driven functional variation in grey wolves". Molecular Ecology. 25 (#1): 357–79. Bibcode:2016MolEc..25..357S. doi:10.1111/mec.13467. PMID26562361. S2CID17798894.