Just came across this excellent article, it's a real good read.
http://theconversation.com/yes-easte...facebookbutton
Printable View
Just came across this excellent article, it's a real good read.
http://theconversation.com/yes-easte...facebookbutton
This does contradict all the other studies that have been done by other "experts " in this field over the last few years.Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty55
Who or which one of these studies are we to believe???
Finally some reality. This is what I have been trying to tell the southern guys for years, wolves eat coyotes. We have both in our are and the only time the packs are close together is when the wolves decide to make a meal out of a pack of yotes.
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Explain how wolf DNA shows up in Eastern coyote populations, as does dog DNA. All articles point to coyote/wolf hybridization at some point.Quote:
Originally Posted by oaknut
Are they a new species ? I don’t buy into that. Kinda like the crap we hear about the Algonquian wolf being a sub-species that needs protection !!! DNA studies have shown them to be just a coyote/wolf hybrid.....
The article explains that, to what I believe to be true at least, and I could be wrong. I base my thoughts off of what is see out there. At one point the wolves were so scarce they bred with whatever was around (ugly chick theory) be it a dog, coyote or whatever would hold still long enough, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
The DNA testing the government paid millions for on the Algonquin wolf showed strong counts of domesticated dog DNA.
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Nice read thanks for posting
I'm a bit puzzled by the headline "Coywolf - no such thing" and then the following text:
"Coyotes in the Northeast are mostly (60%-84%) coyote, with lesser amounts of wolf (8%-25%) and dog (8%-11%). Start moving south or east and this mixture slowly changes. Virginia animals average more dog than wolf (85%:2%:13% coyote:wolf:dog) while coyotes from the Deep South had just a dash of wolf and dog genes mixed in (91%:4%:5% coyote:wolf:dog). Tests show that there are no animals that are just coyote and wolf (that is, a coywolf), and some eastern coyotes that have almost no wolf at all. "
That would seem to indicate that there was something.
Previous research from Maine indicated coyotes there were 30% wolf.
If you go back to the 1920's, there were not coyotes in Ontario, and up until 1959, no wolves outside of Algonquin park.
So I'd guess the mixing took place post 1959. I don't see how you can have the mixed genetics but not call them Coy-wolves.
The article also states "[COLOR=#383838]All eastern coyotes show some evidence of past hybridization, but there is no sign that they are still actively mating with dogs or wolves.not
The coyote, wolf and dog are three separate species that would very much prefer[COLOR=#383838] to breed with each other.
However, biologically speaking, they are similar enough that interbreeding is possible. "
But there is no evidence that they are *not* either. Up here in Renfrew county the coyotes are big and the wolves are small - it's just shades of grey betweeen the two, and to think they wouldn't interbreed is a bit strange, given we have DNA evidence of it occuring in the past.
Given the mixed DNA providing evidence that interbreeding has occurred in the past, the author's assertion that this does not occur is just a bit far out there.
My take, just another researcher look for something else that needs more study and more grant money.
The one best way to figure that out is to follow the funding for the "studies". Finding out who paid for them and what the results of each particular "study" was can be very telling when compared to each set of "theories" each one advanced. Follow the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
BINGO !!!Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
The only thing I got from this article is that the title is confusing and the author goes on to contradict himself.
I think it's clear that most people/biologists agree that coyotes and wolves have become "hybrid" over X-amount of years with some introduction of domestic dog tossed in.
It appears that the only thing interesting about this article is that the author just doesn't like the name attached to the species.
Does it really matter?
Dogs are descendant from wolves, so dogs share wolf DNA too, so the fact that there is a mashup makes perfect sense. The article is useless really, I am just saying that there are tons of different sub-species and variants of wolf around the world and they can be intertwined too.Quote:
Originally Posted by smokin'stoegie
I remember grandpa talking about growing up just outside the park, this would have been the late 30s. He said that they had small wolves, they called them brush wolves. They also had larger wolves, they called them timber wolves. He also said that they introduced larger wolves into the park, he actually drove the truck in to deliver them, this would have been the late 40s or early 50s. I do not believe the coyotes had made it to the park in the 30s and early 40s, so to me there were a small wolf, a large wolf and some introduced wolf. No biological evidence here but grandpa was not a guy who talked nonsense, his stories were never tall tales and he would tell you if it was something he thought vs something he saw.
We shoot a lot of coyotes. I have seen all different colour phases, from black to red. Some the same colour as a golden retriever. I’ve also seen some smaller yotes that have the finer features of an eastern coyote. I’ve also seen two or three each year that look more like a wolf, heavy body, huge feet and quite a bit longer than a regular coyote. They also have a similar head and muzzle as a wolf. A couple last year were too large to put on a coyote skin stretcher. There’s no doubt we are seeing different genetic variants. Call them coywolf or whatever...there is obviously a difference.
The posted article does contradict the no coywolf theory...I subscribe to the coywolf hybrid theory, only because of the animals I have actually laid hands on...
X2 ^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo D
The carbon taxes should clean up all those genetic stews right? Maybe JT will give a million dollar grant to Suzuki/CBC? That would help too.......Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
I think the main point the author is making here is that there is always some domestic dog dna mixed in, none of the testing has found an animal with only coyote and wolf dna, hence the reasoning to not call them a coywolf.
Domestic dogs are 99% wolf I remember reading somewhere.
I wouldn't doubt a male lone wolf shacked up with a few coyotes over the last couple hundred years.
Protecting these mutts because they are a "rare subspecies' is hogwash. They need managed like every other predator.
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Found the same data point as SongDog-
1. In general, the domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the grey wolf, from which it differs by only ~0.04% in nuclear coding-DNA sequence, and no dog [mitochondrial DNA] sequences have been found that show closer kinship to other canid species. This similarity is so profound that hybridization often occurs between dogs and wolves
The science seems to line up pretty well.
All the BS and semantics layered on top are what don't line up. You can call the damn thing a "fruitloop" if you want. All scientists are in agreement that the damn fruitloop contains a lot of hybrid canid DNA.
I saw that article a few weeks back, it is a good read. Not sure I agree or disagree with the author, but the one thing I took away from it that I can NOT deny is, I don't really care! Lets go shoot some coyotes! Or what ever they are!
Attachment 39713Attachment 39714Attachment 39715Attachment 39716Attachment 39717
This thing is massive. Very big prints ( palm sized ).
Maybe it’s a coydolf, or coywog !!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by firedeptlt
"Canis soupus."
Biologists prefer the term "eastern coyote", since non-hunters who run into these animals exaggerate their size a lot of the time, and "coywolf" as an urban animal frankly sounds scary. They generally have around 30% wolf DNA, but there are a lot of differing viewpoints and discussions can get pretty heated even among experts.
Gotta say, from the standpoint of someone who's returning to school for biology, who's in contact with the experts, and who's new at hunting, this anecdotal evidence is so crucial.
Science is missing out if it doesn't listen to hunters and trappers. Recently, there was a big scientific study on wolverines in Alberta that relied heavily on knowledge from trappers. It's too much of a vast area for non-trappers.
In my area, the GTA, I've seen a lot of reddish eastern yotes, and a few blondes. Rarely black/melanistic, but the wolves around Algonquin do sometimes grow dark coats. You also occasionally get some weird coat patterns like this guy. https://i.pinimg.com/736x/0c/22/c2/0...7b7b1cae11.jpg
I get my local coyote/wolf information from scientists and wildlife photographers, which obviously has its limitations. I get my American coyote/wolf information from scientists, photographers, trappers, hunters, and taxidermists. I'm starting my own network here in the GTA. If you shoot or trap coyote, I'd be interested in seeing the coat colours and the size of the animal. Might be interested in buying pelts and/or skulls to see the size/morphology differences. Hit me up! Sorry that I missed a few PMs, I was just away from the site for a while.