Search USGSSearch

USGS · 5210777

Systematics of wolves in eastern North America

Abstract

Cranial morphology of Recent wolves throughout northern and western North America is remarkably consistent. Statistical analysis indicates the presence of four subspecies of gray wolf (Canis lupus) there, which are always distinguishable from the sympatric coyote (C. latrans). A fifth gray wolf subspecies, lycaon, occurs in southeastern Canada, and the red wolf (C. rufus), is found in the southeast. During the early 1900s the coyote moved east of the prairies and hybridized with the native wolves, thereby creating much confusion. Nonetheless, analysis of every available specimen of wild Canis, dating from before the coyote invasion in the region east of the Mississippi River and south of Wisconsin, Michigan, and New York, does indicate the presence of a small wolf, distinct from the coyote and showing the statistical consistency of other wolf populations. That series also has close affinity to specimens of the red wolf collected in Louisiana and Missouri prior to 1925, and to Pleistocene fossils from the east. There was a sharp line of morphological distinction between the wolves of the eastern United States and those of the prairies, but a closer approach by the former to the subspecies lycaon, which in turn intergrades with gray wolf populations in western Ontario and Minnesota. Although gaps in our knowledge remain, a reasonable hypothesis is that the entire forested region from southeastern Canada to the Gulf Coast originally was inhabited by populations of small wolves, with a subspecific or specific line just south of the eastern Great Lakes. There is no evidence that southeastern North America ever was occupied by large gray wolves and coyotes that hybridized to form the red wolf.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R. Nowak, N.E. Federoff. 1996. Systematics of wolves in eastern North America. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/5210777

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Loma salmonae and related species

Loma salmonae is a microsporidium that infects Pacific salmon and causes a gill inflammatory syndrome known as microsporidial gill disease of salmon. This disease has been mostly associated with netpen-farmed Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) in British Columbia, Canada. Clinical, diagnostic, pathological aspects of disease, as well as approaches for disease avoidance in salmon aquaculture are discussed. A laboratory infection model in rainbow trout was used to determine life cycle-stages, transmission dynamics, pathophysiology, influence of temperature, and to test therapeutics applicable to aquaculture. This experimental model has been informative on various approaches of disease control, including the development of a promising vaccine. In addition to improving fish health in salmon farming in North America, this L. salmonae model will be applicable to other microsporidial diseases that may be encountered in emerging aquaculture regions.

Book chapter

Cumulative effects of multiple stressors on marine mammals: Elephant seals as a model system

Noise exposure is a potential stressor for free-ranging marine mammals and is often studied in the absence of other environmental factors. Here, a multi-investigator, interdisciplinary effort was undertaken to examine the response of elephant seals to multiple stressors. An integrated physiological and ecological approach was taken, including immunology, stress physiology, toxicology, animal behavior, population biology, and life history theory, to examine the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple stressors in elephant seals. While we measured the response of individual animals, a population response can be predicted by incorporating these results into the long-term data on elephant seal demographics.

Book chapter

When is a parasite a problem?

A parasite’s perceived societal impact depends on the disease it causes and the perception of the affected host species. For instance, doctors and veterinarians have a mission to treat parasites that infect humans or that impact host species that have some utilitarian or aesthetic value for society. Marine scientists have different concerns than doctors. Although the number of parasites that marine scientists should be concerned about may vary, only 13% of parasites and 6% of host–parasite links might be considered “problematic” in a kelp forest food web. With regard to the many threats to marine ecosystems, these percentages suggest that most parasites and infectious diseases are inconsequential. A related issue is the common expectation that parasites and the impacts that they cause are increasing under stress as ocean environments across the globe degrade. Yet, reports of disease have not increased due to human impacts on the marine environment, where the factors that influence parasitism are more complex. Thus, the expectation that marine parasites create problems, and that the diseases they cause are getting worse, is more likely the exception than the rule.

Book chapter