Cape jackal (L) and East African black-backed jackal (R)
The molecular revolution in biology has caused a great deal of turmoil in the taxonomy of Canids. Long-time readers know that full-genome comparisons have recently found that the red wolf and Eastern wolf are hybrid between coyotes and wolves, and one implication of the recent origins of the coyote is that the coyote itself might be better classified as a subspecies of wolf.
Mitochondrial DNA comparisons, though potentially erroneous in determining the exact time of divergence between species or subspecies, have also revealed that the “golden jackals” of Africa are much more closely related to wolves than Eurasian golden jackals. Classifying African golden jackals is going to take more analysis of their genome, but they are either a species on their own or a subspecies of wolf. They have evolved in parallel with both the Eurasian golden jackal and the coyote.
We also know now that the red fox of the Old World is quite divergent from that of North America, enough that some authorities are reviving the old Vulpes fulva for the North American species. Red foxes in the Eastern and Midwestern US are actually part of this endemic North American species and are not, as the folklore claimed, to be derived from seventeenth and eighteenth century introductions from England.
Recent mitochondrial DNA analysis also revealed that Eastern and Western gray foxes are perhaps separated by 500,000 years of evolution.
So we’ve likely lost two wolf species in North America. The coyote’s validity is questionable. But we’ve gained either a wolf species or subspecies in Africa. We have also potentially gained two species of fox in North America.
With all of these new findings in DNA studies, scientists are looking more and more closely at other long-established species.
Last week, a study of the cytochrome b gene of black-backed and side-striped jackals revealed that these jackals, too, have some secrets. Cytochrome b genes are part of the mitochondrial genome.
At one time these animals were considered part of Canis, but the current trend is to classify them in their own genus (Lupulella).* They are quite divergent from the rest of the wolf-like canids, much more so than dholes and African wild dogs are. If dholes and African wild dogs are in their own genera, then it makes sense that these two jackals should have their own genus name.
But if they are that divergent from the rest of Canis, then it’s very possible that there are other secrets, and this limited mtDNA study certainly raises some important questions.
The researchers found that the Cape subspecies and East African subspecies of the black-backed jackal (Lupulella mesomelas) actually diverged 2.5 million years ago.
I’ve always thought that there was a possibility of these two jackals being distinct species. The East African black-backed jackal has a shorter muzzle, comparatively larger ears, and usually lack the dense coat of the Cape jackal. The Cape jackal reminds me very much of Southwestern forms of coyote, with longer muzzle and thicker fur. What’s more is that the Cape jackal comes in a white and a golden phase that are not seen in the East African black-back.
If this deep divergence is confirmed in the full-genome or simple nuclear DNA studies that are very likely to be performed, then we likely have two species of what are called black-backed jackals now.
The researchers also found through this same analysis that the West African side-striped jackal diverged from the other two populations 1.4 million years ago, which certainly would raise some questions about its species status as well.
Again, we’re going to have to wait until full-genome analyses are performed, but I’ve always suspected that there are more than two species of endemic African jackal possessed some cryptic species. I also have suspected that both side-striped jackals and black-backed jackals have hybridized a bit. This speculation could be revealed through the same full-genome or nuclear DNA studies that could examine the taxonomy within these supposed species.
Finally, the distribution of black-backed jackals is disjointed. The East African and Cape variants are separated by 800 miles. Several other small carnivorans have a similar distribution. The bat-eared fox and the aardwolf have disjointed distributions in which one population is in East Africa and the other in Southern Africa. It is very possible that similar deep genetic divergence exists within these species as well.
These potential cryptic species are worth investigating, and they certain put some of these “red wolf” controversies with in proper perspective. If that 2.5 million-year divergence is upheld within the black-backed jackal populations, it really does become hard to justify the red wolf. It is descended from two putative “species” that really aren’t that divergent at all by comparison.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
*A bit errata: I initially called the new scientific name of the side-striped jackal Lupulela adustus, which is just a modification of Canis adustus. Most of the literature I’m corrects the gender to Lupulella adusta.
I have a comment awaiting moderation on the Qinling pandas blogpost you did.
I’m sorry you had to wait. WP has a new comment moderation system. and my blog is set to put any comment with multiple links into moderation. When you left your comment, it put it in moderation, but it send the notification email to my spam folder. I’m sorry it took so long for me to catch it. There is a whole new taxonomic system proposed for cats. I think you’ll find it fascinating.
Where is that new taxonomic system proposed for cats?
https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/32616/A_revised_Felidae_Taxonomy_CatNews.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
The article posits that there may have been a Felis genus species of cat endemic to China, but considers the modern Chinese mountain cat (bieti) to be part of silvestris (Felis silvestris bieti). It posits silvestris (forest wildcat) and lybica/cafra/ornata (bay, bush, desert, and steppe wildcats) to be separate species. It still lists the domestic cat as (Felis catus).
But doesn’t the domestic or Near Eastern (lybica) wildcat breed just as easily and completely fertilely with the European/Scottish (silvestris) wildcat just as easily as it does with its fellow lybica wildcat and just as easily as a silvestris wildcat breeds with it’s fellow silvestris wildcat? You posit that the coyote is a small subspecies of (grey) wolf because it breeds easily and fertilely with them (including domestic dogs). If the forest (silvestris) wildcat and the Afro-Asian (lybica, cafra, and ornata) wildcat were separate species, there would be fertility problems in the offspring, like with mules (jackass x mare) and hinnies (stallion x jenny). I’ve heard that Felis silvestris lybica (domestic and Near Eastern Wildcat) x Felis silvestris silvestris (Scottish and European wildcat) hybrids are perfectly fertile.
On the other hand, you posit that North American red foxes are a different species from Eurasian red foxes because they don’t interbreed naturally. It’s like the the case with the Sunda clouded leopard and the mainland clouded leopard as well as the case with the mainland leopard cat and the Sunda leopard cat.
I remember a parrot at a mall in Vancouver, WA who was a hybrid between a blue and gold macaw and a hyacinth macaw named Rocky. Do you consider blue and gold macaws and hyacinth macaws separate species.
We need more work on cats. Much better DNA studies than exist right now. The dog studies are lightyears ahead of cats for some odd reason. Right now, I consider domestic cats to be Felis lybica or Felis silvestris libyca.
I consider Eurasian golden jackals and Ethiopian wolves to be distinct species even though they can interbreed with dogs and/or wolves. The reason is there isn’t a big gene flow between dogs/wolves and either of these two species, and they likely diverged a lot earlier in the past. I consider the Grevy’s and Plains zebras to be distinct species, and Hamadryas and olive baboons to be distinct species, because they split several million years ago and the gene flow is minimal between the two species. Wolves and coyotes have exchanged genes across a continent. Almost every wolf population on this continent has some coyote genes.
The two species of clouded leopard are almost as genetically distinct from each other as lions and tigers, and if crossed, might have fertility issues.
Bird hybrids are complicated! I don’t know if that particular hybrid of macaw is fertile, but even if it is, I don’t think we can call those the same species. Hybridization within related bird species is far more common that it is with mammals.
The important thing isn’t that they hybridize. It is how often, and how long the lineages have been distinct.
My recently deceased uncle had a cat named Ignatz. He was a hybrid of the Asian Leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis) and a domestic or Near Eastern Wildcat (Felis silvestris lybica). He was half the former and half the latter, so he was what would be called an F1 Bengal these days.
So he would be a Prionailurus bengalensis x Felis silvestris lybica.
What are your thoughts and opinions on Bengals and other Asian Leopard cat/Near Eastern wildcat hybrids, whether F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, and beyond?
What have you heard about them?
Also, Rocky the Hyacinth macaw/Blue and Gold macaw hybrid is male. Would that give you a clue on if he would have fertility issues or not, keeping in mind that closely related bird species hybridize more than closely related mammal species?
Those hybrid cats are intergeneric hybrids. I don’t have an opinion on Bengals, but it is likely that Prionailurus is very close Felis.
When related species lose chemical interfertility really varies. The Lynx species are more closely related to the domestic cat and wildcat lineage than servals are, but servals can hybridize with them (making savannah cats). Despite claims on the internet, no bobcat or lynx has ever mated and produced offspring with a domestic cat. I’ve seen photos of a bobcat mating with a domestic, but no kittens resulted.
Canids are much discussed for their hybridization, but the truth is naturally occurring hybrids occur only in closely related species, and several of the “species” that have been proposed (dog, dingo, coyote, gray wolf, Eastern wolf, and red wolf) are all so very closely related that they might be thought of as just variants of a single species. The only non Canis wild dogs that hybridize in the wild are swift and kit foxes along a narrow part of their range in New Mexico.
The macaws mentioned are also intergeneric, and I don’t know if those hybrids are fertile.
very interesting the dna and the evolution of science has given us many answers
about dogs life