Advertisements
Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Jackal’

lupullela adustus

As we have examined the genomes of various  dog species, one problem has become evident:   The genus Canis is paraphyletic. Two endemic African jackals, the side-striped and black-backed jackal, are actually more distantly related to the wolf-like canids than the African wild dog and dhole are.

One way to solve this problem would be to make the dhole and African wild dog part of Canis, but the problem with this classification remedy is that the paleontology on the dhole and African wild dog is quite hard to trace and still fairly controversial. Anything in their lineage needs to have different classification in order to keep those specimens distinct from the main wolf-like canid clade.

The other solution is to give the black-backed and side-striped jackals their own genus.  In the early part of the twentieth century, it was common to refer to these species within a genus called Lupullela. I’ve noticed that a few papers have popped up using this genus, like this one that examines which predatory species may have left the remains of quarry in a Late Pleistocene cave in Morocco.

I don’t think it will be very long before both the side-striped and black-backed jackal will be commonly referred to as Lupullela.

I won’t be complaining. Paraphyly is something I find annoying.  We are classifying nature in light of evolution, and making sure we have true clades in which animals are classified according to their common descent is important.

The classification of jackals is undergoing a sea change. The creature known as the golden jackal is two species, but the exact way to classify the two species is still hotly contested.  The African “golden jackal” is closer to the wolf and coyote than the Eurasian “golden jackal,” but we don’t have good full-genome data to place the African golden jackal properly. It could wind up that the African golden jackal is very close to the wolf, as the coyote was recently found to be, and this will make the actual classification really touchy.

But that current debate is nothing compared to the way we are starting to classify the two divergent jackals of Africa. These animals don’t get studied as much, but I would highly suspect that there are surprises hidden in their genomes. It could be that there are actually several species currently classified as black-backed and side-striped jackals, and it is also highly likely that there are hybrids among these forms as well as between the species classified currently as side-striped and black-backed jackals.

Neither jackal is endangered, but they are something different, something that is at least worthy of study.

These are sort of forgotten dogs, and their secrets are only now just coming to light.

 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

This is from a documentary about brown hyenas on the Skeleton Coast of Namibia, but the black-backed jackals stole the scene here!

They are like piranhas in canid form!

Read Full Post »

Kent Hovind is out of prison, and seeing as he has a month of home confinement to waste time on the internet, he has been posting daily Q and A sessions on Youtube. Just e-mail him, and he’ll answer your question on Youtube.

So the other day, I sent him an e-mail with the following question:

Scottie Westfall Jul 22
To
TheDrDino@gmail.com (Kent Hovind)
Would you say that black-backed jackals, side-striped jackals, African wild dogs (Cape hunting dogs or painted dogs) and dholes (Asiatic wild dog) are part of the same kind that includes golden jackals, coyotes, wolves/domestic dogs/dingoes, and Ethiopian wolves?

Why would I ask this question?

Well, within the wolf-like canids, it is well-known that some species are still chemically interferitle. We have a nice phylogenetic tree, which was drawn from a sequencing of domestic dog genome:

dog family phylogentic tree

Domestic dogs are basic a type of “grey wolf,” so they certainly do interbreed.  One could make the case in a creationist sense that these animals are all part of the same “kind,” because a “kind” is generalized term that pretty much is based solely on whether they can “bring forth”– produce offspring. Wolves and dogs have interbred and produced fertile offspring with coyotes and golden jackals. Golden jackals and coyotes have done the same. Ethiopian wolves (which are a really specialized canid that is found only in the Ethiopian Highlands) have interbred with domestic dogs, and in some instances, there have been viable, fertile hybrids produced.

By the Biblical definition of kind, these animals fit.

However, interfertility stops with the Ethiopian wolf. Although there are rumors of hybrids being produced between dogs and dholes and between dholes and golden jackals, we have no verified hybrids. There are claims that the Bangkaew dog started out as a dhole/domestic dog hybrid, but I’ve never seen anyone confirm this ancestry in the breed.

When this phylogenetic tree was drawn, it really did change the way we view jackals. When I was a kid, we tended to think of all the jackals as being closely related. We even called the Ethiopian wolf the “Simien jackal.”  But even before this study came out, it was pretty clear that the canid of the Ethiopian Highlands was closer to the wolves than the other endemic African jackals.

But this study revealed that golden jackals are even more closely related to wolves/dogs and coyotes than to the other jackals, and that the two endemic African jackals, the side-striped and black-backed jackals, are actually more distantly related to the interfertile canids than African wild dogs and dholes are. African wild dogs and dholes have traditionally been given their own genus names (Lycaon and Cuon), but those two endemic African jackals have always been listed as part of Canis. We now think of Canis as a paraphyletic grouping, which means it is not a clade. To make it a clade, we would have to move the African wild dog and the dhole into Canis, which is what I would do, or create a new genus for the two endemic African canids.

In an earlier video, Kent Hovind was answering a question about the kinds of animals on the ark, and he said something along the lines of how jackals, wolves, coyotes, and dogs are all descended from a single dog “kind” that was put on the ark.  (In that video, Hovind actually claimed that hyenas were part of the dog kind, which isn’t even close to being true).

But if a “kind” is defined as what can produce offspring, we have a very hard big problem here. When a creationist says “jackal,” I don’t think they understand that the three species of jackal are actually quite distinct from each other. You cannot breed a black-backed jackal to a dog, even if people claim that basenjis are derived from them, or that they have an African village dog that looks like one. The two species are very distinct from one another.

So if these animals all are distinct kinds, then God had Noah put several ancestral Canis-type dogs on the ark.  Black-backed and side-striped jackals probably can interbreed, but their genomes haven’t been studied in the interfertile Canis species have been. So that would be a kind. Dholes and African wild dogs probably can hybridize as well, so that would be another kind. And then you’d have the classic “dog kind, ” which has all the wolf-like species that hybridize a lot.

So we’d have these three separate kinds, but why?

Wouldn’t an intelligent deity just want one dog kind?

I mean, a Western coyote and a black-backed jackal are essentially the same organism in terms of their behavioral ecology. They hunt small animals. They gang up and hunt ungulates, and they do a lot of scavenging. They both have intense pair bonds, and they do cause problems with livestock producers.

Why would there have to be two separate “kinds” for this mid-sized, generalist canid?

Well, Hovind tried to answer my question, and he did very poorly. Now, I must confess that he was answering a bunch of questions about the flat earth and geocentrism (which many of his most devout followers wish he believed in), so I don’t think he was expecting a question like mine or understood its significance.

Here’s his answer (and he thinks my name is Daniel):

Source.

He tells me to go look up Baraminology, which I did.

But when I went to Answers in Genesis, I found that they fell into exactly the same trap as Hovind.

They point out that there was a discovery a few years ago that there were some “golden jackals” in Africa that were found to be a primitive lineage of wolf. Now, these are not Ethiopian wolves. People mess this up all the time. These are African wolves (Canis lupus lupaster), and they are actually pretty widespread. Populations of these wolves have been found as far from Ethiopia as Senegal, and they do cross with golden jackals there.

But note that the African wolves are breeding with GOLDEN jackals, and they were being confused with GOLDEN jackals. We know that golden jackals are close to wolves and domestic dogs, and they do hybridize.

One could make the case that golden jackals are part of the same “kind” that includes dogs, coyotes, and wolves, but you cannot say that black-backed and side-striped jackals are part of this same kind. They no more can cross with dogs than they a dog can with a petunia or a guinea pig.

So if you hear a creationist talking about jackals being part of the same “kind” as domestic dogs, just ask them about black-backed and side-striped jackals.

They don’t understand the problem with their reasoning at all.

Nor do they care.

***

AronRa has a nice video on canid evolution, though I do have few quibbles about it, such as the location of where dogs were domesticated and the size of some borophagine dogs, it gives you a good understanding of the problem when creationists mess around with interfertility in dog species.

Source.

Read Full Post »

A side-striped jackal (Canis adustus), the jackal no one talks about.

We’ve always called the smaller wild dogs in the genus Canis jackals.

Historically, there were four species of jackal:  the golden (Canis aureus), the black-backed (Canis mesomelas), the side-striped (Canis adustus), and the Simien (Canis simensis).

Some authorities considered they coyote (Canis latrans) to be a jackal, usually called “the American jackal.”

At one time, they were all placed in the genus Thous.

This, of course, assumed that these animals were all closely related to each other.

However, as we’ve looked at DNA analysis, the relationship between jackals shows that the term “jackal” is actually quite meaningless.

In 1994, an mtDNA study revealed that the Simien jackal had certain mtDNA sequences that were more similar to wolves than other jackals. It was thought to be a relict population of primitive wolves that came into Africa during the Pleistocene.

And from that time forth, the English name of this species was change to “Ethiopian wolf.”  I don’t call it anything else.

However, as more work was performed on jackals, certain facts became evident.

Initial studies of black-backed, side-striped, and golden jackal mtDNA revealed that black-backs in East Africa had huge variances in their mtDNA. Golden jackals had mtDNA that was most similar to coyotes and wolves, while black backs and side-stripes were more similar to each other.

And then the phylogeny of the dog family was drawn from a high-quality sequencing of the dog genome revealed that golden jackals were much more closely related to coyotes and the wolf and domestic dog species than the Ethiopian wolf was. We still call them Ethiopian wolves, even though golden jackals are more closely related to actual wolves than those animals are.

The other issue revealed through this research was that Canis, as it is traditionally classified, is a paraphyletic genus. Modern taxonomy is generally concerned with classifying animals according clades. Clades are, by definition monophyletic. That is, they contain all the animals that descend from a particular lineage.

The dog genome research revealed that two species that are never traditionally classified as being part of Canis, the African wild (Lycaon pictus) and the dhole (Cuon alpinus), actually should be included there.  It turns out that black-backed and side-striped jackals are more distantly related to the rest of Canis than these two species are.

And if we classify Canis with all the jackals, the Ethiopian wolf, and  the wolf and dog species and leave out the dhole and African wild dog, we’ve created a paraphyletic genus that is not useful to modern taxonomy.

Some have suggested giving the two endemic African jackals their own genus.

And this would make Canis monophyletic without including the African wild dog and dhole.

However, the genus that would remain would include several species that are all chemically interfertile with each other (at least in theory). Species complexes exist throughout that part of the Canis, and delineating species is very difficult the species in this lineage.

Although Robert Wayne at UCLA has suggested that black-backed and side-striped jackals might be able to interbreed, no one has confirmed a hybrid between these two species. African wild dogs might be able to hybridize with dholes, but because they live on different continents and because they are both fairly endangered, no one has attempted to cross them. (There are persistent rumors that dholes can cross with domestic dogs. One dog breed, the Bangkaew dog from Thailand, is said to have derived from a dog/dhole cross. However, I don’t believe this claim has ever been tested through DNA analysis.)

All this research has revealed that how we have traditionally thought about the dog family is probably wrong.

The golden jackal is actually a primitive offshoot of the wolf lineage, just as the coyote in the New World is. The Ethiopian wolf is an even more primitive offshoot.

The two endemic African jackals are the two oldest living species in the Canis lineage. They are even more distinct from this lineage than dholes and African wild dogs are.

We do not have a good replacement word for jackal.

I’ve suggested that we call golden jackals “Old World coyotes” almost as a joke.

But I don’t have a good name for either of the two remaining jackal.

Because black-backed jackals are so scrappy, I’ve even suggested that we call them “wild Jack Russells.”

Whatever we call them, the term jackal, if it’s used to reflect close relationships between species, is utterly meaningless.

With the exception of the two found only Africa, it doesn’t refer to any animals that have a close relationship with each other.

It’s just a term we use for smaller wild dogs that are in some way related to wolves.

Read Full Post »

These photos were taken at the Ongava Game Reserve in Namibia.  A black-backed jackal jumps a male lion.

The lion sits on the jackal.

It is hard to tell if these two are playing or fighting.

The lion could have crushed the jackal if it wanted to,  but lions don’t normally kill jackals. Just not enough meat on a jackal for a lion to bother.

Perhaps the two are just playing a bit.  After all, they both are social species.

However, lions might be good allies for a jackal. They keep the leopards away, and we all know that leopards love to eat jackals and dogs.

Still, these are pretty amazing photos.

 

 

Read Full Post »

These photos were taken in Namibia, where the only species of jackal is the Cape subspecies of the black-backed jackal.  In the second photo, it appears that this animal has the red or pink eyes we associate with true albinos, something I have never heard of before in a wild dog.

Read Full Post »

Source.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: