Canis familiaris is a subspecies of C. lupus as of 2005. There is a push to distinguish it as a distinct species but that is not the current consensus.
“Testing” for speciation is pretty silly, tbh, because it’s an arbitrary distinction no matter what. Our placement of rigid definitions onto the constant gradual process of evolution is always going to have edge cases and outliers. So we give things useful labels and move on until we have better tools (DNA analysis has been great) or have need of better definitions.
Does dogs being wolves do anything for the general public? No, but that’s what common names are for. Does the distinction of Canis lupus familiaris help scientists right now? Probably. If not there’d be a stronger push to change it.
Canis familiaris is a subspecies of C. lupus as of 2005. There is a push to distinguish it as a distinct species but that is not the current consensus.
“Testing” for speciation is pretty silly, tbh, because it’s an arbitrary distinction no matter what. Our placement of rigid definitions onto the constant gradual process of evolution is always going to have edge cases and outliers. So we give things useful labels and move on until we have better tools (DNA analysis has been great) or have need of better definitions.
Does dogs being wolves do anything for the general public? No, but that’s what common names are for. Does the distinction of Canis lupus familiaris help scientists right now? Probably. If not there’d be a stronger push to change it.
This is the good stuff.