Talk:Canidae

Cerdocyonina branch needs updating

Chilla is a sister taxon to culpeo: L. Tchaicka et al. "Molecular assessment of the phylogeny and biogeography of a recently diversified endemic group of South American canids (Mammalia: Carnivora: Canidae). Genetics and Molecular Biology, 39 (3): 442-451
Falkland Island wolf needs to be included as sister taxon of maned wolf: Slater, G. J.; Thalmann, O.; Leonard, J. A.; Schweizer, R. M.; Koepfli, K.-P.; Pollinger, J. P.; Rawlence, N. J.; Austin, J. J.; Cooper, A.; Wayne, R. K. (2009-11-03). "Evolutionary history of the Falklands wolf" (PDF). Current Biology. 19 (20): R937–R938. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.09.018. ISSN 0960-9822. PMID 19889366. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 4, 2013.Mariomassone (talk) 13:23, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. The cladogram already has updates for Canis and Vulpes so an update for Lycalopex is appropriate. The result for the Falkland wolf looks fairly definitive. Do you want to make the changes or do you want me to do them?   Jts1882 | talk  16:12, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Could you? I've tried but I still need to work these cladograms out without making messes of them. Mariomassone (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Yes check.svg Done. I've also put the Lycalopex section in the Lycalopex article if you plan on adding more images.   Jts1882 | talk  07:16, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Borophagus.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Why 10 and not 13?

I have no expertise in this subject but cannot understand why only 10 of the 13 extant canid genera are pictured. It seems to me that the average Wiki user would wonder that as well. And, it is the more aggravating because neither here nor in the ‘List of Canids’ are the three missing ones identified. Irish Melkite (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

The mosaic images in taxoboxes usually just show a representative sample of the taxon's members. There are often too many to show them all. Here you have the additional problem of fitting 13 into a rectangle. For what it's worth the missing genera are Atelocynus, Lupulella and Lycalopex (from listing at List of canids).—  Jts1882 | talk  12:17, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Characteristics paragraph

Currently states: "Wild canids are found on every continent except Antarctica, and..." — Australasia only has human-introduced feral canids (dingoes), which are not genuinely wild natives. Shouldn't Australasia be included with Antarctica here? - MPF (talk) 21:35, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Dingo are wild canids, and while they are not a native species, they are found in Australasia. The sentence is correct as written. Mediatech492 (talk) 22:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Mediatech492 - feral ≠ genuinely wild; it remains misleading. I'd still say some better wording is needed here - MPF (talk) 08:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Whether the dingo is feral in the traditional sense is much debated (e.g. here or here. It's also become politicised among those who want to protect them (conservationists) and those who want to shoot them (farmers and miners) (see the first link). I think the current wording appropriate, although better wording is always appreciated.  —  Jts1882 | talk  09:03, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

The Dingo article states that there is evidence that Dingoes have been active in Australia for at least 3000 years. I'm not sure you can call them "feral" when their wild ancestry can be traced back several millennia. Mediatech492 (talk) 21:31, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Probably more than 3,000 years; but that does not make them native, since native status is defined by how they got there (with, or without, human assistance), not by length of time. I'll try to think of a more appropriate wording - MPF (talk) 21:01, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Have reworded now, hope it's OK! - MPF (talk) 10:02, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Cynoidea Can't be Ranked as an Infraorder

Cynoidea can't be ranked as an infraorder because it has the suffix "-oidea". Under the ICZN, only superfamilies can have this suffix. Cynoidea is not valid under the PhyloCode either because it does not have a phylogenetic definition. Jako96 (talk) 21:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)