Wolf Subspecies: Reply to Weckworth et al. and Fredrickson et al.

Colleagues disagree with statements in our discussion (Cronin et al. 2015) regarding subspecies taxonomy of wolves (Canis lupus) in southeast Alaska (Weckworth et al. 2015) and the southwest United States (Fredrickson et al. 2015). Following the presentation of results of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) variation in several populations of wolves in North America, we discussed other genetic data and stated that the results “do not support a subspecies designation of wolves in southeast Alaska” (C. l. ligoni) and that designation of a Mexican wolf (C. l. baileyi) subspecies “is of questionable validity.” Fredrickson et al. and Weckworth et al. provide information and insights that support the Mexican wolf subspecies designation and the southeast Alaska subspecies designation, respectively. We and they discuss the same data, so this is essentially a “lumper-splitter” (e.g., Mayr 1982, p. 240) disagreement over subspecies, and whether a degree of genetic differentiation, or strict phylogenetic independence, is needed for subspecies designation. Because subspecies and taxonomy in general, may not be the focus of many readers of the Journal of Heredity who work in agriculture, medicine, and conservation, we provide insights from the literature to explain the concepts relevant to our thinking on this topic. This is important because of the potential for misconceptions of classic principles and literature of evolutionary biology (Karl et al. 2012).