Did you not read their name?
3 Likes
Dogs and wolves are the same genus (Canis) but different species (C. lupus vs C. familiaris). Unless dogs are a subspecies of Canis lupus (Canis lupus familiaris). Depends on whether you side with the lumpers or the splitters in the ongoing blood feud amongst taxonomists.
Species is a wibbly-wobbly concept, by which we attempt to draw sharp conceptual lines in a biological world of fuzzy boundaries. There are endless examples of separate species that can be interfertile - Coyotes and dogs can interbreed, as can coyotes and wolves. But it’s generally agreed even by taxonomists on opposite sides of the blood feud that coyotes are strongly differentiated enough from wolves and dogs, so they get assigned their own separate species.
Lack of interbreeding in the wild, as a general rule (ie, not counting what happens when humans start disrupting habitats, also not counting isolated counterexamples) is an indicator that two different populations are separate species. Along with other indicators such as differences in physiology, differences in behaviour, differences in habitat and diet, etc.
IIRC, the question when it comes to interbreeding is not “can they make babies together” but rather “when they live next door to each other, do they court and mate with each other resulting in offspring, or not so much.”
And as more data gets collected, groups of animals that were once regarded as the same species can be declared separate, or vice versa. For instance, in my lifetime standard reference works on Neanderthals have gone from labelling them as a separate species, to calling them a subspecies of H sapiens, to saying “well, it’s one or the other but we’re not going to take sides because we don’t want to be dragged into the blood feud.”
Finally, may I say regarding taxonomist blood feuds, that “two taxonomists enter, one taxonomist leaves” would really be a much better way of resolving these sorts of disputes, involving less bloodshed and fewer murders in the campus steam tunnels.
18 Likes
3 Likes
Only under natural conditions and in terms of creating a population of viable offspring.
There are rather a lot of fish that are separate species but can interbreed in captivity, create viable offspring in hatchery conditions, or when separate populations are brought together at the right time/place/temperature.
ETA: There is a problem in western North America where populations of threatened native Bull Trout are interacting with non-native Brook Trout. They successfully interbreed but create sterile offspring, which further threatens the already diminishing Bull Trout populations.
4 Likes
Ah, but how do you define “taxonomist?” Ow! Hey!..Medic!
6 Likes
Well… yeah… ok… but I tend to think of radio as very distinct from podcasting.
FCC rules and all that, “public airwaves” and all that.
I admit I may be nearly alone in my way of thinking.
1 Like
He’s got GPS now.
3 Likes
…but then again
too few to mention…
1 Like
Even in those species where the offspring is overwhelmingly infertile, there can be exceptions.
(No recorded fertile hinnies, however.)
I admit the joke was a bit of stretch, but you have to admit* that it was a small stretch. 
* You really don’t.
3 Likes
aw, you made liam neeson sad
3 Likes
I’ve read somewhere that taxonomy is always controversial.
4 Likes
For biologists, really, really nasty arguments about taxonomy were the whole point of living. Most are genuinely sad that genomics has ended about 90% of them.
8 Likes
I would argue that the famous friendly nature and obedience of domestic dogs is just something experienced by humans close to them in social terms. To most other people, dogs behave exactly live wild animals.
3 Likes
Elizabeth Holmes might be willing to adopt.
1 Like
Try skritching a wolf behind its cute little ears, and see if it acts like a domesticated dog.
5 Likes
I grew up in the foothills of the coast range, in a time when Oregon wasn’t nearly as Californified as it is now, so I know a few hillbillies. Think Sometimes a Great Notion but about a generation later. The boys I know, when logging work dried up or they lost a leg or something and had to quit, were more inclined to grow weed or cook meth off in some backwoods holler than make moonshine, but are still pretty stereotypical hillbillies most ways.
These guys all have a sense of humor, and are proud of being hillbillies, and none of them would find either of those characterization offensive. If you want to be offended on the behalf of hillbillies everywhere, that’s fine, but you should understand that that’s about you, not about them.
2 Likes
There was a deleted ending scene where he is cosying up to the freshly pummeled wolves as their new Alpha
1 Like
And, having lived near - and for a short time in, the Appalachians - I’m aware of that. Most mountain men and women, like most people everywhere, have humility and a sense of humor. But I’m not from there, and it’s not my word to use.
I don’t remember saying that. 
Please point to where I said I was offended.
2 Likes
Thank you.
1 Like
Yes. I’m currently reading Alice Roberts’ excellent ‘Tamed’, and she makes (or reports) a compelling argument for that.
