File:Wolf-like canids phylogeny (ita).jpg

English: The sources used are:

• Wilson, P.J., Grewal, S., Lawford, I.D., Heal, J.N.M., Granacki, A.G., Pennock, D., Theberge, J.B., Theberge, M.T., Voigt, D.R., Waddell, W., Chambers, R.E., Paquet, P.C., Goulet, G., Cluff, D., White, B.N. (2000). "DNA profiles of the eastern Canadian wolf and the red wolf provide evidence for a common evolutionary history independent of the gray wolf". Canadian Journal of Zoology 78: 2156–2166.

• Lindblad-Toh, K.; Wade, CM; Mikkelsen, TS; Karlsson, EK; Jaffe, DB; Kamal, M; Clamp, M; Chang, JL et al. (2005). "Genome sequence, comparative analysis and haplotype structure of the domestic dog". Nature 438 (7069): 803–819.

I did this piece in order to clarify the relationships between Canis species capable of hybridizing, hence why I omitted Canis mesomelas and Canis adustus, which are too basal to reproduce with any of the above shown species. One thing that I hope should become immediately apparent in this piece is the fact that the term "wolf" is taxonomically meaningless. For example, simensis is usually considered a "legitimate" wolf, yet aureus is more closely related to lupus than simensis is, yet it is classed as a "jackal" (an equally meaningless term from a genetic standpoint). Furthermore, latrans is also far more closely related to lupus than simensis is, yet it is termed "coyote", and isn't usually included as much in wolf fansites or organisations. Yet more confusion stems from lycaon and rufus. Assuming that they are in fact distinct species, the phylogenetic tree makes it clear that they branched off from the same lineage as latrans, not lupus, yet they are in turn called "eastern wolf" and "red wolf" respectively.