North America is currently home to a number of grey wolf (Canis lupus) and wolf-like canid populations, including the coyote (Canis latrans) and the taxonomically controversial red, Eastern timber and Great Lakes wolves. We explored their population structure and regional gene flow using a dataset of 40 full genome sequences that represent the extant diversity of North American wolves and wolf-like canid populations. This included 15 new genomes (13 North American grey wolves, 1 red wolf and 1 Eastern timber/Great Lakes wolf), ranging from 0.4 to 15x coverage. In addition to providing full genome support for the previously proposed coyote-wolf admixture origin for the taxonomically controversial red, Eastern timber and Great Lakes wolves, the discriminatory power offered by our dataset suggests all North American grey wolves, including the Mexican form, are monophyletic, and thus share a common ancestor to the exclusion of all other wolves. Furthermore, we identify three distinct populations in the high arctic, one being a previously unidentified “Polar wolf” population endemic to Ellesmere Island and Greenland. Genetic diversity analyses reveal particularly high inbreeding and low heterozygosity in these Polar wolves, consistent with long-term isolation from the other North American wolves.

Twenty six wolves were captured and radio collared in 1984 and 1985 on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. These wolves included members of 8 packs and 11 lone wolves. Average weights were 43.1 kg for males and 36.7 kg for females with the average age being 2-3 years old. Only 5 wolves were 4 years old and older. Activity areas were delinieated for all packs as some packs had insufficient data to accurately define territories. These activity areas were non-overlaping. Only 1 wolf pack had a large scale seasonal shift in areas used. Formation of new packs and long-distance movements were common. One wolf had a documented movement of 770 km, the longest recorded movement in Alaksa. Wolf densities were 1/726 km2 in 1984 and 1/686 km2 in 1985 for an area of 24,700 km2. Litter sizes averaged 3.0 and 4.2-4.75 in 1984 and 1985 respectively. Over-summer pup survival was related to pack size; more pups survived in larger packs. This was in contrast to other studies where pup survival and pack size were unrelated. After wolves had left, den sites were visited, scats were collected, and dens were mapped. Mortality (natural and human induced) was 35% of the fall population. Rabies was documented in the wolf population in the spring on 1985. It is believed that rabies in the wolf population in the arctic is more common than previously thought and may be cyclic in conjunction with outbreaks of rabies in the Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) population.

Wolves 2

## Overview

Wolves 2 is a dataset for object detection tasks - it contains Wolves annotations for 381 images.

## Getting Started

You can download this dataset for use within your own projects, or fork it into a workspace on Roboflow to create your own model.

  ## License

  This dataset is available under the [CC BY 4.0 license](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/CC BY 4.0).

Rapid Evolution of Prehistoric Dogs from Wolves by Natural and Sexual Selection Emerges from an Agent-Based Model

Here, we provide the necessary .py files to recreate the results found in the above-entitled manuscript. If you desire to load the data provided, it's recommended you use pandas 2.0.3 and python 3.10.13.

Nearly all .py files will require you have evolutuion_system.py file in the base directory. This .py file enacts the ABM as described in the manuscript. All other .py files should be placed in the same base directory.

You should construct a data folder and a figures folder in the base directory. In the data folder create an efast, prcc, and a monotonicity subfolder. These exists so you do not have to re-run the efast, prcc, or monotonicity simulations. In the figures folder create subfolders for default_distributions, distributions, efast, monotonicity, prcc, validation, and verification. Any figures generated will be produced in the corresponding figures sub-folder. ...

Wolf harvest numbers and quota numbers by FWP's trapping districts and wolf management unit (WMU) for the current hunting/trapping season in Montana. For display in the Montana Wolf Harvest Dashboard: Montana Wolf Harvest Dashboard (arcgis.com). Data are from the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks' mandatory reporting records provided by hunters and trappers, wolf regulations and FWP Commission. Harvest numbers are updated multiple times per day during the hunting/trapping season. This data is also displayed on the wolf harvest status web page: https://myfwp.mt.gov/fwpPub/speciesHuntingGuide?wmrSpeciesCd=GW. More information about wolf hunting and trapping in Montana is available at: https://fwp.mt.gov/hunt/regulations/wolf

This dataset contains gray wolf (Canis lupus) survival and cause-specific mortality data from radiocollared wolves (n=756 collared-wolf tenures) from 1968-2018 in the USGS Wolf Project study area (2,060 km2) of the Superior National Forest, USA, an area that also includes the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Also, included are the annual resident winter wolf counts for the study area.

We used two census methods to estimate N2020 and N2021 and reproductive parameter R (mean, lower and upper bounds of the 95% CI from [53] for 256 wolf packs. D is estimated as (N2021-N2020) divided by (0.5 * R2020 + N2020) following Eq 3. We assumed the mean value for N2021 because the state did so for setting policy.

Data file containing spatial variables of wolf GPS-positions and random points for step selection functions that is used in the article “Wolves at the door? Factors influencing the individual behavior of wolves in relation to anthropogenic features”. Abstract: The recovery of large carnivores in human-dominated landscapes comes with challenges. In general, large carnivores avoid humans and their activities, and human avoidance favors coexistence, but individual variation in large carnivore behavior may occur. The detection of individuals close to human settlements or roads can trigger fear in local communities and in turn demand management actions. Understanding the sources of individual variation in carnivore behavior towards human features is relevant and timely for ecology and conservation. We studied the movement behavior of 52 adult established wolves (44 wolf pairs) with GPS-collars over two decades in Scandinavia in relation to settlements, buildings, and roads. We fit fine-scale movement data to individual step selection functions to depict the movement decisions of wolves while travelling, and then used weighted linear mixed models to identify factors associated with potential individual pair deviations from the general behavioral patterns. Wolves consistently avoided human settlements and main roads, with little individual variation. Indeed, after correcting for season, time of the day, and latitude, there was little variability in habitat selection among wolf pairs, demonstrating that all wolf pairs had similar movement pattern and generally avoided human features of the landscape. Wolf avoidance of human features was lower at higher latitudes particularly in winter, likely due to seasonal prey migration. Although occasional sightings of carnivores or their tracks near human features do occur, they do not necessarily require management intervention. Communication of scientific findings on carnivore behavior to the public should suffice in most cases.

Wolves Finder

## Overview

Wolves Finder is a dataset for object detection tasks - it contains Wolves annotations for 551 images.

## Getting Started

You can download this dataset for use within your own projects, or fork it into a workspace on Roboflow to create your own model.

  ## License

  This dataset is available under the [CC BY 4.0 license](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/CC BY 4.0).

Since 1986, surveys in spring and fall each year count the number of wolves found in Denali National Park and Preserve, north of the Alaska Range.

Nonbreeding helpers can greatly improve the survival of young and reproductive fitness of breeders in many cooperatively breeding species. Breeder turnover, in turn, can have profound effects on dispersal decisions made by helpers. Despite its importance in explaining group size and predicting population demography of cooperative breeders, our current understanding of how individual traits influence animal behavior after disruptions to social structure is incomplete particularly for terrestrial mammals. We used 12 years of genetic sampling and group pedigrees of gray wolves (Canis lupus) in Idaho, USA, to ask questions about how breeder turnover affected the apparent decisions by mature helpers (>2-year-old) to stay or leave a group over a one-year time interval. We found that helpers showed plasticity in their responses to breeder turnover. Most notably, helpers varied by sex and appeared to base dispersal decisions on the sex of the breeder that was lost as well. Male and female helpers stayed in a group slightly more often when there was breeder turnover of the same sex, although males that stayed were often recent adoptees in the group. Males, however, appeared to remain in a group less often when there was breeding female turnover likely because such vacancies were typically filled by related females from the males’ natal group (i.e., inbreeding avoidance). We show that helpers exploit instability in the breeding pair to secure future breeding opportunities for themselves. The confluence of breeder turnover, helper sex, and dispersal and breeding strategies merge to influence group composition in gray wolves.

Testing the correlation between abundance trends of wolves and (i) their prey and (ii) human-caused wolf mortality in the southern part of wolf range (packs OSM and RO+KON).

This dataset provides annual gray wolf (Canis lupus) denning spatial information and timing, associated climatic and phenologic metrics, and reproductive success (i.e., pup survival) in wolf populations across areas of western Canada and Alaska within the NASA ABoVE Core Domain. The study encompasses 18 years between the period 2000-2017. Wolves were captured from eight populations following standard animal care protocols and released with Global Positioning System (GPS) collars. Data from 388 wolves were used to estimate den initiation dates (n=227 dens of 106 packs) and reproductive success in the eight populations. Each population was monitored from 1 to 12 years between 2000 and 2017. Denning parturition phenology was measured each year as the number of calendar days from January 1st to the initiation date of each documented denning event. Reproductive success was determined as to whether pups survived through the end of August following a reproductive event. To evaluate the effect of climate factors on reproductive phenology, aggregated seasonal climate metrics for temperature, precipitation, and snow water equivalent based on three biological seasons for seasonal wolf home ranges were produced. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) time-series data were used to estimate phenological metrics such as the start of the growing season (SOS), length of the growing season (LOS), and time-integrated NDVI (tiNDVI), and were summarized for the populations' home range.

This map depicts IDFG wolf management zones, towns, roads, and hydrography.2013 Idaho Wolf Monitoring Progress Report

Large carnivores are globally threatened due to habitat fragmentation and loss, prey depletion, and human exploitation. Human exploitation includes both legal and illegal hunting and trapping. Protected areas can create refugia from hunting and trapping, however, hunting can still threaten wide-ranging large carnivores when they leave these areas. Large carnivore reintroductions to protected areas are often motivated to restore ecological processes, including wolf reintroduction to Yellowstone National Park (YNP). Determining if harvest is compensatory or additive is essential for informed conservation strategies, as it influences the overall impact on wolf populations and their ecosystems. If the harvest was compensatory, then increasing harvest pressure outside YNP should not decrease overall survival for transboundary wolves. Alternatively, if increasing harvest was additive, then increasing harvest pressure outside YNP should decrease overall survival for transboundary wolves. We tested the effects of variable harvest pressure following delisting on the survival of YNP gray wolves (Canis lupus) from 1995 to 2022. We defined three harvest levels: no harvest, harvest with limited quotas, and unlimited harvest. We used Cox-proportional hazards models and cumulative incidence functions to estimate survival rates, factors affecting survival, and cause-specific mortality between these three harvest periods to test predictions of the additive mortality hypothesis. Most wolves that primarily lived in YNP were harvested adjacent to the park border. Cox-proportional hazards models revealed that mortality was highest during years of unlimited harvest during winter outside YNP. Cause-specific mortality analyses showed that natural mortality from other wolves and harvest were the two leading causes of death, but that harvest mortality had additive effects on wolf mortality. Wolf survival decreased with increased harvest mortality, while natural mortality remained relatively unchanged. High rates of additive harvest mortality of wolves could negatively impact wolf survival in YNP. Harvest mortality of transboundary wolves is additive possibly due to source-sink dynamics of uneven spatial susceptibility of wolves to harvest mortality across protected area borders, as well as effects of harvest on complex social dynamics of wolves in YNP. Transboundary management of large carnivores is challenging, yet cooperation between agencies is vital for wolf management in and around Yellowstone National Park. Our results support the use of small quota zones surrounding protected areas, that minimize transboundary mortality impacts on large carnivores living primarily inside protected areas.

Fifteen wolves with ambiguous classification and no additional field data (Table 1) were excluded.

This map depicts IDFG wolf management zones, towns, roads, and hydrography.2013 Idaho Wolf Monitoring Progress Report

This dataset contains gray wolf (Canis lupus) study area section counts of pack wolves by method (observing radiocollared wolves and their packmates via aerial telemetry and also noninvasive methods including ground snow tracking, aerial snow tracking, camera trapping, community scientist reports) from a three winter noninvasive methods trial during 2019-2021 in the USGS Wolf Project study area (2,060 square kilometers) of the Superior National Forest, USA, an area that also includes the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Also, included are the total section counts by year during the three winter noninvasive trial and also the prior winter (2018) before the noninvasive trial. Also, included are the annual counts since the study began in 1967 through this trial's end (2021).

Ethogram of wolf predatory behavior.