Research overview: the rationale behind the 2017 felid taxonomy revision
This overview explains the reasoning the Cat Classification Task Force used to justify a major revision rather than incremental edits. It describes the decision rules adopted: recognize taxa only when supported by multiple, independent, concordant lines of evidence, and otherwise lump conservatively to avoid inflating diversity. It walks through how this principle reshaped tigers, lions, leopards, and several small cats, and why the group prioritized stability and conservation utility. The piece also addresses criticism that the revision was too conservative, retaining ambiguous taxa as subspecies pending genomic data. By laying out the criteria explicitly, the task force made future revisions auditable, so enthusiasts can see exactly what evidence would be needed to change a given name.
Species
Category:taxonomy-systematics
Related articles
- Research overview: the Amur leopard as a distinct northern subspeciestaxonomy-systematics
- Research overview: ancient hybridization and reticulate evolution in catstaxonomy-systematics
- Research overview: the Arabian leopard and its conservation geneticstaxonomy-systematics
- Research overview: the genetic distinctiveness of the Asiatic liontaxonomy-systematics
- Research overview: the island tigers of Bali, Java, and Sumatrataxonomy-systematics
- Research overview: the ancestry of the extinct Barbary liontaxonomy-systematics
Go beyond reading about wild cats
The Felid Wiki is free for everyone, always. Chasing Cats Club members also get monthly live talks with researchers, self-paced fieldcraft courses, and AMAs with working wildlife photographers — the skills to find and photograph these cats yourself.
Explore membership · from $15/monthAI-curated summaries for the pride’s library — verify citations independently before citing.