Talk:White-tailed deer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Central America, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to the Central America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

It was suggested that this article should be renamed White-tailed deer. The vote is shown below:

Oppose. Check the article capitalization in Category:Deer. dbenbenn | talk 20:55, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- Why should they not all be changed? white-tailed deer is certainly the way it should be written in a sentence. DoubleBlue (Talk) 21:25, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
  - Caps is the policy defined by Wikipedia:Wikiproject Tree of Life. No caps would be just as good a policy. Pcb21| Pete 08:55, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
    - From what I can gather from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life, the capitalisation stems from a belief that it is a proper noun naming the species. I think the use of this article betrays the fact that it is not normally used that way. Even this article doesn't use caps for white-tailed deer in sentences. DoubleBlue (Talk) 15:03, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

- - - - It used to be capitalised like the other articles, but because it isn't the most respected policy in the world, someone down-cased and no-one could be bothered to revert yet (see this edit). Characterizing it as a proper noun issue is incorrect. The issue is that some authorities capitalise and others don't, so it is hard to apply the usual "Wikipedia doesn't decide, it just copies what the relevant authorities do" rule. Pcb21| Pete 15:42, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. violet/riga (t) 10:59, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

1 Buck Picture
2 Geographical Distribution
3 subspecies classification
4 the overpopulation issue...
5 Deer Hunting
6 Classification Section
7 Lots of subspecies
8 Major rewrite
9 Size variation
10 Response to Major rewrite
11 Only Mature bucks have Antlers???????
12 Fawn Image (new)
- 12.1 [[Image:White tail fawn.JPG]]

[edit] Buck Picture

It is a mule deer, not a whitetail.

I dunno, you could be right, but the USDA Research Service has it captioned "In the Northeast, the white-tailed deer is the primary host for adult blacklegged ticks." -- Mwanner | Talk 22:07, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

All pics currently show or white-tailed deer. | Omegaman66 18:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC) 18:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)|Talk]]

[edit] Geographical Distribution

I've changed a little bit the body text, including South America in that part concerning the species geographic distribution. You can check this information in the following link: www.natureserve.com/infonatura (entry: odocoileus virginianus). Exlibris 22:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] subspecies classification

I am not sure if we should have the subspecies listed (trinomial name first, common name last) or (common name first, trinomial name last). Phaldo 17:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] the overpopulation issue...

Surprised not to see it here. Is this on another article? SB Johnny 13:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deer Hunting

How about something on hunting deer? Field Dressing them? I mean, millions of people hunt deer, seems appropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.238.254.234 (talk • contribs).

Wikipedia does not do how-to info. There is an article on hunting. -- Mwanner | Talk 12:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Classification Section

Why are the O. hemionus subspecies listed in the Classification section? Those are mulies not white-tails. Toiyabe 18:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lots of subspecies

From whence do all these subspecies come? ITIS says that only three are valid. Natureserve also lists 3. We have about 38 or 39 of them listed in this article. The only place I can find anywhere near that many subspecies listed is on that guy from France's deer-lover page and a handful of other pages which, apparently, use him as an authority. I suggest that ITIS is a pretty good authority. If they list only three valid subspecies, I think the article should reflect that. Comments? — Dave 22:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

After one week, there have been no comments in response to my query. I will allow another week or so and then, if there are no substantive objections, I will edit the article to conform to accepted taxonomical realities. — Dave 13:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the number of subspecies listed is awfully high. Maybe somebody made a list of all the subspecies ever proposed? Mule Deer also needs to be trimmed down. Toiyabe 15:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If memory serves me right, in the days before genetic comparisons among populations, most mammals with large ranges used to have long subspecies lists; at one time, the list on this page was probably the (more or less) accepted one. When someone trims the list down, it'd be helpful to include an explanation of the old and new methods of what constitutes a proper subspecies. – Swid ^{(talk | edits)} 19:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Scientists only consider of three of the 20, true subspecies in North America. the Virginia Whitetail the most common. The Colombian Whitetail found in the pacific Northwest and the key deer found only in the Florida keys. The Great White Hunter 20:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC) Mike_Winters

[edit] Major rewrite

I've made the changes we discussed regarding simplifying the taxonomy for the species. While in there, I also took the time to complete a major rewrite of the article. Have a look and fix up anything you think I missed or muffed. — Dave 15:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Size variation

I've seen weights from 18 kg (40 lb) to 232 kg (511 lb) in various zoological literature – is this the mammal species with greatest variance in size? Other candidates for this record are the Least Weasel at 24 g (0.85 oz) to 250 g (8.8 oz, data combined from various sources), and possibly the Virginia Opossum – which could be the winner by quite a margin if The Animal Diversity Web has got its figures right. --Anshelm '77 20:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The upper end sounds reasonable, although it would be way way out on the tail end of the distribution. How do you determine the lower end weight? At birth? At sexual maturity? If it's at birth, the mammal with the greatest weight range (as a ratio) will probably be a marsupial - my guess would be a Red Kangaroo. If your definition is at sexual maturity, the winner may be a weasel or other mustelid - my understanding is that some members of that family are sexually mature before birth. Toiyabe 22:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I think the range should be for "adults", which may be at times somewhat hard to define. Species that grow throughout their lives (elephants and kangaroos come to mind), for example, may be a problem. Time of sexual maturity doesn't help much, as it is reached before true adulthood – we should know as humans. I suppose we have to rely on reported weights for adults in scientific literature. I did find another candidate that has the White-tailed Deer beat: the Brown Bear Ursus arctos varies at least from 45 kg (99 lb) to 757 kg (1,670 lb) throughout its range, the largest almost 17 times the size of the smallest. The champion should be found among species with notable geographic variation or sexual dimorphism, such as some Fur Seals. --Anshelm '77 16:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Response to Major rewrite

I think the person who drastically reduced the number of subspecies of white-tailed deer to 3 subspecies only took into account those deer of North America. I do agree that with the near depletion of white-tailed deer in the early 1900's that deer from several localities east of the Rocky Mountains were transplanted to several regions for restocking purposes so "yes", the deer east of the Rocky Mountains may be largely mixed. However, I do believe that the Northwest White-tailed Deer, Columbian White-tailed Deer, Arizona Coeue's Deer, Key Deer, and Texas White-tailed Deer are distinct subspecies.

This person totally ignored the subspecies of Central and South America. The white-tailed deer of South America are genetically distinct from those of North America. I think this article is need of an expert. So far, I have not found much conclusive evidence on new classifications of white-tailed deer. (This unsigned comment was added from IP address 64.186.239.30 on 2006-07-10 14:25:20)

[edit] Only Mature bucks have Antlers???????

Who ever wrote that doesn't know the Whitetailed deer very well. All male deer can have antlers, immature or mature. If a male is born late in the year, they may not have a fully developed set of antlers. — (This unsigned comment was added from IP address 199.72.168.138 on 2006-07-17 14:02:42)

Well, it's sort of rare for fawns to have antlers, according to any meaningful definition of that word. They will have small nubs, usually no more than an inch long and often less. Yearlings will normally have forks or something like that. Small antlers, sure, but antlers nonetheless. So, I guess the question next becomes: at what age do male deer mature? In most of the deer range, yearling males are sexually mature and are fully capable, anatomically, of impregnating a doe. The fact that they almost never do, due to the dominance hierarchy and lack of attractiveness to females, does not mean they're not sexually mature (In the same way that a 14 year old human male is sexually mature.) There is a difference between being sexually mature and being able to successfully compete for mating opportunities. The way I read that sentence is to say that fawns and females do not have antlers, only adult males do. An adult, biologically, is defined as an animal which is sexually mature. Read, for example, this page: http://www.ksr.ku.edu/libres/Mammals_of_Kansas/odo-virgini.html, this page: http://www.dnr.sc.gov/marine/mrri/acechar/specgal/whtadeer.htm, and, let's say, this page: http://www.fao.org/docrep/T0750E/t0750e0n.htm#3.15.1%20odocoileus%20virginianus%20(white%20tailed%20deer) Do you have evidence to the contrary? — Dave 19:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

A buck (male deer) is considered mature at the age of 3-1/2. At this age he will start to show is dominance within his heard. He will also then have the body size and antler mass to show his subordinates who's boss and who gets to breed the next hot doe. (The preceding, unsigned comment was provided by User:149.55.30.100

Very well. I've provided three competent references (from, for example, the South Carolina Depatrment of Natural Resources and from the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation) to show that white-tails become sexually mature in their second year of life. Please provide references from a competent authority to support you contention. If you are able to do so, I would welcome your edit of the article to conform to your position. — Dave 04:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats also "Very well." ...but that wasn't your original question. The question I was answering was this one: "So, I guess the question next becomes: at what age do male deer mature?" It had nothing to do with the "sexual" maturity of deer, only the maturity. This begs the definition of the word mature. As per Webster's New World Dictionary,mature:1. full grown; ripe 2.fully developed, perfected,etc. So, allthough a 13 year old "boy" is capable of breeding, he is not yet fully grown. A Whitetailed deer is actually able to breed at the age of 1-1/2 years, but not fully grown untill he's 4-5 years old.

[1]

And to do with antler maturity... http://www.pabucks.com/deerantlers.html

You are correct, of course. I apologise since, as a biologist, I was focussed far too much on the technical meaning of the terms in use. You see, when biologists speak of "maturity" we invariably mean "sexual maturity" which is equated with maturation of the gonads. To a biologist, a white-tail is mature (has mature gonads) at 1.5 yr of age. I can see, by your contribution, that there are other, vernacular, meanings for the term "mature" which would be more familiar to the average reader. I respect those facts and that you have stated them correctly. I shall edit the article accordingly. If you have further insights, please proffer them, here. — Dave 03:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)