Dataset Information

3D morphometric analysis of fossil canid skulls contradicts the suggested domestication of dogs during the late Paleolithic.

ABSTRACT: Whether dogs were domesticated during the Pleistocene, when humans were hunter-gatherers, or during the Neolithic, when humans began to form permanent settlements and engage in agriculture, remains controversial. Recently discovered Paleolithic fossil skulls, Goyet dated 31,680 +/- 250?YBP and Eliseevichi MAE 447/5298 dated 13,905 +/- 55?YBP, were previously identified as dogs. However, new genetic studies contradict the identification of these specimens as dogs, questioning the validity of traditional measurements used to morphologically identify canid fossil skulls. We employ 3D geometric morphometric analyses to compare the cranial morphology of Goyet and Eliseevichi MAE to that of ancient and modern dogs and wolves. We demonstrate that these Paleolithic canids are definitively wolves and not dogs. Compared to mesaticephalic (wolf-like breeds) dog skulls, Goyet and Eliseevichi MAE, do not have cranial flexion and the dorsal surface of their muzzles has no concavity near the orbits. Morphologically, these early fossil canids resemble wolves, and thus no longer support the establishment of dog domestication in the Paleolithic.

SUBMITTER: Drake AG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5389137 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

3D morphometric analysis of fossil canid skulls contradicts the suggested domestication of dogs during the late Paleolithic.

Drake Abby Grace AG Coquerelle Michael M Colombeau Guillaume G

Scientific reports 20150205

Whether dogs were domesticated during the Pleistocene, when humans were hunter-gatherers, or during the Neolithic, when humans began to form permanent settlements and engage in agriculture, remains controversial. Recently discovered Paleolithic fossil skulls, Goyet dated 31,680 +/- 250 YBP and Eliseevichi MAE 447/5298 dated 13,905 +/- 55 YBP, were previously identified as dogs. However, new genetic studies contradict the identification of these specimens as dogs, questioning the validity of trad ...[more]

PMID: 25654325

Similar Datasets

Project description:Bumble bees (Bombus spp.) are a widespread corbiculate lineage (Apinae: Corbiculata: Bombini), mostly found among temperate and alpine ecosystems. Approximately 260 species have been recognized and grouped recently into a simplified system of 15 subgenera. Most of the species are nest-building and primitively eusocial. Species of Bombus have been more intensely studied than any other lineages of bees with the exception of the honey bees. However, most bumble bee fossils are poorly described and documented, making their placement relative to other Bombus uncertain. A large portion of the known and presumed bumble bee fossils were re-examined in an attempt to better understand their affinities with extant Bombini. The taxonomic affinities of fossil specimens were re-assessed based on morphological features and previous descriptions, and for 13 specimens based on geometric morphometrics of forewing shape. None of the specimens coming from Eocene and Oligocene deposits were assigned within the contemporary shape space of any subgenus of Bombus. It is shown that Calyptapis florissantensis Cockerell, 1906 (Eocene-Oligocene boundary, Florissant shale, Colorado, USA) and Oligobombus cuspidatus Antropov, 2014 (Late Eocene, Bembridge Marls) likely belong to stem-group Bombini. Bombus anacolus Zhang, 1994, B. dilectus Zhang, 1994, B. luianus Zhang, 1990 (Middle Miocene, Shanwang Formation), as well as B. vetustus Rasnitsyn & Michener, 1991 (Miocene, Botchi Formation) are considered as species inquirenda. In the Miocene, affinities of fossils with derived subgenera of Bombus s. l. increased, and some are included in the shape space of contemporary subgenera: Cullumanobombus (i.e., B. pristinus Unger, 1867, B. randeckensis Wappler & Engel, 2012, and B. trophonius Prokop, Dehon, Michez & Engel, 2017), Melanobombus (i.e., B. cerdanyensis Dehon, De Meulemeester & Engel, 2014), and Mendacibombus (i.e., B. beskonakensis (Nel & Petrulevičius, 2003), new combination), agreeing with previous estimates of diversification.

Dataset Information

3D morphometric analysis of fossil canid skulls contradicts the suggested domestication of dogs during the late Paleolithic.

Publications

3D morphometric analysis of fossil canid skulls contradicts the suggested domestication of dogs during the late Paleolithic.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets