Shape change and variation in the cranial morphology of wild canids (Canis lupus, Canis latrans, Canis rufus) compared to domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) using geometric morphometrics

International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 42-50

  Schmitt, E ^a   Wallace, S ^a  

^a EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Coyote; Domestic dog; Geometric morphometrics; Gray wolf; Landmark analysis; Red wolf; Thin plate spline

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893906067     PISSN: 1047482X     EISSN: 10991212     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/oa.1306     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adams DC, Rohlf FJ. 2000. Ecological Character Displacement in Plethodon: Biomechanical differences found from a geometric morphometric study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 97(8): 4106-4111.
2. Baker BW, Shaffer BS. 1999. Assumptions about species: a case study of tortoise bones from southeast Texas. Journal of Field Archaeology 26: 69-74.
3. Bookstein FL. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data. Cambridge University Press: New York.
4. Case L. 2008. Perspectives on Domestication: The history of our relationship with man's best friend. Journal of Animal Science 86: 3245-3251.
5. Chaplin RE. 1971. The Study of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites: International series of monographs on science in archaeology. Seminar Press: London.
6. Christiansen P. 2008. Evolution of Skull and Mandible Shape in Cats (Carnivora: Felidae). PLoS One 3(7): e2807 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002807.
7. Clutton-Brock J, Kitchener AC, Lynch JM. 1994. Changes in the Skull Morphology of the Arctic Wolf, Canis lupus arctos, during the Twentieth Century. Journal of the Zoological Society of London 233: 19-36.
8. Craven BA, Neuberger T, Paterson EG, Webb AG, Josephson EM, Morrison EE, Settles GS. 2007. Reconstruction and Morphometric Analysis of the Nasal Airway of the Dog (Canis familiaris) and Implications Regarding Olfactory Flow. The Anatomical Record 290: 1325-1340.
9. Driver JC. 1992. Identification, classification and zooarchaeology. Circaea 9: 35-47.
10. Fredrickson RJ, Hedrick PW. 2006. Dynamics of Hybridization and Introgression in Red Wolves and Coyotes. Conservation Biology 20(4): 1272-1283.
11. Frost SR, Marcus LF, Bookstein FL, Reddy DP, Delson E. 2003. Cranial Allometry, Phylogeography, and Systematics of Large-Bodied Papionins (primates: Cercopithecinae) Inferred from Geometric Morphometric Analysis of Landmark Data. The Anatomical Record. Part A, Discoveries in Molecular, Cellular, and Evolutionary Biology 275A: 1048-1072.
12. Galibert F, Andre C. 2005. The Dog Genome. Genome Dynamics 2: 46-59.
13. Hesse B, Wapnish P. 1985. Animal Bone Archaeology: from objectives to analysis. Taraxacum Publishing: Washington.
14. Hood CS. 2000. Geometric Morphometric Approaches to the Study of Sexual Size Dimorphism in Mammals. Hystrix 11(1): 77-90.
15. Lawrence B, Bossert WH. 1967. Multiple character analysis of Canis lupus, Canis latrans, and Canis familliaris, with a discussion of the relationships of Canis niger. American Zoologist 7: 223-232.
16. Leonard JA, Wayne, RK, Wheeler J. 2002. Ancient DNA Evidence for Old World Origin of New World Dogs. Science 298: 1613-1616.
17. Milenković M, Šipetić V, Blagojević J, Tatović S, Vujošević M. 2010. Skull variation in Dinaric-Balkan and Carpathian gray wolf populations revealed by geometric morphometric approaches. Journal of Mammalogy 91(2): 376-386.
18. Morey D. 1992. Size, Shape and Development in the Evolution of the Domestic Dog. Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 181-204.
19. Mullan GJ, Boycott A. 2004. Archaeological Note: Skeletal Material Recovered from Tynings Great Swallet, Charterhouse-on-Mendip, Somerset. Proceedings of the University of Bristol Spelaeological Society 23(2): 135-140.
20. Olsen S. 1974. Early Domestic Dogs in North America and Their Origins. Journal of Field Archaeology 1(3/4): 343-345.
21. Olsen S. 1985. Origins of the Domestic Dog: the fossil record. The University of Arizona Press: AZ.
22. Parker HG, Kim LV, Sutter NB, Carlson S, Lorentzen TD, Malek TB, Johnson GS, DeFrance HW, Ostrander EA, Kruglyak L. 2004. Genetic Structure of the Purebred Domestic Dog. Science 304: 1160-1164.
23. Scott JP. 1968. Evolution and Domestication of the Dog. Evolutionary Biology 2: 243-275.
24. Semken HA, Wallace SC. 2002. Key to Arvicoline ("Microtene" Rodents) and Arvicoline-like lower first molars recovered from late Wisconsinan and Holocene archaeological and paleontological sites in Eastern North America. Journal of Archaeological Science 29(1): 23-31.
25. Swiderski DL, Zelditch ML, Fink WL. 2000. Phylogenetic Analysis of Skull Shape Evolution in Marmotine Squirrels Using Landmarks and Thin Plate Splines. Hysterix 11(1): 49-75.
26. Vilá C, Maldonado JE, Wayne RK. 1999. Phylogenetic Relationships, Evolution, and Genetic Diversity of the Domestic Dog. The American Genetic Association 90: 71-77.
27. Vilá C, Savolainen P, Maldonado JE, Amorim IR, Rice JE, Honeycutt RL, Crandall KA, Lundeburg J, Wayne RK. 1997. Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog. Science 276: 1687-1689.
28. Walker DN, Frison GC. 1982. Studies of Amerindian dogs, 3: Prehistoric wolf/dog hybrids from the Northwestern Plains. Journal of Archaeological Science 9: 125-172.
29. Wayne RK. 1986. Cranial Morphology of Domestic and Wild Canids: the influence of development on morphological change. Evolution 40(2): 243-261.
30. Young SP, Goldman EA. 1944. Wolves of North America. Dover Publishers: NY. 636.
31. Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheets HD, Fink WL. 2004. Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists: a primer. Elsevier Academic Press: CA. 416.