Dear Haley,
I would second Deb to be very careful in assigning dog remains to
modern breeds. Below are some papers dealing with that specific problem:
Heinrich, Dirk (1974): Die Hunde der prähistorischen Siedlung
Feddersen Wierde. – Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 39, 284-312
Heinrich, Dirk (1975): Zur Frage der Rassenbildung bei
prähistorischen Haushunden. in: Clason, Anneke T. (ed.):
Archaeozoological studies, 352-357, Amsterdam
Wortmann, Waltraud (1971): Metrische Untersuchungen an Schädeln von
Coyoten, Wölfen und Hunden. – Zoologischer Anzeiger 186, 435-464
Best
Christian
--
KNOCHENARBEIT
Hans Christian Küchelmann
Diplom-Biologe
Konsul-Smidt-Straße 30, D-28217 Bremen, Germany
tel: +49 - 421 - 61 99 177
fax: +49 - 421 - 37 83 540
mail: [log in to unmask]
web: http://www.knochenarbeit.de
web: http://www.knochenarbeit-shop.de
Am 28.07.2011 um 18:50 schrieb [log in to unmask]:
> Hayley, you will I think be on dangerous ground if you go so far in
> print
> as to assign any dog remains to a specific breed. For one thing,
> you would
> have to first very carefully define what you mean by "breed" -- and
> the
> zooarchaeologist's meaning for this term of necessity will not
> match what
> it means to, say, the American or British Kennel Clubs. Even if you
> have
> the capability to run DNA on your dog bones, you will still face an
> insurmountable problem here. I'm currently researching the dog
> material
> from Vindolanda, and let me tell you, the most I'm planning on
> saying in
> the paper is "this skull is morphologically similar to", or "this
> skull is
> analogous to". Even this is going much farther than the paradigmatic
> Harcourt paper of the 1970's.
>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can anyone send me a pdf regarding breed determination of dogs from
>> skeletal remains?
>>
>> The site is in the UK, ranging from the Medieval to Modern period.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Hayley Forsyth
>>
>>
>>
|