434 BULLETIX: MTSKI'M OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 



recent investigator, (Kiihn, 1SS7) records the fertilitv' of Dog-Jackal 

 hybrids when crossed infer .sc or l)ack crossed. In thiscase a female 

 Finnish Bird-dog was bred to a captive Indian Jackal {Canis- aureus 

 iudiruft), producing three litters of four each. All the young were 

 much alike in appearance reseml)ling the Jackal, but were somewhat 

 darker in color. One of the hybrids l)red to a Sil)erian Dog produced 

 seven young. Two other of the original hybrids were paired together, 

 and produced a litter of three young after a period of sixty days' 

 gestation — the normal time for a dog. These young were darker 

 than their parents, with a wash of golden along the sides and on the 

 head, recalling the Jackal's color. Unfortunately no careful study of 

 the cranial and dental characters in the hybrids was made. 



The crossing of Wolf and Dog has been frequently accomplished in 

 captivity (Hunter, 17S7, 1789). An instance of the fertile crossing 

 of a Siberian Sledge-flog with a female Dingo from Australia is re- 

 corded b\- Eitfe (1909). The North American Indians and the the 

 Eskimo are accredited with tethering female dogs in heat at a distance 

 from camps to obtain crosses with wild wolves, which though usually 

 highly hostile to dogs, will at such times, it is said, hyl)ridize. Ac- 

 cording to Cones (1873) and others, similar methods were used by the 

 American Indians of the Plains to obtain crosses with wild coyotes. 

 Yet the evidence is not altogether convincing that such cross-breeding 

 was very general, or that it has modified the nati\'e dogs in any way. 

 It is noteworthy that the American Indian is not given to the domesti- 

 cation of Wolf or Coyote puppies as might be expected if either were 

 the prototype of his Dogs. Nevertheless (^oues (1873) and Packard 

 (1885) on the groimd of general external appearance ha^•e held that 

 the common Indian Dog of North America was merely a tamed 

 Coyote; and their view has gained wide credence. It may l)e con- 

 fidently stated, howe\er, from a study of skulls and teeth, that this is 

 not at all the case. Packarrl was perhaps influenced by Cope's 

 (1883, p. 242) statement that "many of the domesticated dogs have 

 been derived "from the Wolf and the Coyote, as found in the Pliocene 

 deposits of the Repuljlican River formations. The x\merican Indian 

 dogs, however, are true domestic dogs in skull-characters, and show 

 no e\"idence of deri\-ation from coyotes. 



Crosses between domestic dogs and foxes have l)een less commonly 

 reported, and even these reports seem to lack proper substantiation 

 in most cases. B. Ross (1861) explicitly states that the dogs of the 

 northern Indians could not be induced to cross with capti\e foxes. 

 A supposed case is given by Toni (1897) of a natural hybrid, but its 

 ancestry as in one or two other cases, was merely conjectural. 



