4^i4 hitllktin: miskim ok ( dmi'ahativk zooiaxjv. 



recent investigator, (Kiihn, 1SS7) records tlie fertility of Dog-Jackal 

 h^•hrids when crossed inter se or back crossed. In this case a female 

 Finnish Bird-<log was hred to a captive Indian Jackal {Cam's aiireu.'i 

 indicus), j)roducing three litters of four each. All the young were 

 much alike in appearance resembling the Jackal, but were somewhat 

 darker in color. One of the hybrids bred to a Siberian Dog produced 

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

 and produced a litter of three \oung after a period of sixty days' 

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

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

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

 the cranial and dental characters in tlu hybrids was made. 



The crossing of Wolf and Dog has been frequently accomplished in 

 captivity (Hunter, 1787, 1789). An instance of the fertile crossing 

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

 corded by Eiffe (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 Avild wolves, which though usually 

 highly liostile to dogs, will at such times, it is said, hybridize. Ac- 

 cording to ("ones (1878) and otiiers, similar methods were used by the 

 American Indians of the Phiins 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 anyway. 

 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 Coues (1873) and Packard 

 (188o) on the ground of general external appearance have held that 

 the common Indian Dog of North America was merely a tamed 

 Coyote; and their \iew has gained wide credence. It may be con- 

 fidently stated, however, from a study of skulls and teeth, that this is 

 not at all the case. Packard was perhaps influenced l)y 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 Republican River formations. The American Indian 

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

 no evidence of derivation 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 (1801) explicitly states that the dogs of the 

 northern Indians could not be induced to cross with captive foxes. 

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

 ancestry as in one f)r two other cases, was merely conjectural. 



