The contribution of geometric morphometric analysis to prehistoric ichnology: the example of large canid tracks and their implication for the debate concerning wolf domestication

Abstract

Apart from exceptional cases, such as Laetoli, Koobi Fora or Happisburgh hominin trackways (Behrensmeyer and Laporte, 1981; Bennett et al., 2009; Raichlen et al., 2010; Ashton et al., 2014; Bennett and Morse, 2014), tracks are often underestimated in prehistoric research, particularly in cave contexts, despite their representing rich sources of behavioural and taphonomic information. The analysis of human and animal tracks in archaeological contexts can help to both untangle the chronology of cave occupations and identify the animal species who frequented different sites. Here we focus on differentiating large dog and wolf tracks that are very similar in both appearance and size. We use a large sample of 36 modern prints from two wolf subspecies (Canis lupus lupus and Canis lupus albus) and 106 dog tracks belonging to seven breeds (Beauceron, German Shepherd, Bernese Mountain Dog, Czechoslovakian Wolfdog, Great Dane, Siberian Husky and Rottweiler). This study uses an approach combining statistical analyses and geometric morphometrics (Berge et al., 2006; Bennett et al., 2009). Our results shed new light on the still unidentified canid tracks accompanying human footprints documented at Chauvet Cave in the Ardèche region of southern France (Clottes, 2001) and have important implications for current debates surrounding the timing of wolf domestication in Western Europe and prehistoric ichnology in general.