On Dogs, Agriculture and Amerindians

TThe oldest dated dog remains in America are 10 150 ± 260 cal BP years old. More or less 10,500 years BP. (Source).

Dogs, forged a symbiotic relationship with humans during our hunter-gatherer days. They shared our prey's meat and fat. However, once we discovered agriculture, and included more complex starches and carbohydrates in our diet, dogs adapted to our new diet.

Natural selection favored dogs who could digest starch, and those who had genes coding for enzymes that degrade carbohydrates fared better than those who didn't.

Nodern dogs have up to 30 copies of an enzyme known as α-2B-amylase or AMY2B, but wolves only have 2. (Source)

This fact could explain the turnover in dog breeds mentioned in my previous post linked to the expansion of maize farming in Central and South America.

The paper analyzed in that post stated that maize agriculture spread into South America with dogs and that there were no dogs in that region before the invention of agriculture, the suggest that the evidence supports that "the spread of agriculture" introduced dogs into South America, and does not support the notion "hat dogs were introduced during the initial peopling of South America by hunter–gatherers...This dispersal happened in a context of early agrarian societies" some 7,000 years BP.

This scenario implies two possibilities:

1. The first wave that peopled South America, 20,000 or more years ago did so before dogs evolved in Eurasia, so of course the didn't bring any dogs into America when they migrated. This first wave of Paleoindians was swamped by a later wave (see this post), and the dogs that they brought with them occupied a vacant niche.
2. Dogs are older than we think, maybe 50 or 70,000 years old (we don't have proof of this, however, a 2023 paper pushes the dog-domestication date back to 40,000 years ago. So, the first wave into America brought dogs, they were adapted to the hunter-gatherer lifesytle of these First People. When farming reached South America, farmers replaced the original human population there, and the second wave of dogs did displaced the dogs of the first wave, which could not digest carbohydrates.

Interestingly, a study reported that a now extinct canid (Dusicyon avus) could produce fertile offspring if mating with domestic dogs. This could explain their extinction some 400 years ago, with successive matings with domestic dogs watering down the D. avus until their genetic pool was lost. However, the authors believe that even though hybridization could have played a role in their extinction, it was caused by the effects of the Europeans on the environment and habitat that led to their demise.

Coincidentially, 400 years ago, the Europeans began displacing the Natives, and this altered their relationship with the environement, as they moved further from the European settlements. Another factor, observed in Patagonia, was that the Natives adopted the more docile domestic dogs introduced by the Spaniards. This verly likely pushed their domesticated foxes into decline, and ultimately, extinction.

D. avus. Source

This paper also found that an D. avus specimen they studied, called CS/91, shared the diet of the humans with which it interacted: "the diet of the CS/91 canid varied from that of other wild carnivores in the region, pointing to a higher intake of C4 resources (probably maize) and a higher distinct trophic level. Furthermore, the isotopic results of CS/91-1 are more similar to the values obtained from adult humans found in the same archaeological context."

It mentions that the CS/91-1 specimen was found in the same burial with human remains:

"it is possible that the fox was intentionally inhumated in this burial context, becoming the first record of a complete skeleton of this fox species buried alongside humans. The co-burial of humans and foxes is a rare archaeological record worldwide and suggests a cultural or symbolic significance. Although the reasons for its inclusion in a mortuary context remain unclear, the most plausible explanation is that this fox was a valuable companion to the hunter-gatherer groups. Its strong bond with human individuals during its life would have been the primary factor for its placement as a grave good after the death of its owners or the people with whom it interacted.
The stable isotope analysis of carbon and nitrogen further supports this interpretation, revealing a similar dietary pattern between CS/91 and the human individuals found in the same archaeological context rather than a typical carnivorous diet. In other words, the hunter-gatherers fully incorporated this wild animal into their ecological and cultural niche, possibly through systematic feeding."

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025 by Austin Whittall © 

Dogs and the peopling of America

An interesting article on the arrival and dispersal of dogs in America. It was published last June and has some interesting points regarding the dating of their introduction into the New World. (Aurélie Manin, et al., (2025). Ancient dog mitogenomes support the dual dispersal of dogs and agriculture into South America. Proceedings of the Royal Society, June 18 2025. Volume 292 Issue 2049 https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.2443)

I will quote the main points:

Dogs (Canis familiaris) accompanied early waves of people who entered North America at least 15 000−16 000 years before present (BP)... Ancient DNA analyses have shown that all dogs preceding contact with European settlers (hereafter referred to as pre-contact dogs) possessed mitochondrial haplotypes belonging to the mitochondrial A2b clade that is specific to the Americas...
Dogs belonging to the A2b clade spread throughout the Americas, except in the Amazon basin where linguistic data suggest that they were unknown until the Europeans arrived, during the sixteenth century...
The earliest commonly accepted dog remains in Mexico, Ecuador and Peru are dated to 5200−5000 BP...
the reasons for their delayed dispersal in the region remain contentious...
The indigenous American A2b mitochondrial clade, and its associated nuclear ancestry, has now almost vanished from the continent. Pre-contact maternal lineages have only been found in two modern American dogs so far: a village dog from Nicaragua and a Chihuahua from the United States...
Evidence from nuclear DNA indicates that the proportion of Native American ancestry in modern American dogs (such as the Chihuahua and the Xoloitzcuintli) is approximately 3–4% at most

It makes me wonder if there was a large variety of Native dogs and all but the A2b haplogroup was the only survivor.
Did the American dogs suffer from death due to diseases brought to America by the European dogs? Did they die out in droves like the Amerindians did when confronted with new diseases?

Perhaps there were other lineages, vanished and ignored because we have not yet found remains of these dogs?

The authors of this study acknowledge that "To date, archaeogenomic studies of American dogs have largely focussed on North America while ancient Central and South American dogs are poorly represented." So they analyzed canine remains across this region and 42 newly mitochondrial genomes, all of which are part of the A2 lineage. It should be noted that they excluded some dogs belonging to B, C, D, haplogroups assigning them to post-contact dogs.

The authors suggest that maize agriculture spread into South America with dogs: "[evidence supports that ] movement of people and dogs in association with the spread of agriculture rather than supporting the hypothesis that dogs were introduced during the initial peopling of South America by hunter–gatherers. This dispersal happened in a context of early agrarian societies" some 7,000 years BP.

Meaning that dogs and farming went together into South America. There were no dogs there before 7,000 BP

Does this mean that the original Paleoindians living in South America since at least 15,000 BP did so without dogs? They didn't hunt with them, or share their company?

The paper addresses these concerns as follows:

"This long delay is surprising, as human populations were already present in South America for at least 8000 years prior to the arrival of dogs and different hypotheses can be proposed. The earliest fisher–hunter–gatherers that inhabited central America and reached South America may have not found many subsistence advantages from keeping dogs. Moreover, crossing the Central American land bridge required the dogs to adapt to a tropical environment characterized by many new diseases, insects and parasites, and they may have been easy prey for local predators...
Under this scenario, only few dogs may have reached South America during its initial peopling, albeit it is important to note that, to date, no dog remains have been confidently identified in these early settlements. According to the data produced in this paper, this (still hypothetical) early population would have been replaced by the later arrival of dogs accompanying the development of agrarian societies"

It should be noted that both the Chono and the Fuegian boat people had dogs when encountered by Europeans in the 1500s. So dogs did provide subsistance advantages, at least to these natives. These dogs have not been dated, but, they may have reached this region later, after the wave that this paper argues brought dogs into South America 7,000 years ago.

Patagonian Dogs

As I mention in my book's second edition, the first evidence of pre-Hispanic dogs in Patagonia comes from two sites: Angostura site, in Rio Negro Province, on the river of the same name, and in Lihuel Calel, La Pampa, dated to around 1,080 AD. We do know that all Patagonian and Fuegian peoples had “dogs” before 1,080 AD, but they were not necessarily of the modern domestic dog variety (Canis lupus familiaris) derived from wolves. The South American Culpeo and Dusicyon avus fox-like canids were domesticated in lieu of wolves. The remains of the prehistoric dog Canis (Dusicyon avus) have been found across southern Patagonia in Paleo-Indian sites. Avus was a big and wolf-like animal that shared several features with the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) warrah wolf-fox.

Dusicyon avus was the only carnivore that became extinct after the late Pleistocene extinction 2 million years ago, and it died out before the arrival of the Spaniards to America. Why?

It was a large foxlike animal like the culpeo fox (Lycalopex culpaeus) but bigger (weighing around 15 kg – 33 lb.) Its habitat covered all of Patagonia, including the Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego, and north of it, the Pampas, and parts of the Cuyo region in Argentina.

In 2024, the remains of D. avus that were found in Cañada Seca, Mendoza, were dated to 1,500 years ago. They were buried beside humans. Isotopic analysis showed that it shared a human diet which was different from that of other foxes, suggesting it “could have been a companion, even a pet of the hunter-gatherers […] that lived there.” The study also found that Dusicyon avus didn’t disappear due to interbreeding with domestic dogs. D. avus was “the most commonly identified canid in Fuego-Patagonian archaeological sites until its extinction” around 400 years ago. Something else led to its demise, but what? We don't know.

Current consensus is that dogs were domesticated around 40,000 years ago (source). Could the first Amerindians have reached the New World Before this date? This could explain why they didn't bring dogs with them.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025 by Austin Whittall © 

Yamana natives "Fuegian Dog" - Tierra del Fuego (update)

The Anuario Hidrográfico de la Marina de Chile, Vol 6, page 50, published in 1880, reports different expeditions sent by the Chilean Navy to map and explore their coastline, including southern Patagonia.

One of the reports mentions the Fuegian dog, the dog of the canoe people. Which may either be Yaghans (Yamana) or Alakaluf (Kaweskar) natives.

The text is the following (bold font mine):

"A species of Canis familiaris accompanies the Fuegian indians on all of their excursions along the channels, it breeds in the wild in Tierra del Fuego. It is a small animal, but very fierce and it is very useful for the Fuegian, and for this reason they appreciate it a lot; it seems to be the outcome of a crossbreding of the Canis familiaris with the Canis magellanicus due to its similarity with the latter".

This same account was given by the Chilean governor in Punta Arenas, on the Strait of Magellan in his Tierra del Fuego and its Native Peoples memoir of the Governor of Magallanes, Manuel Señoret, 1896 (in Spanish). Who wrote:

"The Fuegian dog is abundant and an aid to the indians, its origin seems to be a mixture of dog and fox, and is an interesting scientific problem not yet solved.".

Canis magellanicus (photo by Brian Ralphs) is one of Patagonia's foxes, now it is known as "Lycopex culpaeus magellanicus", it is a subspecies of the culpeo fox.

Its body is about 80 cm long, with a tail 44 cm long. Height 42 cm and weight around 7.5 to 8.5 kg.

This dog, of the canoe people should not be mistaken for the other native (?) dogs of southern Patagonia. Apparently there were different dogs in Pre-Hispanic Patagonia:

1. A large wolf-lik dog, used by Tehuelches, Aonikenk and Selknam people.
2. A smaller one, the fox-like Fuegian canoe people's dog.
3. And yet another one, small, with long curly hair of the extinct Chono canoe people of the Chilean fjords.

This is a photograph of a Yaghan dog ( image from page 332 of "Arkiv för zoologi" (1918-1920)

Text Appearing Before Image: "ETNAU LÖNNBERG, SOME SOUTH AMERICAN CANID. 13 is triangular, and in Ps. lycoides somewhat pentagonal, although perhaps less so than in most other South American Canidce. The dentition is different throughout. The Yaghan dog has comparatively larger incisors; its canines are shorter and stouter than in Ps. lycoides and rnagellanicus. In the Yaghan dog p^ is provided with a small posterior cusp and in p^ such a one is still better developed, while such cusps appear to be missing in the Ps. magellanicus-gTou-p. The difference..."

Text Appearing After Image: "Fig. 3. Skull of the Yaghan dog seen from the side. in shape of the upper carnassial {p^) is very important, as it seems. Its heel is much better developed in the Yaghan dog, and it is directed inwards in such a way that it forms a right angle against the longitudinal axis of the tooth itself. The inner end of the heel comes thus rather far behind the transversal line connecting the anterior ends of p^ of both sides. The shape of m^ is also different as in the Yaghan dog its longitudinal diameter is 78, i % of its transverse diameter, while in Ps. lycoides the same percentage is a little more than 68, and in Ps. magellanicus about 65 as far as my material admits any judgment. These relative dimensions of m^ of the Yaghan dog agree thus much better with the corresponding ones of Canis aureus viz. 74,4—80%,"

More posts will follow...

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2019 by Austin Whittall © 

Fuegian Dogs, some photos

Almost ten years ago (Oct. 2009) I posted about the Fuegian dogs -pictured below, said to descend from foxes. At that time I had only managed to get one photo of them, a stuffed specimen at a museum in Punta Arenas Chile. Today I have found several images of Fuegian dogs, which don't look fox like at all!

The photo from my 2009 post:

I have wondered if they were replaced by European dogs after these were introduced by shepherds, and the Selknam adopted the newcomers to replace their extinct breed.

A paper published a year ago in Science (The evolutionary history of dogs in the Americas, Maire Ni Leathlobhair, Angela R. Perri et al., Science 06 Jul 2018:Vol. 361, Issue 6397, pp. 81-85 DOI: 10.1126/science.aao4776) tells us that the Amerindian dogs were wiped out by disease brought to the New World after European discovery and conquest (post 1492 AD). The paper also came up with an intriguing discovery "The closest detectable extant lineage to precontact American dogs is the canine transmissible venereal tumor, a contagious cancer clone derived from an individual dog that lived up to 8000 years ago", but that will be discussed in a separate post.

Below are some of the photos I came across today in the Internet, they are all Selknam dogs. There were other natives in Tierra del Fuego, and their dogs are not depicted here (the Alakaluf, the Haush, the Yaghans or Yamana).

Selknam dogs with surviving Selknam people ca. 1910. (source)

Selknam woman, child and dog:

Selknam hunting with two dogs, and using bows and arrows.

Salesian father Juan Vila, with an embalmed Fuegian dog. Seems very much like the one in the Punta Arenas museum.

Here the Selknam are called "Ona", another name used until recently to designate these people.

Another dog, during a Selknam ritual.

Two dogs.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2019 by Austin Whittall ©