Foxes were man’s best friend before dogs arrived, archaeologists claim
Remains at a burial site in Patagonia suggests that Dusicyon avus was a valuable companion to hunter-gatherers
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Archaeologists have revealed an animal that was man’s best friend before the humble dog.
An extinct fox in Argentina may have once been in that role, sharing a “strong bond” with humans, research suggests.
Analysis of 1,500-year-old skeletal remains at a burial site in Patagonia suggests that Dusicyon avus – also known as Falkland Islands wolf – was “a valuable companion to the hunter-gatherer groups”.
The fox bones belong to a single animal while the human remains come from 21 different individuals, in what scientists described as “a very rare and unusual find”.
The team said the findings, published in the journal Royal Society Open Science, represents “a unique case” of partnership between a human and a wild South American fox.
Lack of cut marks on the bones suggest D. avus was not hunted by humans for food, the scientists said.
Study author Dr Ophelie Lebrasseur, of the University of Oxford’s School of Archaeology, said: “There are several factors that led to identifying our fox as a companion or a pet rather than as part of the humans’ diet.
“None of the animal bones present any traces of cut marks, which suggests the individual was not eaten.
“The specimen was buried on a human burial site along with 21 other human beings.
“This is a very rare and unusual find, and suggests it probably held personal significance.
“Finally, its diet resembled that of the humans buried on the site rather than the diet of wild canids, including your typical Dusicyon avus.
“Such a similarity in diets suggests it was either fed by the hunter-gatherers or it fed on the kitchen refuse.”
Researchers say D. avus would have had a body mass of around 10 to 15kg, which is about the size of a German shepherd.
It would have lived in various open areas – with grasses and low shrubs – in large parts of South America, including Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina.
The archaeological record suggests D. avus went extinct about 500 years ago, the team said, but reasons for their disappearance are unclear.
One theory is that the arrival of domestic dogs in Patagonia somewhere between 700 and 900 years ago may have contributed to their demise.
However, the researchers said that any possible mating between the two species would not have played a major role in D. avus’s extinction because of “a low probability of producing viable and fertile hybrid offspring”.
And whether these foxes would have made good pets also still remains unknown.
Dr Lebrasseur said: “Some individuals may have been less scared of humans, which may have facilitated the development of a closer bond, but we cannot currently confirm this.”
She added: “We do believe though that finding a Dusicyon avus specimen with such a close relationship with the hunter-gatherer community is very rare and really interesting, and represents quite a unique case of a human-wild South American fox partnership.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments