Original Articles
Vol. 98 No. 2 (2025)
https://doi.org/10.4081/jbr.2025.14218

Comparative cranial anatomy of Homo sapiens and Canis lupus familiaris: morphological, functional, and educational perspectives with a glance to biodiversity

Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Received: 4 August 2025
Accepted: 16 March 2026
Published: 12 November 2025
240
Views
162
Downloads
Original Articles
Cranial morphology, comparative anatomy, bipedalism, domestication, olfactory adaptation, craniofacial development

Authors

Melania Ionelia Gratie
Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Elena Varotto
Department of Cultures and Societies, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy; Archaeology, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Massimo Fresta
Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Antonella Marino Gammazza
Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Francesca Rappa
Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Francesco Maria Galassi
Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland.
Francesco Cappello
francesco.cappello@unipa.it
Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.

Cranial morphology reflects a species’ evolutionary history, functional adaptations, and environmental interactions. This comparative anatomical study examines the key structural differences between the cranium of humans (Homo sapiens) and that of domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Through a multi-level analysis encompassing gross anatomy, comparative anatomy, and anthropological implications, we highlight how evolutionary divergence, bipedalism, olfactory function, diet, and domestication have shaped the skulls of these two species. The findings underline the relevance of interspecies cranial comparisons for understanding human evolution, craniofacial development, and the broader patterns of mammalian biodiversity.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
1. Lieberman DE. The Evolution of the Human Head. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674059443
2. Ollivier M, Tresset A, Bastian F. et al. Dogs accompanied humans during the Neolithic expansion into Europe. Biol Letters 2018;14:20150817. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0286
3. Drake AG, Klingenberg CP. 2010. Large-scale diversification of skull shape in domestic dogs: disparity and modularity. Am Nat 2010;175:289–301.
4. Herculano-Houzel S. The human advantage: a new understanding of how our brain became remarkable. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262034258.001.0001
5. Radinsky L. Evolution of the felid brain. Brain Behav Evol 1975;11:214-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000123634
6. Hecht EE, Smaers JB, Dunn W, et al. Significant neuroanatomical variation among domestic dog breeds. J Neurosci 2019;39:7748–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0303-19.2019
7. Wrangham R. Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human. New York: Basic Books, 2009.
8. Evans HE, de Lahunta A. Miller’s Anatomy of the Dog. 4th ed. St. Louis: Saunders Elsevier, 2013.
9. Lovejoy CO. The natural history of human gait and posture. Part 1. Spine and pelvis. Gait Posture 2005; 21: 95–112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.01.001
10. Lieberman DE, Ross CF, Ravosa MJ. The primate cranial base: ontogeny, function, and integration. Yearb Phys Anthropol 2000;31:117-69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-8644(2000)43:31+<117::AID-AJPA5>3.0.CO;2-I
11. Van Valkenburgh B. Carnivore dental adaptations and diet: a study of trophic diversity within guilds. In: J.L. Gittleman, ed. Carnivore Behavior, Ecology, and Evolution. Vol. 1. Boston: Springer, pp. 410–436. 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0855-3_16
12. Axelsson E, Ratnakumar A, Arendt ML et al. The genomic signature of dog domestication reveals adaptation to a starch-rich diet. Nature 2013;495:360–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11837
13. Wroe S, McHenry C, Thomason J. Bite club: comparative bite force in big biting mammals and the prediction of predatory behaviour in fossil taxa. P Roy Soc B- Biol Sci 2005:272:619–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2004.2986
14. Zhao H, Ivic L, Otaki JM, et al. Functional expression of a mammalian odorant receptor. Science 1998;279:237-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.279.5348.237
15. Berns GS, Brooks AM, Spivak M. Functional MRI in awake unrestrained dogs. PLoS One 2012;7:e38027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038027
16. McGann JP. Poor Human Olfaction is a Nineteenth Century Myth, Science 2017;356:eaam7263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam7263
17. Quignon P, Kirkness E, Cadieu E, et al. Comparison of the canine and human olfactory receptor gene repertoires. Genome Biol 2003;4:R80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2003-4-12-r80
18. Cartmill M. Primate origins, human origins, and the end of higher taxa. Evol Anthropol 2012;21:208-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21324
19. Schoenebeck JJ, Ostrander EA. The genetics of canine skull shape variation. Genetics 2013;193:317–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.112.145284
20. Hytönen MK, Lohi H. Canine models of human rare disorders. Rare Dis 2016;4:e1241362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21675511.2016.1241362
21. 21 Hebdon N, Ortega A, Orlove A, et al. Dog skull shape challenges assumptions of performance specialization from selective breeding. Sci Adv 2025;11:eadq9590 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adq9590
22. Drake AG, Klingenberg CP. Large-scale diversification of skull shape in domestic dogs: disparity and modularity. Am Nat 2010;175:289–301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/650372
23. Varotto E, Landini L, Desiderato A, et al. Comparative osteological skills in the practice of forensic anthropology: an example to stress an educational and professional point. Anthropologie (Brno) 2024;62:143–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26720/anthro.24.04.05.1

How to Cite



Comparative cranial anatomy of Homo sapiens and Canis lupus familiaris: morphological, functional, and educational perspectives with a glance to biodiversity. (2025). Journal of Biological Research - Bollettino Della Società Italiana Di Biologia Sperimentale, 98(2). https://doi.org/10.4081/jbr.2025.14218
Copyright (c) 2025 the Author(s) Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.